2 responses from Mrs Maggie Mason, South Lakes Flood Partnership
1. Mrs Maggie Mason, South Lakes Flood Partnership : 14 Dec 2017 16:46:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show that you have read the guidance notes accompanying this consultation.
I have read the guidance notes.
Policy Reference
DM6 - Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage Systems
1.1 Do you consider the DM DPD to be legally compliant?
Yes
1.3 Do you consider the DM DPD to be sound?
No
1.4 If NO, please indicate the ground(s) on which you consider the DPD to be unsound.
The DPD is not justified
The DPD is not effective
The DPD is not consistent with national policy
1.5 Please give details of why you consider the DPD is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the Duty to Cooperate. Please be as precise as possible.
If you wish to support the legal compliance or soundness of the DPD or its compliance with the Duty to Cooperate, please also use this box to set out your comments.
South Lakeland Flood Partnership (SLFP) is a coalition of Flood Action Groups in South Lakeland formed to represent the views of flooded communities to official agencies and decision makers in both Cumbria and wider national context. We have secured representation on the Cumbria Strategic Flood Partnership and South Cumbria River Catchment Board and work with the Environment Agency on flood protection plans for the area.
SLFP is fully supportive of the first aim of Policy DM6, to ensure existing and new development is not exposed to flood risk. However we consider that the second aim, to prioritise the promotion of Sustainable Drainage Systems, and the policy as currently worded, is not likely to be effective. In particular, there is insufficient evidence to indicate that the policy will:
a) achieve a reduction in overall flood risk in the district, or
b) ensure existing and new development is not exposed to flood risk as stated in the policy purpose, or
c) implement the stated aims, objectives or policies of the South Lakeland Local Development Framework Core Strategy (1), or
d) ensure that development in areas at risk of flooding (from all sources), including areas with critical drainage problems will be safe in its lifetime and not cause flooding elsewhere as required by National Planning Policy (2),
e) secure that the development and use of land in the local planning authority’s area contribute to adaptation to climate change, in particular to address flooding which is identified by the Committee on Climate Change as the key climate risk facing the UK (3) and by the South Lakeland Development Framework Core Strategy (October 2010) as a specific threat to South Lakeland.(4)
Policy DM6, and therefore the DPD as a whole, is considered not to be sound,,justified, effective or consistent with national policy , and also to not be compliant with Section 19A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
1. South Lakeland Local Development Framework Core Strategy (October 2010)CS1.1, CS1.2, CS2, CS3.2
2. NPPF paras 100, 102, 103 or PPG Paragraph: 037 Reference ID: 7-037-20140306
3. UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 Synthesis report: priorities for the next five years: Committee on Climate Change: July 2016
4. Paragraph 1.23 South Lakeland Local Development Framework Core Strategy : October 2010.
The assumption of the draft policy is that prioritising the promotion of Sustainable Drainage Schemes will contribute to reducing overall flood risk in the district, and also (by inference) that this reduction will be sufficient to protect the people and economy of South Lakeland from flooding.
Neither the text nor the policy demonstrate an adequate understanding of the scale and nature of flooding in the district, and are not supported by evidence that Sustainable Drainage Systems based on national and county level design guidance and rainfall intensity (with climate change allowances*) parameters based on national averages, can, for all proposals, reduce the causes and impacts of flooding within its area, or ensure that the development will be safe for its lifetime and prevent flooding elsewhere.
Nor is it supported by any analysis of the performance of Sustainable Drainage Systems implemented in new development in recent years, which might indicate whether the national guidance on rainfall intensity, climate change allowances, and the criteria within the non-Statutory Technical Guidance for Sustainable Drainage Systems are appropriate and safe standards for local climatic or hydro-geological conditions.
National guidance currently gives a climate allowance for increasing rainfall intensity of 20-40% over a 1961 – 1990 baseline. However this is a national average, and frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is predicted to increase further under the impact of climate change in Cumbria than elsewhere in England.
This response makes the case that, although the Publication Draft Development Management Policies DPD has a policy on Managing Flood Risk, with the prime purpose as “to ensure existing and new development is not exposed to flood risk” and refers many times to “taking account of climate change” the wording of the first three sections of the policy is such that it fails to achieve its aim, or to comply with National Planning Policy on either flooding or climate change (see Appendix B). The policy would therefore, in our opinion, fail to protect people and businesses in flood prone areas of South Lakeland from unacceptable flood risk both in the short term, and the longer term when the impacts of climate change develop further.
This response refers only to the first three parts of policy DM6, Location of Development –Avoiding Areas of Flood Risk, Surface Water Disposal, and Designing Sustainable Drainage Measures. SLFP has no objection to the other two sections.
The policy section headed “Location of Development –Avoiding Areas of Flood Risk” contains a selection of the many phrases in National Planning Policy (NPPF) and in Practice Guidance (including referring to withdrawn Technical Guidance to the NPPF), which could be said to be unnecessary, but also fails to provide the precision and clarity that would enable the local planning authority to insist on improvements to a development or ultimately to refuse it as national policy and guidance makes clear. By conflating several different PPG phrases without PPG’s clarification and definitions it would appear to create loopholes which would be less strong that national policy. It does include a few phrases that might relate to the risks of flooding specific to the Plan area, but these are not worded clearly and precisely, nor justified by locally relevant evidence or explanation in the text.
The use of the words “avoiding areas of flood risk” or “development should be avoided” are more suitable for a Core Strategy or Site Allocation DPD than a Development Management Policies DPD where the only issue at stake is the consent or otherwise for a single planning application on a specific site. Our experience as FLAG members in speaking to LLFA, EA and SLDC employees (past and present) about developments that have flooded or caused off site flooding is that we are told “we didn’t have the power to refuse”.
This section of the policy is considered to be unsound because it will not support strong regulation of planning applications that might exacerbate flooding, and if necessary refusal of, inappropriate development in areas subject to flood risk (from all sources) that: fails the Exception Test, will not be safe from flooding, and/or will cause flooding elsewhere. It is therefore not in conformity with NPPF paras 100, 102, 103 or PPG Paragraph: 037 Reference ID: 7-037-20140306 and also would not be effective over the Plan period.
SLPF suggest an initial statement of intent about “Location of Development”, followed by simple set of criteria and issues that need to be demonstrated by developers, but do not conflate or unintentionally undermine the stronger aspects of national planning policy and guidance on flooding.
Regarding “Surface Water Disposal” and “Designing Sustainable Drainage System measures”
The policy section headed “Surface Water Disposal” requires all development proposals to include the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems, possibly attempting to conform to the Ministerial Statement by Eric Pickles in December 2014. This is not completely in accordance with PPG Para 079 which says such systems should be considered when there are concerns about flooding.
SLFP welcomes the statement that they should be of the right proportion and type reflecting local circumstances, but considers that a genuine analysis of sources and causes of flooding in South Lakeland would have enabled a clearer understanding of the differences between genuine surface water, arising from rainfall on impermeable areas of the site, and other sources of flooding including run off from hillsides, and fluvial flooding from small watercourses which is a problem in the district. These affect the potential for, and problems with, infiltration and provision of a surface water body for attenuation purposes. (SLFP’s understanding based on local knowledge, research and contact with the Environment Agency since Storm Desmond is attached as Appendix A)
PPG para 079makes it clear that sustainable drainage should be provided unless shown to be inappropriate, and PPG Para 82 makes it clear that this is a matter of judgement for the local planning authority, whilst seeking advice from the relevant flood risk management bodies.
The draft policy then paraphrases a section of Planning Practice Guidance (PPG), but inaccurately, saying that the hierarchy in para 80 of PPG must be adhered to, whereas PPG says “the aim should be to discharge surface water runoff as high up the hierarchy as reasonably practicable, and encourages lpas to provide some guidance on when sustainable drainage systems may not be appropriate.
Our next problem with the policy is in the section headed “Designing Sustainable Drainage System measures” that states that sustainable drainage must reflect the non statutory technical standards and the Cumbria design guide, neither of which reflect local climatic conditions or the higher than average vulnerability to climate change in South Lakeland, or the possibility of a different approach in areas defined as areas with critical drainage problems. As such the policy fails to address either the scale and nature of flood risk to people and property within the Plan area, or local climatic and geo-hydrological conditions.
The policy here wrongly limits the LPA to standards which are currently under review , Table 2 of PPG on Rainfall Intensity and Climate allowances in small and urban catchments, and implies that the local planning authority has no statutory obligation to use its own judgement, as well as taking advice, in cases where it is apparent that the standards being applied or the analysis of the site specific causes and sources of flooding might not be accurate. No research or evidence is presented to assess local conditions, and therefore the policy has not been justified.
We consider that the two sections “Surface Water Disposal” and “Designing Sustainable Drainage System measures” should be replaced by a simple list of criteria and matters which the developer will have to demonstrate, that does not undermine Planning Practice Guidance where it gives the LPA some flexibility and ensures that development will not flood or cause flooding eslewhere.
In summary SLFO consider that this policy, and the plan, is not effective because it fails to ensure that new development will neither flood nor cause flooding elsewhere.
FOOTNOTE: About our organisation
SLFP grew out of individual flood action groups (FLAGs) in South Lakeland and their links with similar groups elsewhere in Cumbria. While FLAGS were working on recovery and resilience following Storm Desmond in December 2015, there was also a need to share information held by the communities with the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authority, and seek to develop lasting solutions in terms of flood protection investment and actions. SLFP was formed at a meeting to all FLAGs in South Lakeland and a Committee was elected to help the collective voice of all flooded communities to be heard. The principles in this response to the Publication Draft were agreed at a meeting of the SLFP Committee on 11 December 2017 and the detailed response has been compiled by Mrs Maggie Mason, B A (Arch) Diploma in Town and Regional Planning , a recently retired Town Planner whose most recent professional experience was 10 years with Cumbria County Council working on both Development Management for Minerals and Waste and County Council Developments of many types, and also Planning Policy development, specifically the Minerals and Waste Development Framework. It attempts to represent flooded communities and their anger about the flood risk impacts from new development on existing homes and businesses, together with a considered constructive critique of the proposed Development Management policy on Flood Risk Management and Sustainable Drainage.
APPENDIX A Sources, Severity and Causes of Flooding in South Lakeland
Unfortunately this DPD has come to its Publication stage before either the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment or the Environment Agency revised modelling of the main river catchments in the plan area have been completed. Flooding understanding had, we believe, already advanced since the 2007 SFRA, which was used to support the 2010 Core Strategy, but Storm Desmond on the 5th/6th December 2015 has significantly increased the areas and properties at risk of flooding in the District.
The Core Strategy in 2010 estimated 325 homes to be at 1% risk of flooding in Kendal, plus areas in Ulverston and Furness (5), based on the 2007 SFRA. Since then, the number of homes known to be at risk has increased significantly. Storm Desmond, on 5/6th December 2015 flooded approximately 1500 homes in Kendal, and many homes flooded again in South Lakeland on the 22 November 2017, including two that were recently built under the most up to date flood criteria. Recent extreme weather events has been shown (6) to be made much more likely (best estimate 59% increase in likelihood) by anthropogenic climate change of approximately 1 degree C, and the Committee on Climate Change’s best estimate (7) of warming this century is 2.7 degrees C. They estimate that the number of homes, and the cost of flood damage is likely to double by the 2050’s.
The 2010 Core Strategy identified flood risk as serious and linked to climate change “Climate change is a threat to South Lakeland. There are significant areas of flood risk, particularly in Kendal, where the Rivers Kent and Mint flow through the town.”(8) Its Sustainable Community Strategy, Strategic Objectives and area specific policies for Kendal and Ulverston all stated an aim of minimising flood risk. SLFP argue that this risk is now more significant, and urgent, and better understood as a key health and wellbeing, and economic issue for the district. If the policy is not as effective and enforceable as possible, it is failing to address or adapt to climate change. Policy DM6 should also address the locally specific sources and causes of flooding, which South Lakeland has IN ADDITION to the general national sources such as fluvial flooding near large rivers and in coastal areas.
Most urban areas in the district have 19th century drainage in their centres, with networks of historic tributaries from upland areas constrained in undersized culverts under successive urban extensions from the 1960’s to the present day. Some of these water courses flow underground through the limestone geology above the town, and emerge to form areas of natural winter flood storage on hillsides, held between drumlins, in old mineral workings, and on level areas beneath steep concave hillsides. Many such areas have been drained and developed during this period, both to build houses but also to develop and protect infrastructure such as water supply and rail networks above the town. Natural attenuation has not been acknowledged or quantified and has therefore been lost, eliminating historically important delays in peak flows to downstream areas. These tributaries are now key elements of the surface water drainage network, and excess fluvial flows escaping from historic watercourses on hillsides, or preventing genuine surface water from impermeable areas within developments entering the culverts, find their easiest pathways through housing areas and down highways. Following a relatively dry period from 1960 to 1990, which Friederike E.L. Otto’s analysis already quoted shows increased after 2000 mainly as a result of natural variability, have probably now also increased under the influence of climate change. Flow rates in the becks have increased further and the loss of natural winter storage has brought peak flows forward causing flash floods. Not surprisingly, such excess flows cannot be accommodated in highway drains and residents tend to blame highway drain blockages for all such flooding, both when justified or not!
National policy and guidance, and Environment Agency flood mapping assumes fluvial flooding is all near large rivers, and confuses out of river flows from small becks above and within the town with surface water flooding, which technically should only refer in planning situations to water that falls on impermeable sections within a development and needs to be either allowed to infiltrate into the ground, accommodated temporarily on the site, or discharged to some form of water course or pipe.
Reality, in this and some other areas, is much more complex. Development sites have underground streams which emerge and disappear, temporary streams that escape from upland infrastructure such as railway lines and utilities infrastructure, or from changes on agricultural holdings. Local residents have knowledge of significant increases in such flows which far exceed theoretical estimates, and have resulted in step changes in flood frequency and depth.
5 Paragraphs 3.24, 4.19 South Lakeland Local Development Core Strategy; October2010
6 Friederike E.L. Otto et al 2017 Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa9663
7 UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 Synthesis report: priorities for the next five years: Committee on Climate Change: July 2016
8 Paragraph 1.23 South Lakeland Local Development Core Strategy; October2010
APPENDIX B
Summary of National Planning Policy and Guidance Relating To Flood Risk And Climate Change
Three simple summaries in National Planning Practice Guidance summarise the national planning policy and other statutory duties which relate to consideration of flood risk and climate change in Local Plans.
The National Planning Policy Framework sets strict tests to protect people and property from flooding which all local planning authorities are expected to follow. Where these tests are not met, national policy is clear that new development should not be allowed.
Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 7-001-20140306
“Addressing climate change is one of the core land use planning principles which the National Planning Policy Framework expects to underpin both plan-making and decision-taking. To be found sound, Local Plans will need to reflect this principle and enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework. These include the requirements for local authorities to adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change in line with the provisions and objectives of the Climate Change Act 2008, and co-operate to deliver strategic priorities which include climate change.
In addition to the statutory requirement to take the Framework into account in the preparation of Local Plans, there is a statutory duty on local planning authorities to include policies in their Local Plan designed to tackle climate change and its impacts. This complements the sustainable development duty on plan-makers and the expectation that neighbourhood plans will contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. The National Planning Policy Framework emphasises that responding to climate change is central to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.”
Planning Practice Guidance Paragraph: 001 Reference ID: 6-001-20140306
Section 19(1A) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires local planning authorities to include in their Local Plans “policies designed to secure that the development and use of land in the local planning authority’s area contribute to the mitigation of, and adaptation to, climate change”. This will be a consideration when a Local Plan is examined.
Paragraph: 002 Reference ID: 6-002-20140306
(1) Paragraphs 3.24, 4.19 South Lakeland Local Development Core Strategy, October 2010
(2) Friederike E.L. Otto et al 2017 Environ. Res. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa9663
(3) UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 Synthesis report: priorities for the next five years: Committee on Climate Change: July 2016
(4) Paragraph 1.23 South Lakeland Local Development Core Strategy; October2010
1.6 Please set out what modification(s) you consider necessary to resolve your objection and make the DPD legally compliant or sound, having regard to the matter(s) you have identified above. (Please note that any non-compliance with the Duty to Cooperate is incapable of modification at examination). You will need to say why this modification will make the DPD legally compliant or sound. It will be helpful if you are able to put forward your suggested revised wording on any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.
[Regarding Location of Development – Avoiding areas of Flood Risk] SLPF suggest an initial statement of intent, followed by simple set of criteria and issues that need to be demonstrated by developers, but do not conflate or unintentionally undermine the stronger aspects of national planning policy and guidance on flooding.
[Regarding Surface Water Disposal and Designing Sustainable Drainage System measures] We consider that these two sections should be replaced by a simple list of criteria and matters which the developer will have to demonstrate, that does not undermine Planning Practice Guidance where it gives the LPA some flexibility and ensures that development will not flood or cause flooding eslewhere.
Policy DM6 should also address the locally specific sources and causes of flooding, which South Lakeland has IN ADDITION to the general national sources such as fluvial flooding near large rivers and in coastal areas.
2.1 If your representation is seeking a modification, do you wish to participate at the oral part of the Examination?
Yes, I wish to participate at the oral examination
2.2 If you wish to participate at the oral part of the Examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary.
In order to explain and present the views of flooded communities of South Lakeland.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, when recommendations are published and when the document is adopted.
Please notify me.
2. Mrs Maggie Mason, South Lakes Flood Partnership : 14 Dec 2017 16:56:00
Before completing this online representation please tick the box to show that you have read the guidance notes accompanying this consultation.
I have read the guidance notes.
Paragraph No.
2.6.1
1.1 Do you consider the DM DPD to be legally compliant?
Yes
1.3 Do you consider the DM DPD to be sound?
No
1.4 If NO, please indicate the ground(s) on which you consider the DPD to be unsound.
The DPD is not justified
The DPD is not effective
The DPD is not consistent with national policy
1.5 Please give details of why you consider the DPD is not legally compliant or is unsound or fails to comply with the Duty to Cooperate. Please be as precise as possible.
If you wish to support the legal compliance or soundness of the DPD or its compliance with the Duty to Cooperate, please also use this box to set out your comments.
this response is to be viewed together with the South Lakeland Flood Partnership response to Policy DM6, which SLFP considers is not sound or and also to not be compliant with Section 19A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
This is because because it will not secure that the development and use of land in the local planning authority’s area contribute to adaptation to climate change, in particular to address flooding which is identified by the Committee on Climate Change as the key climate risk facing the UK(1) and by the South Lakeland Local Development Framework Core Strategy (October 2010) as a specific threat to South Lakeland.
( 1) UK Climate Change Risk Assessment 2017 Synthesis report: priorities for the next five years: Committee on Climate Change: July 2016)
2 Paragraph 1.23 South Lakeland Local Development Framework Core Strategy : October 2010
1.6 Please set out what modification(s) you consider necessary to resolve your objection and make the DPD legally compliant or sound, having regard to the matter(s) you have identified above. (Please note that any non-compliance with the Duty to Cooperate is incapable of modification at examination). You will need to say why this modification will make the DPD legally compliant or sound. It will be helpful if you are able to put forward your suggested revised wording on any policy or text. Please be as precise as possible.
We consider that while para 2.6,1 is sound in itself an further paragraph should be added explaining the sources, nature and urgency of local flood risk in South Lakeland, and the reason why strong action is required to protect lives, homes, businesses and the economy.
Unfortunately the SFRA is not yet complete, but there is enough knowledge to make a suitable statement and enable stronger regulation for the next 15 years.
2.1 If your representation is seeking a modification, do you wish to participate at the oral part of the Examination?
Yes, I wish to participate at the oral examination
2.2 If you wish to participate at the oral part of the Examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary.
So that the views of local flooded residents can be properly heard and understood.
Please tick the box if you wish to be notified when the document is submitted, when recommendations are published and when the document is adopted.
Please notify me.