Upload
isabel-freeman
View
217
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Integrating water management and spatial planning
Developments in England (and elsewhere)
UK Context
• April 2004 – Foresight Future Flooding report Published• July 2004 – making Space for Water programme initiated• July 2004 – Com (2004) 472 Final, Flood risk management,
Flood prevention, protection and mitigation• June and July 2007 – Major floods in many areas of England• October 2007 – Directive 1007/60/EC on the assessment and
management of flood risks• Pitt Review final report published 25th June 2008• November 2009 – Flood and Water Management Bill
published• December 2009 - Flood Risk Regulations published• April 2010 - Flood and Water Management passed
What’s climate change about and how will it affect our
cities?• More intense rainfall?• Longer duration heavy rainfall?• More frequent intense and long duration rainfall?• Is it just more of what we already get?• It’s also about heat island, and pressure on water supply.• And there are other things to consider
– Increasing population and demographic change– What is the impact of declining oil reserves and increasing
competition for what’s left– What about food security and the demand for irrigation against those
for urban water supply?
• What are our cities going to look like in the future?
A vision of what might happen if we just carry on as
normal• River Aire Strategic Studies
KEIGHLEY HIGH LEVEL
KEIGHLEY LOW LEVELSUTTON IN CRAVEN
BINGLEY
HARDEN VALLEYSHIPLEY
EAST BRADFORD
THORNTON VALLEY
LITTLE HORTON
HORTON VALLEY
HEATON & FRIZINGHALL
CITY CENTRE/WTS
MANNINGHAM
MANCHESTER RD/BOWLING
Baildon
ECCLESHILL & GREENGATES
RAWDON
YEADON
RODLEY
PUDSEY
SMALEWELL
MORLEY
MIDDLETON
WORTLEY
HORSFORTH
WYKEBECK
MEANWOOD
GIPTON
50 Km
Aire study objectives
• To review available data and identify additional data needs.• To review the pressures for land use change from regional
spatial strategy and specific regeneration initiatives and quantify the likely impacts on all forms of surface water management systems at a local scale.
• To assess current and future flood risk and water quality impacts resulting from land use and climate changes at strategic level for the River Aire catchment in Bradford and Leeds and at local level for selected locations.
Impact of climate change, development and creep
Impact of climate change, development, creep and event probability on surface flow volume
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Event probability (1 in (x) years)
Su
rfac
e fl
ow
vo
lum
e (c
.m.)
2005
2025
2055
2085
Conclusions
• Flooding– Increase in the number of vulnerable locations by approximately 40%– Increase in the surface water flow volume by around 100%– Increase in the frequency of surface water flooding at vulnerable
locations by around 200%
• Water quality– Typical discharge volumes to receiving waters may increase by at least
60%– Typical biochemical oxygen demand loads may increase by around
50%– Typical suspended solids loads may increase by over 120%
• Can we afford not to do anything?
If climate change means more water in our cities, what do
we want to do?• Do we want to spend a fortune and bring our cities to a
standstill by increasing the size of our sewers?• Do we want to manage the occasional excess water on the
surface at minimum cost through appropriate urban design?• Anyone who prefers increasing the size of our sewers can go
straight to the asylum now.• That doesn’t mean that we abandon our sewers, they are a
really valuable asset. For more than a century they have been proved to be really sustainable. However we need to use them to their maximum benefit.
• Are we agreed that this is what we want to do?• If not we need to talk and work out our differences!
But what can we do?
• This is what is likely to happen and what we have to do
• Threshold of acceptability is the same as Tipping Point
Unstructured development Time
Climate change
Drainage infrastructure enhancements
Increasing flood risk
Reducing flood risk
Threshold of acceptability
T1 T2
Planning horizon
Management of the urban surface
Socio economic adaptation (Densification, retreat reduced expectations etc)
Structured development
Identify current and potential future risks, and who is responsible for managing them
Water type Water category sub category
Rural and urban areas
Exceedence pathways
Surface water and soil
Rural green spaceGreen space at urban fringeGreen space within urban areaDeveloped urban surface
Groundwater
Artificial superficial deposits(Made, Worked, In filled, Disturbed or Landscaped Ground)Natural superficial deposits Bedrock
Drainage infrastructure
Combined sewerSurface water sewer Foul sewerSUDS/Source controlPipe drainOpen Drain
Streams and ponds
Small Stream2
OpenPiped/culvertedBuilt over
Large Stream3
OpenPiped/culvertedBuilt over
Ponds Ponds with outletsPonds without outlets
Rivers and lakes
River1
LakesLakes with outletsLakes without outlets (oxbow)Salt lakes (inland seas)
Artificial water bodies
Drainage channelCanalReservoirs
Coastal Estuaries and deltasOpen sea
Adopt a task and role orientated approach
• This focuses on doing the job of flood risk management.• Driven by practitioner needs.• It’s more common to start from the position of legislation and
institutions, but tends to omit whole areas of flood risk management as the law doesn’t cover everything.
• By looking at it from doing the job, duties, powers, voluntary action and areas of inaction can be identified.
What is the task?• Section 2.2 COM (2004) 472 final provides guidance on
management the risk of floods as follows:– Prevention: preventing damage caused by floods by avoiding construction of
houses and industries in present and future flood-prone areas; by adapting future developments to the risk of flooding; and by promoting appropriate land-use, agricultural and forestry practices;
– Protection: taking measures, both structural and non-structural, to reduce the likelihood of floods and/or the impact of floods in a specific location;
– Preparedness: informing the population about flood risks and what to do in the event of a flood;
– Emergency response: developing emergency response plans in the case of a flood;
– Recovery and lessons learned: returning to normal conditions as soon as possible and mitigating both the social and economic impacts on the affected population”.
This is often represented as follows
But the task is neither cyclical or sequential
• Things happen at the same time, they can intertwine and synergies can be developed
Time
Alleviation and avoidance
Analysis and assessment
Awareness
AssistanceRecovery RecoveryPreparation Response
All clearWarning
Significant eventInter event period with minor events
So who is involved?
Water type Water category sub category
Discipline
Water specialists
Planning and
building control
specialists
Highway specialists
Landscape specialists
Administrator, financial and
legal specialists
Rural and urban areas
Exceedence pathways
Surface water and soil
Rural green spaceGreen space at urban fringeGreen space within urban areaDeveloped urban surface
GroundwaterArtificial superficial depositsNatural superficial deposits Bedrock
Drainage infrastructure
SewersSUDS/Source controlDrains
Streams and ponds
Small Stream2
Large Stream3
PondsRivers and lakes
River1
LakesArtificial water bodies
Drainage channelCanalReservoirs
Coastal Estuaries and deltasOpen sea
Stakeholder analysis, who does what?• Identify the organisations that are involved and the tasks they
carry out– Awareness raising (including lessons learned)– Analysis and assessment (identifying flood hazards and risk)– Avoidance and Alleviation (actions to prevent and protect from flooding)– Assistance (preparing for, responding to and helping recover from floods).
• Then identify who does what within organisations• Identify if actions are legal duties, legal powers, viluntary and
also where there are no actions.• Agree who should do what• Write it all down and formalise it. Don’t just carry it round in
your head. Get it clear and get it right
This enables
• Communication pathways within and between organisations to be identified.
• The need for the development of competencies to be identified.
• The need for capacity building to be identified.– Tools (software)– Procedures– Organisational infrastructure (for communication and information
sharing)– Etc.
• In effect an emerging strategy for flood risk management
Where are we?• In England legislation has created a duty to produce local flood risk
management strategies.• The top down guidance is being produced by administrators rather
then practitioners. Therefore, although the intentions are good, there are shortcomings.
• Aware that this was likely to happen, the UoS and Bradford involvement in projects such as SKINT, MARE and FRC provides the opportunity to identify the gaps and how to fill them.
• The methods are being tried and tested by different project partners, e.g. Bradford worked on an earlier version and Hannover started the process last week and have identified what they do now
• This is an ongoing process that will be completed in the next two years and all are welcome to join in.
Hannover analysis• Tables 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, are check lists for the different topic
groups relevant to flood risk management. The stakeholders responsible for each cell within the table should be identified together with an assessment of whether the stakeholder is acting because of legislative duties, legislative powers, or voluntarily. Each cell may be completed by entering a unique number for each stakeholder followed by a letter as follows:
• D for a duty set down in statute• P for a power set down in statute• V for a voluntary action• Therefore cells may be completed 1P, 4V etc.• Some of the tasks are either not relevant to some of the
water types and some are not possible to do.• Table 6 identifies the stakeholders and their roles
Table 6, stakeholder reference numbers and their
roles
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Thank you for your attention