building water sensitive urban planning
DESCRIPTION
Building Water Sensitive Urban Planning. A project sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Facilitated by Liz Sharp Senior Lecturer University of Bradford/Pennine Water Group. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Building Water Sensitive Urban Planning
Facilitated by Liz Sharp
Senior Lecturer
University of Bradford/Pennine Water Group
A project sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
For further information see: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environ/fcd/policy/strategy/ha2.htm
Water Sensitive Urban Planning
A planning process that is sensitive to:
• Need to reduce flood risk;• Ecological needs of water
ways and surroundings;• Aesthetic benefits of bringing
water and people closer together;
• Local social and economic need
….use workshop to explore what in practice
Objectives of Workshop
To support mutual learning about water sensitive urban planning, in particular:
1. What potential to contribute to sustainable urban development?
2. How supported by legislative framework?
3. How is framework applied in plans & practice in Bradford and Leeds?
4. What is needed to further influence current current practices?
Attitudes today
• Our aim today is to discover and explore institutional roles & tensions around the governance of water;
• We will be respectful to you in terms of seeking to understand your perspective on what you do and why you do it;
• We ask that you are likewise respectful of others.
Legislative Framework for Water Sensitive Urban
PlanningLiz Sharp
Senior Lecturer
University of Bradford/Pennine Water Group
A project sponsored by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)
For further information see: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environ/fcd/policy/strategy/ha2.htm
Overview of Framework
Three main spheres of control:
1. Rivers and bodies of water
2. Drains
3. Houses and buildings
What follows is a ‘crude’ analysis – to be improved by you when I’ve finished!
Rivers and water ways
• EU water framework directive sets context for Environment Agency (EA)’s control of water ways
• ‘Good ecological status’ required by 2015, to be achieved through discharge and abstraction licensing
• EA also responsible for flood risk management
Rivers and water ways
Incentive (for investment in WSUP)• WSUP could help improve water quality & reduce flood
water quantity;
Influence• EA regulate discharge, are consulted about planning &
can fund flood defences
Barriers• Limited time/budget based on a narrow CBA; largely rely
on others to take action; can only fund flood defence not flood prevention i.e. WSUP.
Drains
• “Drains” means pipes, culverts and sewers that convey surface water to treatment works or water courses;
• They are variously the responsibility of riparian owners, the local drainage authority and/or the water company;
• In UK drains frequently go into combined sewers, adding to water treatment costs.
Water Company
Incentive• Could save on future pumping & treatment costs
&/or pipe infrastructure if drainage is minimised;
Influence• Planning consultee;
Barriers• Ability to invest limited by regulator OFWAT &
shareholder value;• Incentive limited because of shared
responsibility with LDA/riparian owners.
Local Drainage Authority
Incentive• Political & community interest in preventing
floods in local areas;
Influence• Consultee for planning; permissive rights of
influence;
Barriers• Limited money/time & sometimes limited
expertise; other political priorities
Riparian Owners
Incentive• (Possibly) prevent risk of damage to their
property/neighbours properties
Influence• None
Barriers• Not aware of responsibilities; hard to work in co-
operation with many other riparian owners.
Buildings and planning
• PPS 25 (Dec 2006) puts new responsibilities in relation to floods & surface drainage in the planning process;
• Like all planning, tiered process of responsibility – Regional Planning Authority impacts on Local Planning Authority impacts on specific site potential;
• Requirements of surface drainage and flooding compete for space with the pressure to develop housing.
Regional Planning Authority
Incentive• Flooding is significant cost to area;Influence• Produce ‘Regional Flood Risk Assessment’
which informs Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategy AND local Strategic Flood Risk Assessments.
Limitations• Must balance flood risk with development
pressure
Local Planning Authority
Incentive• Desire to avoid costs of (and potential “blame”
for) flooding in their area;Influence• Produce Strategic Flood Risk Assessment &
grant planning permissionBarriers• Limited knowledge of flooding & surface
drainage; tight deadlines for planning decisions; fear of appeal.
Owner/developer
Incentive• Need to satisfy LPA that a) development is appropriate
for location’s flood vulnerability (sequential test) b) that surface water is sustainability drained c) there are plans for exceedence of surface water system.
• If development is large or in flood vulnerable zone must produce ‘Flood Risk Assessment’.
Influence• Choice of what is implemented and how (within planning
permission)Barriers• Lack of knowledge/usual way of doing things; desire to
maximise value from development.
Concluding questions
• Is this right…. Have I mis-represented something, or missed out some crucial factors?
• This explains systems in theory, but how do they work in practice? (The afternoon!)
• What stages are RFRA and SFRAs in Aire valley?
• What is/can be done while the latter are still in development?
• Is this legislative system enough to implement WSUP?