Consulng Civil, Structural & Geo‐Environmental Engineers

Flood Risk Assessment Report

Site Address:

Burley Road Rawtenstall

Paul Waite Associates Ltd Summit House Riparian Way Project Ref: 11201/I/01B The Crossing Cross Hills February 2014 BD20 7BW [email protected] www.pwaite.co.uk Report No.13161/I/01 REVISION B Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Flood Risk Assessment

Paul Waite Associates have been appointed by the RTB Partnership, to undertake a Flood Risk Assessment in support of a planning application for residential development at a site off Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, Lancashire.

Clients Details

RTB Partnership The Business Centre Futures Park Bacup Lancashire OL13 0BB

Documents Revision Status

ISSUE: DATE COMMENTS

‐ November 4, 2013 FINAL

A February 10, 2014 FINAL ‐ Revised following updated development plans

February 25, 2014 FINAL – Revised following response from the Environment B Agency

Report No.13161/I/01 REVISION B Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Contents

Executive Summary 1

1.0 Introduction 3

2.0 Approach to the Flood Risk Assessment 4

2.1 Approach 4

2.2 Application of the Sequential and Exceptions Test 4

3.0 Site Details 6

3.1 Location 6

3.2 Former/Current Use 6

3.3 Proposals 6

3.4 Boundaries 7

3.5 Topography 7

3.6 Existing Drainage 8

3.7 History of Flooding 9

3.7.1 British Hydrological Society – Hydrological Events 9

3.7.2 Internet Search for Historical Flooding 9

3.7.3 Lancashire Area PFRA Document (2011) 9

3.7.4 Rossendale Borough Council SFRA (May 2009) 11

3.7.5 Environment Agency Data – Historic Flooding 11

4.0 Flooding Mechanisms 12

4.1 Fluvial: Limy Water 12

4.1.1 General 12

4.1.2 Modeled Flood Level Data 13

4.1.3 Overtopping 14

4.1.4 Climate Change 15

4.1.5 Infrastructure Failure: Blockage 16

4.1.6 Conclusion 17 Report No.13161/I/01 REVISION B Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

4.2 Artificial Water Sources: Reservoirs 17

4.3 Pluvial Sources 18

4.3.1 Sewer Flooding 18

4.3.2 Increase in Surface Water Runoff 19

4.4 Groundwater 25

4.5 Overland Flow 25

4.6 Ponding 26

5.0 Material Consideration In Respect of the National Planning Policy Framework 27

5.1 Environment Agency Flood Map 27

5.2 Finished Development Levels 28

5.3 Flood Resistance/Resilience Measures 28

5.4 Flood Protection Equipment 29

5.5 Access and Egress 30

5.6 Flood Warning 35

5.7 Flood Evacuation Plan 37

5.8 Safe Refuge 38

5.9 Flood Conveyance Routes 39

5.9 Compensatory Flood Storage 39

5.10 Easements 40

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations 41

Tables

Table 1: Exceptions and Sequential Test 4 Table 2: Sources of Flooding 12 Table 3: Limy Water Model Results Node Ref. ea0140LIMY01_1115 14 Table 4: SUDs Planner 21 Table 5: Existing Greenfield Runoff Rates (Site Area = 0.25Ha) 24 Table 6: Indicative Attenuation Volumes 24 Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14 Table 7: Typical Flood Proofing Measures 29 Table 8: Guidance on Debris Factors for Different Flood Depths, Velocities and Dominant Land Uses (Table 3.1 FD2321/TR1) 32 Table 9: Velocity, Depth and Flood Hazard Matrix 32 Table 10: Flood Hazard Rating for Safe Access/Egress Route 33 Table 11: Environment Agency Flood Warning Codes 36 Table 12: Volume Displacement Due to Building Footprint (Steps and Lobby Area) 40

Figures

Figure 1: Location Plan – Existing Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire 6 Figure 2: Existing Site Viewed North East along Burnley Road 7 Figure 3: Position of Existing Gully Viewed South West towards the Site Access 8 Figure 4: Lancashire PFRA – Past Flood Event Locations 10 Figure 5: Limy Water Taken from Over the North East Boundary 13 Figure 6: Limy Water Viewed at the Head of the Culvert Section (BP Garage) 14 Figure 7: Constable Lee Road Bridge 15 Figure 8: Risk of Flooding from Reservoirs 18 Figure 8: Environment Agency Flood Map 27 Figure 9: Typical Flood Resilience/Resistance Measures 30 Figure 11: Pedestrian Route & Levels from the New Building 34 Figure 11: Environment Agency Flood Warning Coverage Map 35 Figure 12: Suggested Evacuation Route to St James the Less School in Flood Zone 1 38

Appendices

APPENDIX A Aerial Photographs APPENDIX B Topographical Survey APPENDIX C Proposed Development Plans APPENDIX D Environment Agency Data APPENDIX E United Utilities Sewer Records APPENDIX F Local Borehole Logs & Soilscape Map APPENDIX G SUD’s Planner Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14 APPENDIX H Greenfield Runoff Rates APPENDIX I Indicative Attenuation Volumes APPENDIX J Flood Extent Plans

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Executive Summary

The proposed development comprises 16No new apartment units with associated car parking located off Burnley Road, within the Lancashire Town of Rawtenstall.

The development covers an area approximating 0.25 Hectares; and is located within Flood Zone 3 of the Environment Agency Flood Map; and therefore has a risk of flooding from fluvial sources.

The primary source of flood risk to the development is identified to be from local watercourse Limy Water, which is situated directly adjacent to the east boundary of the site.

From a topographical survey of the site, levels within the site range from 178.7mAOD up to 179.87mAOD; with an average ground level at the location of the new building of 179.15mAOD.

The 1 in 75 year; 100 year and 1 in 1000 year flood levels for estimated as 179.23mAOD, 179.34mAOD and 179.45mAOD respectively; and undertaking a direct comparison indicates that the site is likely to become inundated during the 1 in 75 year flood event.

In conclusion it is confirmed that Limy Water presents a flood risk at the site.

As such the following measures have been; or are recommended to be included within the design of the site:

 Lobby area set at a level of 180.00mAOD i.e. elevated above the 1 in 1000 year flood level  Ground floor accommodation set at a level of 181.00mAOD which again is elevated above the 1 in 1000 year flood level  Open undercroft area provided to prevent impedance of flood conveyance routes and the displacement of flood storage volumes; hence ensuring that flooding is not increased elsewhere as a result of the development.  Flood storage compensation is to be provided through ground re‐profiling and careful design of levels within the proposed car park area.  Suitable flood resistance/resilience measures are to be incorporated into the building design i.e. non‐return valves; elevated electricity sockets etc…, where appropriate.  Residents/Housing organisation advised to sign up to receive flood warnings from the EA’s Flood Warning’s Direct Service.  Evacuation plan/procedure to be devised and implemented; undertaking assistance/consultation with Rossendale Emergency Planning Team.

Surface water runoff rates and volumes will be increased as a result of the development.

1

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

On‐site investigation indicates that surface water from previous development was directed via an outfall into Limy Water.

Approved Document H of the current Building Regulations sets out a hierarchy for disposal of surface water from new development, as listed below in order of preference:

 Infiltration via soakaway or other infiltration device  Watercourse  Sewer

A desk‐top study suggests that local ground conditions are unsuitable for disposal of surface water via infiltration methods such as soakaways; and as such it is recommended that the existing outfall into Limy Water is re‐utilised.

Greenfield run off rates for the proposed development have been estimated at 2.43 l/s; 4.75 l/s; and 5.82 l/s for the 1 in 1 year; 1 in 30 year; and 1 in 100 year plus climate change events respectively.

Discharge into the watercourse, should be restricted to greenfield runoff rates or a minimum of 5l/s whichever is the highest; to prevent an increase in surface water flooding occurring as a result of blockage.

Flows in excess of these values should be attenuated on‐site up to the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event. Some flooding is permitted during this event; however flooding must be retained within the site; and not be allowed to migrate beyond the site boundary.

An evaluation of SUDS indicates that source control methods such as permeable paving, green roof technology, or rainwater harvesting; with online/offline attenuation volume provided by large diameter pipes or geo‐cellular storage crates; are suitable for inclusion with a drainage strategy for the proposed development.

2

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

1.0 Introduction

Paul Waite Associates have been appointed to undertake a Flood Risk Assessment in support of a planning application for proposed residential development located on land off Burnley Road in Rawtenstall, Lancashire

The development covers an area approximating 0.25 Hectares and is shown to be situated within Flood Zone 3 of the Environment Agency Flood Map, which is defined as land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding (>1%) or a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding from the sea.

The primary source of flood risk to the proposed development site has been identified as Limy Water, however other sources of flooding have been considered within this assessment.

It is usual for the Environment Agency to raise an objection to development applications within the functional floodplain or Zone 2 or 3 of the flood map until the question of flood risk has been properly evaluated. The Agency will also object to developments where the total site area is in excess of 1 Hectare until suitable consideration has been given to surface water runoff.

3

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

2.0 Approach to the Flood Risk Assessment

2.1 Approach

A topographical survey of the site was undertaken by TriCAD Solutions Limited all levels and coordinates relate to OSGB36 using GNSS data. As such, the levels provided by the topographical survey have been utilised within this report.

The requirements for flood risk assessments are generally as set out in the ‘Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework’, published in March 2012; and in more detail from the Environment Agency’s ‘Standing Advice on Flood Risk’ available from http://www.environment‐agency.gov.uk/reasearch/planning/82584.aspx.

2.2 Application of the Sequential and Exceptions Test

The risk based sequential test should be applied at all stages of planning. Its aim is to steer new development to areas at the lowest probability of flooding, within Zone 1. The flood zones are the starting point for the sequential approach.

The development is shown to be situated within Flood Zone 3 of the Environment Agency Flood Map, which is defined as land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding (>1%) or a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding from the sea.

Proposals for the site incorporate a 16No residential apartments and as such Table 2 of the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) indicates that the development is classified as ‘more vulnerable’.

Table 1: Exceptions and Sequential Test Flood Risk Essential Water Highly More Less Vulnerability Infrastructure compatible Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable Classification Zone      1

Zone Exception Test     Flood 2 required Zone Zone Exception Test Exception Test    3a required required

Zone Exception Test     3b required

 Development is appropriate  Development should not be permitted

4

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

The site is identified as a Category 2 development within the 2010 SHLAA document (Site ID 670) published by Rossendale Council; as the mapping undertaken by Scott Wilson for the Rossendale SFRA places the development within Flood Zone 2.

As the development is situated outside of Flood Zone 1, it is advised that a Sequential/Exceptions Test may be required by the LPA; in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF.

5

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

3.0 Site Details

3.1 Location

The site is centred on ordnance survey grid reference SD810235.

An Ordnance Survey plan, indicating the location of the property is presented below.

Figure 1: Location Plan – Existing Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire

Proposed Development

Source: www.streetmap.co.uk

3.2 Former/Current Use

An aerial photograph from Google Earth Circa 2000 shows existing development within the red‐line development boundary, however by 2005 the building had been demolished (see Appendix A)

Information ascertained from an internet search indicates that from the late 1970’s/early 1980’s up to the period 2000‐2005; the site accommodated a nursing home.

Aerial photographs of the site are provided for reference within Appendix A.

3.3 Proposals

Proposals the development at the site comprises construction of 16No residential apartments; with associated car parking.

6

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

A plan illustrating the latest development proposals is attached within Appendix C of this report.

3.4 Boundaries

The application site is situated within the Lancashire town known as Rawtenstall; at a distance of approximately 750 metres to the north east of Rawtenstall Town Centre.

The north boundary of the site has garages directly in front of it, with Limy Water flowing in a southerly direction along the east side of the development. Burnley Road forms the west boundary; and St James the Less Church located immediately to the south.

Direct vehicular access into the site is available from Burnley Road.

Figure 2: Existing Site Viewed North East along Burnley Road

Image: Google Earth

3.5 Topography

The topographical survey indicates that a high point of 179.87mAOD is located at the north west corner and a low point of 178.70mAOD at the south west corner of the site.

The existing access onto Burnley Road has a level of 179.18mAOD; and it is noted that due to thick vegetative cover; the extent of the survey along the riverside boundary is limited.

7

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

3.6 Existing Drainage

The topographical survey shows a gully in the centre of the hard surfaced area which formerly served car parking at the now‐demolished residential care home site.

The route of surface water flow from the gully has not been traced; however on‐site inspection revealed an existing outfall from the site to Limy Water.

As such; due to the proximity of the watercourse; it is surmised that where topography allows, surface water runoff from the site drains via the outfall into Limy Water.

It is believed that the remainder of the site drains overland towards Burnley Road; where runoff is intercepted by road gullies along the highway.

Figure 3: Position of Existing Gully Viewed South West towards the Site Access

Image: C.Vose (PWA)

8

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

3.7 History of Flooding

3.7.1 British Hydrological Society – Hydrological Events

A search on the British Hydrological Society Chronology of British Hydrological Events website (http://www.dundee.ac.uk/geography/cbhe) found one incident of flooding relating to Limy Water in 1950.

 Crawshawbooth, above Rawtenstall: Urban flooding seriously affecting the ancient Quaker Meeting House [Limy Water tributary of the Irwell]

It is advised that this recorded incident was in excess of 1.5 kilometres away from the proposed development and no incidents of flooding were found within the BHS records within close proximity of the site at Burnley Road.

3.7.2 Internet Search for Historical Flooding

Undertaking an internet based search for flooding confirmed that Rawtenstall and Bacup have flooded in the past, most recently in 2012. However reports from www.thisislancashire.co.uk indicate that the worst affected areas in Rawtenstall were concentrated at St Mary’s Roundabout; near to the Fire Station; Railway Station; and Tesco; notably downhill and at a distance approximating 1 kilometre south of the proposed development.

The Environment Agency Flood Warning Area has identified the following areas at risk of flooding generally within Rawtenstall:

‘Areas at risk include properties adjacent to Limy Water from Brittania Mill to Mill Road. Including Stoneholme road, Crawshaw Grange and Burnley Road.’

At the time of writing there are no flood warnings issued for Limy Water; and it is noted that the flood warning status of the area was last updated by the EA on 16th March 2011.

3.7.3 Lancashire Area PFRA Document (2011)

A Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) published jointly by Lancashire County Council; Blackpool Council; and Blackburn with Darwen Council in May 2011 to inform the preparation of future Local Flood Risk Management Strategies as required by the Flood Risk Regulations 2009 and the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (FWMA).

The document identifies key flood risk areas within Lancashire area and fulfils the Lead Local Flood Authorities obligations under the requirements of the Flood Risk Regulations 2009 (FRR).

9

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

The PFRA is a high level screening exercise that brings together readily available information from a number of sources to assess local flood risk.

Figure 4: Lancashire PFRA – Past Flood Event Locations

Rawtenstall

Image: Extract from Central Lancashire County Council PFRA (2011)

10

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Past Flood Risk

Initial data collection indicated 420No incidents of historic flooding across the Lancashire area, from local authority records. Records obtained from United Utilities added a further 32No incident of flooding, due to exceedance of the sewer system capacity.

Records indicate that historic flooding is clustered most notably in the areas of Lancaster, Morecombe, Blackpool, Preston, and Bacup in Rossendale.

It is highlighted that whilst there are 2No incidents of historic surface water flooding highlighted within Bacup; there are no significant incidents shown at Rawtenstall.

A map illustrating key areas of historic flooding is provided within Figure 4.

3.7.4 Rossendale Borough Council SFRA (May 2009)

A Strategic Flood Risk Assessment for the Rossendale area was undertaken by Scott Wilson and published by Rossendale Borough Council in May 2009.

Records of historic flooding throughout the Rossendale area are provided within Appendix A of the SFRA report; with incidents relevant to Limy Water in close proximity to the application site listed below:

 October 1980: Fluvial Flooding  January 1995: Channel capacity exceeded  October 1998: Channel capacity exceeded  1999: 8No Properties affected  January 1999: Fluvial Flooding  March 1999: Channel capacity exceeded  July 1999: Channel capacity exceeded  June 2002: Caused urban flooding  June 2002: Flooding at Constable Lee  June 2002: Blocked Culvert

3.7.5 Environment Agency Data – Historic Flooding

A historic flood map has been provided by the Environment Agency; which highlights that the site has had a history of flooding. The flood event depicted within the data provided indicates that the channel of the watercourse was exceeded at the site in January 1995.

No other details regarding specific flooding at the location of the development site has been provided.

The relevant map is provided for reference within Appendix D of this report.

11

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

4.0 Flooding Mechanisms

Table 2: Sources of Flooding Source/Pathway Significant? Comment/Reason Fluvial Yes Limy Water Approximately 40Km from coast, River Tidal/Coastal No Irwell not affected. Leeds & Liverpool Canal approximately Canal No 8Km away. Reservoir Yes Clowbridge Reservoir Pluvial (urban drainage) No Site is under 1 Hectare SFRA states no records of groundwater Groundwater No flooding found during the study. Overland flow No Site located within a steep sided valley Blockage Yes Culverted Sections of Limy Water Infrastructure failure Yes Culverted Sections of Limy Water No evidence of depressed ground levels Rainfall Ponding No or ponding within the site boundary.

4.1 Fluvial: Limy Water

4.1.1 General

Limy Water is a tributary of the River Irwell and is formed by a combination of overflow from Clowbridge Reservoir; small tributaries such as Gin Clough; and streams originating within moorland around Dunnockshaw, Love Clough, Good Shaw Fold, Good Shaw, Crawshawbooth, and Reeds Holme.

Its confluence with the River Irwell is located at Bocholt Way in Rawtenstall, near Rawtenstall Railway Station approximately 1Km south of the development.

Limy Water is classified as a main river and runs primarily in a north to south direction. On its route from Clowbridge to Rawtenstall, the watercourse is predominantly channelized and passes through and beneath many culverts and bridges. It is noted that the watercourse passes beneath Burnley Road a total of 7No times before reaching the River Irwell.

The nearest bridge to the site, known as Constable Lee Bridge, is located approximately 40 metres upstream of the proposed development site. A photograph of the bridge is provided within Figure 7.

The watercourse crosses under the road from west to east, and then flows in open channel along the east side of the development for approximately 180m before entering a culvert next to the BP garage. Limy Water emerges from the culvert ay a location just after the old fire station on Burnley Road. The upstream face of the culvert is illustrated within Figure 6.

12

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

The development site is elevated along the bank of the watercourse; which is located immediately adjacent to its east boundary. There are no formal flood defences providing protection to the site from flooding; and a therefore the risk associated with overtopping of the river bank needs to be assessed in detail.

The Irwell Habitat Improvement Report September‐December 2011 published by the Environment Agency; indicates that a redundant weir on Limy Water has been removed; to help improve the river environment and allow migration of fish to spawn. This action is likely to also improve the general flow of water through the channel.

Figure 5: Limy Water Taken from Over the North East Boundary

Image: C.Vose (PWA)

4.1.2 Modeled Flood Level Data

The Environment Agency has provided modelled flood level data for Limy Water at five different locations along the watercourse in close proximity to the proposed development site.

The nearest model node to the site is known as ea0140LIMY01_1115 (point 3); and has therefore been used to assess the flood risk associated with the watercourse within the site.

The modelled flood data for all nodes is provided within Appendix D; and a summary provided below within Table 3.

13

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Table 3: Limy Water Model Results Node Ref. ea0140LIMY01_1115 10 year 20 year 75 year 100 year 1000 year Data Event Event Event Event Event Water 178.88 179.02 179.23 179.34 179.45 Level (m) Flow 14.24 16.45 20.12 22.10 23.64 (m3/s)

Figure 6: Limy Water Viewed at the Head of the Culvert Section (BP Garage)

Image: C.Vose (PWA)

4.1.3 Overtopping

External ground levels at the proposed development site range from 178.70mAOD to 179.87mAOD. The area within the central part of the site has a level averaging 179.00mAOD.

From the limited data available, river bank levels range from 178.16m AOD to 179.15m AOD; and levels along the boundary fence line range from 179.26mAOD to 179.43mAOD.

The modelled flood levels within Limy Water adjacent to the development indicate that the retained wall forming the river bank is likely to overtop during the 1 in 10 year event.

However owing to the steep bank rising above the wall; the site is only likely to be inundated during flood events in excess of the 1 in 75 year return period.

14

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Ground levels within the south west corner of the site suggest that inundation of a small area is possible during the 1 in 10 year and 1 in 20 year events; however it is noted that due to topography within the site, this is not likely to be as a result of direct flooding from the river; but flood water encroaching into the site from Burnley Road or the Church located along the south boundary.

During the 1 in 75 year event; the depth of flooding within the site is estimated to be 0.23 metres; increasing to 0.34 metres during the 1 in 100 year event.

Consequently during such an event, it is considered likely that the existing site is likely to become inundated to a depth approximating 0.36m.

Figure 7: Constable Lee Road Bridge

Image: C.Vose (PWA)

4.1.4 Climate Change

In accordance with Table 5 of the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework a 20% increase should be applied to peak river flows beyond the year 2025 to provide an appropriate increase resulting from climate change over the lifetime of any development.

Unfortunately the Environment Agency has not provided modelled flood levels for the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event.

15

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Estimated flows within Limy Water for each return period have been provided; and application of a 20% increase suggests a flow of 26.52m3/s during the 1 in 100 year plus 20% climate change event.

It is highlighted that this value is higher than the flows estimated for Limy Water during the extreme 1 in 1000 year event.

As such, for calculation purposes, the modelled flood level for the extreme 1 in 1000 year event i.e.179.45mAOD has been used.

As such, the site is likely to become flooded to a depth approximating 0.45m.

4.1.5 Infrastructure Failure: Blockage

Where watercourses have been enclosed i.e. bridged or culverted, there can be a potential for blockage and/or insufficient capacity to convey peak flows; and flooding can arise due to subsequent backing up of water upstream from such a structure.

Under such conditions, it is likely that water will overtop the banks of the watercourse, flowing overland towards the areas with the lowest topography.

The commonest causes for blockages include:  Collapsed culverts  Fallen trees  Accumulated debris

Rossendale’s SFRA shows the majority of flooding within the area is caused by exceeding culvert capacity and blockage of culverts.

There are two potential risks to the site from blockages;

 The first is from the culvert located approximately 80m downstream of the site where Limy Water passes under the BP garage towards the junction at Newchurch Road. Under extreme flood conditions, in the event that the culvert was to become blocked; the water level within Limy Water is likely to rise until it overtops the bank and enters the site; or until the blockage is removed.  The second is the Constable Lee Road Bridge which allows Limy Water to pass under Burnley Road approximately 50m upstream of the proposed development. In the event that the bridge opening was to become blocked it would cause flooding immediately upstream of the bridged section of watercourse. Due to the general topography of the area, flood water is likely to be conveyed south along Burnley Road, and as such inundation of the site from the west boundary may occur.

Reviewing the Environment Agency’s Routine Maintenance Program for 2013/14, indicates that Limy Water (Rossendale), is scheduled for the following:

16

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

 Weed cut by hand  Weed cut by machine  Maintain channel } April – December 2013  Obstruction removal  Environment management

 Grass cut by hand  Grass cut by machine  Vermin control April – August 2013  Tree work }  Defence repair  Flood reservoir work

 Maintain structures July 2013 – March 2014 }

 Condition inspection  Operational inspection April 2013 – March 2014  System monitoring }  System operation

Accounts of historic flooding from Limy Water within the Rawtenstall area cite channel exceedance and blockage as the main contributing factors. It is noted that whilst the Environment Agency makes every effort to inspect and maintain the channel and culverts along the watercourse on a regular basis; the risk of flooding due to infrastructure failure and in particular blockage, cannot be completely eliminated.

4.1.6 Conclusion

Limy water presents a flood risk to the proposed development at Burnley Road, Rawtenstall.

4.2 Artificial Water Sources: Reservoirs

Clowbridge Reservoir has been listed within Table 2 Sources of flooding. The reservoir is operated and maintained by United Utilities and is situated approximately 4.8 kilometres to the northeast of the development site.

It is highlighted however that reservoir flooding is extremely unlikely to happen; and there has been no loss of life in the UK from reservoir flooding since 1925.

17

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

All large reservoirs must be inspected and supervised by reservoir panel engineers. As the enforcement authority for the Reservoirs Act 1975 in England, the Environment Agency ensures that reservoirs are inspected regularly and essential safety work is carried out.

In the event that the reservoir fails; a deluge of water would be released into Limy Water. Due to the location of the site i.e. along the banks of Limy Water downstream from Clowbridge Reservoir; the proposed development is likely to be affected; with flooding occurring with little or no warning.

Overall however Clowbridge Reservoir is considered to present a low flood risk to the proposed development.

Figure 8: Risk of Flooding from Reservoirs

Proposed Development

Source: www.environment‐agency.gov.uk

4.3 Pluvial Sources

4.3.1 Sewer Flooding

The Rossendale SFRA document indicates that there are some instances of historic flooding resulting from sewer flooding i.e. pluvial sources; however there are no details available to suggest that such flooding is likely to have an impact on the proposed development off Burnley Road in Rawtenstall.

18

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

News reports indicate construction works on a £7million scheme has recently begun by United Utilities in order to prevent the discharge of undiluted sewage into the River Irwell and Limy Water during heavy flood conditions.

The project includes work at land off the A682 near New Hall Hey Road, the junction of Bank Street and St Mary’s Way, Bacup Road near the junction with Bury Road, the Ilex Mill car park, off Fall Barn Road, and the car park in Highfield Road, Waterfoot.

Consultation with the Environment Agency confirms that the above scheme relates to water quality improvements and sewage overflow to watercourses will still occur during heavy rainfall but overall peak discharge overflow rates will not increase.

It is advised that Council officials regularly meet with the United Utilities, Lancashire County Council and the Environment Agency as part of a joint working group to monitor flooding issues within the Rossendale area.

Furthermore it is reported that following the severe flooding of 2012, a number of successful flood management schemes have been delivered throughout Rossendale; which include culvert and drainage ditch improvements at Hardman Avenue in Rawtenstall, Irwell Vale, Phillipstown, Lord Street in Crawshawbooth, Sandybank in Waterfoot, Bacup’s Bankside Lane and Tor End Road in Helmshore.

4.3.2 Increase in Surface Water Runoff

General

The total area within the site boundary approximates 0.25 Hectares; and is comprised of a previously developed plot; which has been derelict for a period in excess of 5 years.

Proposals for the site include 16No residential apartments, with associated car parking.

Following development, the roof and hardstanding areas within the site will be increased; and the rate and volume of surface water discharged from the development will be increased above existing values. Therefore it is considered that attenuation of surface water flows prior to discharge will be required at the application site.

The hierarchy for disposal of surface water from new development is outlined within ‘The Building Regulations Approved Document H’ and specifies the following methods in order of preference:

 Infiltration via soakaway or other suitable infiltration device  Discharge to watercourse  Discharge to public sewer

19

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Infiltration

A site investigation report for the proposed development is not currently available, and therefore in order to assess the potential for infiltration methods to dispose of surface water from the site, an investigation of the general ground conditions within the area surrounding the development has been undertaken.

Catchment wide data for the site was obtained from the Flood Estimation Handbook i.e. the FEH CD‐ROM (V3.0), which indicates that the SPRHOST (Standard Percentage Runoff) for the site has a value of 41.6%.

Through experience, this value is considered high and generally represents ground which is likely to be unsuitable for the dissipation of surface water flows via infiltration.

To further investigate, a review of historic borehole logs has been untaken. The nearest borehole is located approximately 130m north west to the proposed development at Hazel Grove; and the British Geological Society records show that the ground comprises the following:

 0 ‐ 2.8m Stiff brown sandy clay with gravel and cobbles  2.80 – 3m Stiff brown silty sandy clay  3 – 7.4m Medium dense to dense brown silty fine sand  7.4 – 8.5m Stiff grey brown silty sandy clay with gravel  8.5 – 9.5m Firm grey brown silty sandy clay

Water was struck at 3.45m, the level of which rose within the borehole after 20 minutes, to 2 metres below ground level. This indicates a relatively shallow groundwater levels within the Rawtenstall area.

Information from the National Soil Resource Institute: www.landis.org.uk/soilscapes details the development area as being situated on ground with freely draining rich loamy soils.

Although ground conditions suggest that infiltration methods may be suitable for inclusion within the surface water drainage system for the development, due the possibility of shallow groundwater; and evidence of historic discharge to watercourse; the disposal of surface water from the proposed development via infiltration methods is not considered overall to be a feasible option.

A copy of the borehole logs and ‘Soilscape’ map which have been reviewed is provided within Appendix F of this report.

Watercourse

The nearest watercourse to site is Limy Water, located immediately adjacent at north east boundary of the application site. There is an existing outfall from the site to the

20

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

watercourse; which will be re‐used as part of the drainage scheme for the new development.

Examination of Sewer Records

United Utilities sewer records show a 150mm diameter foul pipe from the site connecting to a 450mm diameter combined sewer on Burnley road.

There is also a 225mm diameter surface water pipe running along Burnley Road next to the entrance to site.

Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDs)

The Local Authority and Environment Agency advocates that surface water runoff should be controlled as near to its source as possible, through a sustainable approach to surface water management (SUDs). This approach involves using a range of techniques such as soakaways; swales; and other methods to reduce flood risk by mimicking natural drainage characteristics; thereby slowing down the discharge of surface water runoff into receiving watercourses and sewer systems.

The SUDS Planner module from MicroDrainage Windes has been used to quickly identify SUDs techniques which may considered suitable for incorporation into the proposed drainage system for the new residential development.

In summary the following methods for dealing with surface water from the development site are found to be the most suitable:

Table 4: SUDs Planner SUDS Criteria Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3 Infiltration Hydrological Permeable Paving Infiltration Basin Trench/Soak Away Infiltration Land Use On/Offline Storage Dry Detention Trench/Soak Away Filtration Site Features On/Offline Storage Green Roof Techniques Community & Storm Water Bio‐retention Grasses Filter Strip Environment Wetlands Economics & Wet Pond Green Roofs Dry Detention Maintenance Total On/Offline Storage Green Roof Permeable Paving

1. Online/Offline Storage

This is a traditional form of surface water attenuation and may be provided via online or offline structures such as oversized pipes; or shallow attenuation structures such geo‐ cellular crate systems e.g. Hydro‐International’s Stormcell System or similar.

21

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

These structures may be easily placed within either hardstanding or landscaped areas to provide ease of access for maintenance purposes.

2. Source Control Methods

In the event that the proposed development is to be assessed as part of BREEAM’s Code for Sustainable Homes; in order to achieve the mandatory requirements, surface water runoff volume leaving the development will need to be limited to pre‐development values for the 1 in 100 year 6 hour duration event.

This is usually achieved via infiltration; however it has already been established that this method for disposing of surface water runoff from the development is not considered to be a viable option for the site off Burnley Road Rossendale.

As such, the Developer should consider reducing surface water runoff volumes using Source Control methods such as green roof technology or rainwater harvesting.

It is highlighted that a failure to offset any increase in surface water volume; will mean that the mandatory requirements of SUR1 (surface water management) will not be met; and accreditation in regard to the Code for Sustainable Homes is likely to be jeopardised.

a) Green Roofs

Green roofs comprise of a multi‐layered system that covers the roof of a building with vegetation cover, and/or landscaping over a drainage layer.

They are designed to intercept and retain rainfall thereby reducing the volume and attenuating peak surface water flows.

Whilst this method has a number of advantages, such as provision of ecological; amenity and aesthetic benefits; the cost of installation is increased compared to traditional roof materials; and on‐going maintenance of the roof vegetation can prove difficult.

The end‐use; construction costs; and maintenance budget/schedule of the development will therefore be key constraints in regard to the decision to include this method of source control into the drainage scheme for the redeveloped site. b) Rainwater Harvesting

Rainwater harvesting provides a source of non‐potable water, for purposes such as car washing; toilet flushing; and watering gardens etc…

This SUDS solution, like green roof technology, is also designed to provide interception storage i.e. acts to reduce the volume of surface water leaving the proposed development; thereby helping to alleviate the current pressures on the receiving watercourse.

22

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

It is highlighted that collection of rainwater via water butts is not classed as a rainwater harvesting solution, in terms of BREEAM accreditation. The inclusion of rainwater harvesting and/or green roof technology will be determined by the Developer and/or Architect during the detailed design stage of the project. c) Permeable Paving

Permeable paving may be used to provide shallow attenuation of surface water runoff; prior to discharge into a receiving watercourse or on‐site drainage system.

This type of solution is therefore appropriate within car park areas or shared driveways only; which are located outside of any adoptable part of the proposed drainage system.

Existing Greenfield Runoff Rates

Table 1 of the Joint DEFRA/EA R&D Technical Report ‘Preliminary Rainfall Runoff Management for Developments’ (W5‐074/A/TR/1) published in January 2012 provides the appropriate methodologies for calculating peak greenfield runoff rates.

For developments smaller than 50 Hectares in size, one of the two following approaches may be utilised:

 The Institute of Hydrology (IH) Report 124 Flood Estimation for Small Catchments (1994) method can be used to estimate the greenfield site flow rate, QBAR (the Mean Annual Flood).  The Index Flood, QMED (the median of the set of annual maximum flood peaks) regression equation that forms part of the FEH statistical method can also be used where the appropriate parameters are known or can be derived/ estimated.

Where developments are smaller than 50Ha, the analysis for determining the greenfield index flood flow rate should use 50Ha in the formula and linearly interpolate the flow rate value based on the ratio of the development area.

FSSR 14 can be used to convert QMED to QBAR.

FSSR 2 and 14 regional growth curve factors can be used to calculate the greenfield peak flow rates for 1, 30 and 100 year return periods.

For the purposes of this assessment, the IOH124 Method for Small Catchments has been adopted; utilising the Source Control Module of industry standard software known as MicroDrainage Windes.

A summary of the calculation results is tabulated below; with full output provided within Appendix H of this report.

The area used for the calculation purposes is 0.25Ha

23

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Table 5: Existing Greenfield Runoff Rates (Site Area = 0.25Ha) Peak Flow Peak Flow Return Hydrometric Peak Flow Q (l/s) Rate 50Ha Rate Site Period Area BAR Rate (l/s/ha) (l/s) (l/s) 1 in 1 year 487.1 9.74 2.43 1 in 30 year 949.3 18.99 4.75 10 559.9 1 in 100 1164.6 23.292 5.82 year

Note: The size of aperture required to limit flows to a rate less than 5l/s is small; which is likely to increase the risk of surface water flooding at the site resulting from blockage. As such, surface water flow to the watercourse will be restricted to existing greenfield runoff rates or a minimum of 5l/s whichever is the highest.

Flows in excess of this will be attenuated on‐site prior to discharge to the adjacent Limy Water.

Attenuation Requirement

Evaluation of the latest development plans provided by the Client indicates that the impermeable area attributed to roof, road and other hardstanding is increased from 0 Hectares to 0.167 Hectares. This equates to 67% of the total site area.

The preliminary drainage strategy incorporates the top ranked SUDS method resulting from the evaluation detailed within Table 4.

The natural drainage path i.e. topography of the development; along with the drainage hierarchy set out within the Building Regulations; has determined that the discharge of surface water from the development to the watercourse (Limy Water) located along the north east boundary of the site, is the most appropriate solution.

It is recommended that existing outfall is used to discharge surface water into Limy Water.

Using MicroDrainage Source Control, indicative volumes required for attenuating surface water runoff from the new development have been evaluated; and are tabulated below.

Table 6: Indicative Attenuation Volumes Indicative Surface Water Storage Return Period Volume (m3) 1 in 1 year 4.8 ‐ 13.0 1 in 30 year 24.0 ‐ 45.0 1 in 100 year 34.0 ‐ 62.0 1 in 100 year + 30% Climate Change 52.0 ‐ 90.0

24

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Layout

The purpose of this report is to demonstrate that a surface water drainage strategy is feasible for the site given the development proposals and land available.

The site layout provides the opportunity for the inclusion of SUDS, ensuring that surface water runoff rates and volumes are maintained at pre‐development levels or a minimum of 5l/s whichever is the highest.

Foul Drainage

It is proposed that foul drainage from the development will be directed to the combined public sewer system located on Burnley Road.

4.4 Groundwater

The following extract is from Rossendale Borough Council’s SFRA document:

‘No records of groundwater flooding were found over the course of the study.’

It is concluded that groundwater flooding presents a minor risk to development within the Rossendale area; and as such further investigations pertaining to this source of flooding at the application site have not been undertaken.

4.5 Overland Flow

Flooding from this source generally occurs when the infiltration capacity of land is exceeded and excess rainwater flows overland. Flooding from this source occurs as a result of an accumulation of water within topographic depressions and at areas where its flow route is impeded.

Severe rainfall events, steep slopes, soils, geology and land management all contribute to the effect and severity of flooding resulting from overland flow.

A natural high point approximating 335mAOD is located at Cribden Flats, approximately 1 kilometre to the west of the site. Runoff from the catchment is generally directed towards Limy water via Cribden Clough and a network of small watercourses.

Cribden Clough is formed at the base of a steep valley; and therefore is it unlikely that excess flow will be directed away from its natural route.

Furthermore due to the location of existing development to the west of Burnley Road, it is considered that overland flow routes are to some extent intercepted prior to reaching the application site.

25

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

In conclusion, overland flow is considered to present a low flood risk to the development at the proposed development site.

4.6 Ponding

Observations at the site did not highlight any existing pond systems or localised low points within the existing site, where ponding is likely to occur during heavy rainfall.

As such, this mechanism is deemed to present a low flood risk to the development.

26

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

5.0 Material Consideration In Respect of the National Planning Policy Framework

5.1 Environment Agency Flood Map

Figure 8: Environment Agency Flood Map

Proposed Development Site

Source: Environment Agency website (http://www.environment‐agency.gov.uk/subjects/flood)

Key

Flooding from rivers or sea without defences (Flood Zone 3)

Extent of extreme flood (Flood Zone 2)

Flood defences

Areas benefiting from flood defences

Main rivers

The Environment Agency flood zone map indicates that the site lies within Flood Zone 3, which is which is defined as land assessed as having a 1 in 100 or greater annual probability of river flooding (>1%) or a 1 in 200 or greater annual probability of flooding from the sea.

27

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

5.2 Finished Development Levels

In accordance with the requirements of the Environment Agency and National Planning Policy Framework, it is usual to specify that the ground floor level of any new residential development is set at a minimum of 600mm above the 1 in 100 year plus climate change flood level.

Unfortunately, the modelled flood level for this event has not been provided; however the development plans indicate a ground floor level of 181.00mAOD; which is elevated 1.66 metres and 1.55 metres above the respective 1 in 100 year and 1 in 1000 year modelled flood levels for Limy Water in line with the development.

The level of the proposed lobby area is designed at 180.00mAOD; and again is elevated above the design flood levels for the adjacent watercourse.

There will be a basement area within the building; which is set to a level approximating 179.00mAOD; and as such during the 1 in 100 year and 1 in 1000 year events will become inundated.

5.3 Flood Resistance/Resilience Measures

Consideration should be given to flood proofing the proposed building to reduce the residual damages if an extreme flood was to occur. It is proposed that flood proofing measures are designed to a minimum level of 180.05mAOD i.e. 600mm above the modelled 1 in 1000 year flood level for Limy Water.

The table overleaf summarises general recommendations for flood proofing which can be incorporated within the design for the proposed building, as appropriate. Such measures are put forward in accordance with ‘Development and Flood Risk Guidance for the Construction Industry’ CIRIA C624, London 2004.

It would be preferable to avoid external doors as this would remove a potential point of flood inflows. However since free access and egress into the residential units will be required, flood resistant doors and/or the use of flood resistant stop logs or flood boards should be considered.

Full details of manufacturer’s or suppliers of flood protection equipment may be obtained from the Flood Protection Association (website: www.thefpa.org.uk).

28

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Table 7: Typical Flood Proofing Measures

Feature Considerations To Improve Flood Proofing Careful consideration of materials: use low permeability materials to limit water penetration if dry proofing required. Avoid using timber frame and cavity External Walls walls. Consider applying a water resistant coating. Provide fitting for flood boards or other temporary barriers across openings in the walls. Avoid use of gypsum plaster and plasterboards; use more flood resistant linings Internal Walls (e.g. hydraulic lime, ceramic tiles). Avoid use of stud partition walls. Avoid use of chipboard floors. Use concrete floors with integrated and continuous damp proof membrane and damp proof course. Solid concrete Floors floors are preferable; if a suspended floor is to be used, provide facility for drainage of sub‐floor void. Use solid insulation materials. If possible, locate all fittings, fixtures and services above design floor level. Avoid chipboard and MDF. Consider use of removable plastic fittings. Use solid Fitting, Fixtures doors treated with waterproof coatings. Avoid using double‐glazed window and Services units that may fill with flood water. Use solid wood staircases. Avoid fitted carpets. Locate electrical, gas and telephone equipment and systems above flood level. Fit anti‐flooding devices to drainage systems.

5.4 Flood Protection Equipment

Keeping water out of the buildings, or limiting the ingress of floodwater, is recommended when considering flood protection measures. Excluding water will help to reduce damage to the internal fabric of the building and its contents. Such measures are referred to as dry proofing and include:

 Temporary flood barriers.  Measures to reduce seepage through walls and floors.  The installation of non‐return valves on sewers.

Movable flood barriers can be very effective in preventing or reducing the volume of floodwater entering through doors and other external openings in walls, such as windows and airbricks, as long as a good quality product is installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.

Although barriers may not totally prevent the ingress of water into a building, they can provide valuable time in which to move people, vehicles, expensive equipment and other essential items to higher levels before floodwater rises inside the building.

Flood barriers on wall openings can also reduce the amount of contaminated silt and debris entering the property. Water that seeps through the ground or walls is likely to be filtered to some extent and therefore is usually cleaner than floodwater entering larger openings such as gaps around doors and airbricks.

29

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Figure 9: Typical Flood Resilience/Resistance Measures

Source: Environment Agency

5.5 Access and Egress

In accordance with the requirements set out within the National Planning Policy Framework, it is essential to ensure that the route into and out of the application site will not present a danger to people during a flood event within the Limy Water.

From Section 13.3 of document FD2320/TR2 ‘R&D Outputs: FRA Guidance for New Development: Phase 2’, the requirements for safe access and egress from development situated in flood risk areas are as follows, in decreasing order of preference:

 Safe dry route for people and vehicles  Safe dry route for people  If a dry route for people is not possible, a route for people where the flood hazard (in terms of depth and velocity of flooding) is low and should not cause a risk to people.  If a dry route for vehicles is not possible, a route for vehicles where the flood hazard (in terms of depth and velocity of flooding) is low to permit access for emergency vehicles. However the public should not drive vehicles in floodwater.

Where a dry route is not possible and a route with low flood hazard is identified, the route should not have any service covers that could be removed, or other underwater hazards.

It is often difficult to see underwater hazards even in shallow water, particularly at night or if the water is silty.

30

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

In addition, the route should be clearly marked, for example using painted posts.

Vehicles should not be used when:

 The presence of water stops the engine functioning;  The vehicle floats; or  The vehicle becomes difficult to control.

Cars will stop and/or float in water as shallow as 0.5m, whilst some emergency vehicles may survive in water of 1m. A fire engine remains controllable in depths of 0.5m up to a flow velocity of 5 m/sec, due to high‐level air intakes/exhausts.

The data and information required in assessing safe access and exit depends on the complexity of the approach undertaken, as follows:

Simple Approach

 Flood levels for suitable annual probabilities (advisable to look at the 1% and 0.1% annual probabilities for fluvial flooding or the 0.5% and 0.1% for tidal/coastal flooding).  Minimum ground levels along access and exit routes.

Intermediate Approach

 Flood depths and velocities for suitable annual probabilities across the development site and surrounding the development site, determined from hydraulic modelling.  Simple lookup table relating depth and velocity to danger to people

Detailed Approach

 Flood depths and velocities across the development site and surrounding the development site, determined from hydraulic modelling.  An appropriate means for determining the hazard factor for the site should be determined from the Flood Risks to People report.

Due to the scope of development proposed, an intermediate approach to assessing the safety of the emergency escape route has been adopted.

Intermediate Approach: Methodology

Danger to people is assessed using flood hazard, which can be expressed as a combination of flood depth and velocity.

Hydraulic modelling or the use of results from an existing assessment is needed to predict flood depth and velocity.

31

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

The Flood Risks to People project has developed the following equation to relate the flood hazard to flood depth and velocity:

Flood Hazard Rating = ((v + 0.5) x D) + DF

Where: v = velocity (m/s) D = depth (m) DF = debris factor

The following table extracted from FD2321/TR1 provides guidance with regard to the appropriate debris factors to be applied.

Table 8: Guidance on Debris Factors for Different Flood Depths, Velocities and Dominant Land Uses (Table 3.1 FD2321/TR1) Depths Pasture/Arable Woodland Urban 0 to 0.25m 0 0 0 0.25 to 0.75m 0 0.5 1 >0.75m and/or V>2 0.5 1 1

A value for DF of 0 has been applied to the area along the escape route with a depth of inundation less than 0.25m; 1.0 has been applied to areas where the depth of flooding is less than 0.75m; and a value of 1.0 applied to areas with a depth of flooding in excess of 0.75m.

Using the guidance provided by FD2320/TR2, the following velocities are sufficient for such calculations:  0.5 m/s for lowland flat floodplains  2.0 m/s for steeper catchments

Based on this, the hazard rating equation has been applied to various combinations of flood depth and velocity to produce a matrix of hazard ratings.

Applying thresholds to these hazard ratings defines the danger to people at various depths and velocities as shown in the following table, extracted from FD2320/TR2.

Table 9: Velocity, Depth and Flood Hazard Matrix Depth (m) Velocity DF = 0 DF = 1.0 (m/s) 0.1 0.2 0.25 0.5 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.13 1.25 1.00 1.50 1.63 1.75 1.88 2.00 0.50 0.10 0.20 0.25 1.50 1.37 2.00 2.25 2.50 2.75 3.00 1.00 0.15 0.30 0.38 1.75 2.12 2.50 2.88 3.25 3.63 4.00 1.50 0.20 0.40 0.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00 2.00 0.25 0.50 0.63 2.25 2.88 3.50 4.13 4.75 5.38 6.00

32

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

<0.75 Low flood hazard (caution is required) Class 1 0.75 – 1.25 Moderate hazard ‐ Danger for some (children, the elderly & infirm) Class 2 1.25 – 2.00 Significant hazard ‐ Danger for most (the general public) Class 3 >2.00 Extreme hazard ‐ Danger for all (includes the emergency services)

Flood Hazard Rating Calculations

Modelled flood levels have been provided by the Environment Agency for a range of probabilities; and are provided within Table 3.

At the location of the proposed development, the catchment for the Limy Water is considered to be fairly steep and therefore a velocity of 2.0m/s has been utilised.

Table 10: Flood Hazard Rating for Safe Access/Egress Route 1 in 20 year 1 in 75 year Point Ground Flood Flood Flood Flood Flood Flood Ref. Level (m) Depth Hazard Depth Hazard Level (m) Level (m) (m) Rating (m) Rating 1 180.00 0 0 0 0 2 179.75 0 0 0 0 3 179.50 0 0 0 0 4 179.33 0 0 0 0 5 179.15 179.02 0 0 179.23 0.08 0.2 6 179.15 0 0 0.08 0.2 7 179.17 0 0 0.06 0.15 8 179.20 0 0 0.03 0.08 9 179.22 0 0 0.01 0.03

1 in 100 year 1 in 1000 year Point Ground Flood Flood Flood Flood Flood Flood Ref. Level (m) Depth Hazard Depth Hazard Level (m) Level (m) (m) Rating (m) Rating 1 180.00 0 0 0 0 2 179.75 0 0 0 0 3 179.50 0 0 0 0 4 179.33 0.01 0.03 0.12 0.30 5 179.15 179.34 0.19 0.48 179.45 0.30 1.75 6 179.15 0.19 0.48 0.30 1.75 7 179.17 0.17 0.43 0.28 1.70 8 179.20 0.14 0.35 0.25 1.63 9 179.22 0.12 0.30 0.22 0.55

33

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Figure 11: Pedestrian Route & Levels from the New Building

Evacuation Route

In summary the resulting calculations indicate that the access from the proposed development onto Burnley Road possesses a hazard rating of Class 1 i.e. presents a low flood hazard to people for events up to and including the 1 in 100 year flood event in Limy Water.

Due to the nature of the catchment and the urban setting of the development; the hazard rating is increased to Class 3 i.e. presents a significant hazard to people during the 1 in 1000 year flood event.

As such, to reduce the hazard rating to Class 1 for this flood event; it is recommended that the pedestrian access route onto Burnley Road from the Building is elevated to a minimum level of 179.19mAOD; which will result in flood depths less than 0.25 metres for the 1 in 1000 year event.

It is recommended that the developer will need to take the view of the emergancy planner into consideration when considering access and egress.

34

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

5.6 Flood Warning

The site is located within the Constable Lee area of Rawtenstall; which is covered by the Environment Agency’s Flood Warning Direct Service.

Due to the proximity of the proposed residential development to Limy Water, it is highly recommended that residents are advised to register an interest in receiving flood warnings.

This is a free service which enables the Environment Agency to send a direct message when flooding is expected and may affect the development. Flood warnings are designed to provide businesses the time to prepare for flooding. Flood warnings can be sent by telephone, mobile, email, SMS text message or fax.

The Environment Agency also provides the Floodline 0845 988 1188 service, where the residents can listen to recorded flood warning information for the area or speak to an operator for advice 24 hours a day.

Using the latest available technology, the Environment Agency is able to monitor rainfall, river levels and sea conditions 24 hours a day and use this information to forecast the possibility of flooding.

If flooding is forecast, they are able to issue warnings using a set of three different warning types; as illustrated within Table 11 overleaf.

Figure 11: Environment Agency Flood Warning Coverage Map

Proposed Development Site

Source: Environment Agency website (http://www.environment‐agency.gov.uk/subjects/flood)

35

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Table 11: Environment Agency Flood Warning Codes Flood Warning Code What it means When it’s used What to do  Be prepared to act on you flood plan  Prepare a flood kit Flooding is possible. 2 hours – 2 days in  Monitor local water Be prepared. advance of flooding. levels and the flood forecast of the EA website  Move people to a safe place  Turn of gas, Flooding is expected. ½ hour – 1 day in electricity and water Immediate action is advance of flooding. supplies if safe to do required. so  Put flood protection equipment in place  Stay in a safe place with means of escape Severe flooding. Danger When flooding poses a  Be ready to evacuate to life. significant threat to life.  Co‐operate with the emergency services  Call 999 if you are in immediate danger  Be careful as flood water may still be around for several No further flooding is When river or sea Warnings no longer days currently expected in conditions begin to in force  If you have been your area return to normal flooded, ring your insurance company as soon as possible

How are Flood Warnings issued?

 Direct to you ‐ receive warnings by phone, text, email or fax. Sign up for the Environment Agency’s FREE Floodline Warnings Direct service via this website link: https://fwd.environment‐agency.gov.uk/app/olr/register or by calling Floodline on 0845 988 1188.  On the flood warnings website ‐ view up‐to‐date information about flood warnings in force, monitor the river or sea levels in your area and check out the latest flood risk forecast for your county.  By calling Floodline on 0845 988 1188 ‐ you can listen to recorded information on the latest warnings and predictions or speak to an operator for more general information 24 hours a day. Environment Agency operators can also provide a quick dial number which gives you faster access to information for your area.  Through the media ‐ you may see or hear Environment Agency warnings on television and in radio broadcasts.

36

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

 Flood Wardens ‐ in some areas Flood Wardens are there to alert and support their local community when a flood warning is issued. Call Floodline on 0845 988 1188 to find out if this service is available in your area.  Sirens/loudhailers ‐ in some areas the Environment Agency uses loudhailer or siren systems to warn people that a flood warning has been issued. Call Floodline on 0845 988 1188 to find out if this type of service operates in your area.  Flood warning feeds ‐ Flood warning (RSS) feeds shows national and regional flood warnings in force and are updated every 15 minutes. The feeds contain a brief summary and link to the full information on the Environment Agency website.

5.7 Flood Evacuation Plan

For health and safety reasons there is a preference to evacuate, as failure to do so, could put the residents; visitors and others (e.g. rescuers) at risk of injury.

During flood conditions it is possible that Burnley Road i.e. the main vehicular route into central Rawtenstall will become inundated. Due to the potential vulnerability of residents within the development i.e. elderly or infirm it is highly recommended that a flood warning and evacuation plan from the proposed dwellings to a safe area away from Limy Water is devised and practiced, in the event that a warning is issued by the Environment Agency.

Close consultation with the Rossendale and Lancashire Emergency Planning Teams is considered essential in development of a suitable plan; in order for residents to be safely directed away from the flood zone.

Development proposals incorporate a raised ramp area for residents to escape onto Burnley Road; and with minor adjustment to the proposed levels along the route from the building onto Burnley Road, the route is considered to present a low hazard to all.

It is advised that Alexandria Street, located off Burnley Road to the west side of the proposed development access is located within Flood Zone 1 and is therefore outside of the floodplain.

During poor weather conditions; it is advisable to ensure that residents reach a safe, warm environment. The nearest public or community building which could be used as a muster point or emergency refuge outside of the floodplain to the development is St James the Less Catholic School, located off Unity Way/Haslingden Old Road. It is noted however that this location is a distance approximating 900 metres; and assistance to less able residents may be required.

Practical advice is available from the Environment Agency website: http://www.environment‐agency.gov.uk/homeandleisure/floods/31624.aspx.

Further help and advice is available from SWEL (Sustainable Water Environment in Lancashire) website: http://www.swelancashire.co.uk/

37

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Figure 12 below, illustrates a suggested evacuation route away from the potential flooded area; and

Figure 12: Suggested Evacuation Route to St James the Less School in Flood Zone 1

5.8 Safe Refuge

In the event that residents are unable to evacuate; then it is advised that finished floor levels within the new apartment building are elevated 1.55 metres above the modelled 1 in 1000 year flood level; and may therefore be considered as a safe refuge.

If extreme flood levels are exceeded; there is accommodation at a higher level within the building where residents may relocate to; including any irreplaceable belongings, which are able to be moved quickly.

38

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

5.9 Flood Conveyance Routes

In order to prevent the impedance of flood conveyance routes through the development; the proposed building has been carefully designed with an undercroft arrangement (see Appendix C); which allows flood water from Limy Water to flow freely through the site during flood events; and to recede back towards the channel when water levels within the watercourse fall.

The openings for the undercroft comprise large open archways with metal railings for safety purposes i.e. to prevent unauthorized people from accessing the area beneath the building.

During flood conditions it is highlighted that debris may accumulate at the railings and within the void beneath the building; and hence a robust inspection and maintenance schedule will be required.

5.9 Compensatory Flood Storage

Proposals for the development incorporate the construction of a residential complex with vehicular access and car parking. It is proposed that the ground floor level of the residential building is elevated to a minimum level of 181mAOD; and is therefore 1.66 metres above the design flood level for the 1 in 1000 year event within Limy Water.

It is highlighted that much of the building is elevated above natural ground levels; with an undercroft provided to permit flow during flood conditions within Limy Water.

Furthermore the only areas of the building identified to displace flood water which could be potentially stored within the existing site are:

 Ramp and steps provided access to the elevated building  Entrance lobby, stairs and lift to the front of the building  External steps and internal stairwell area

Compensatory flood storage should be provided on a ‘level‐by‐level’ outside of the existing envelope for each return period up to the 1 in 100 year event.

The displaced volumes for the 1 in 10, 20, 75 and 100 year return periods for the buildings footprint are tabulated within Table 12 overleaf.

The total volume of flood storage lost as a result of the development is estimated at 18.8m3.

To adequately compensate for this loss, it is proposed that ground levels within the proposed car park area are designed carefully to provide the flood storage volume required.

39

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

Table 12: Volume Displacement Due to Building Footprint (Steps and Lobby Area)

Flood Av. Volume Cum. Return Plan Area Av. Depth Level (m Ground Displaced Volume Period (m2) (m) AOD) Level (m) (m3) (m3)

10 178.88 0 0 0 0

20 179.02 0 0 0 0 179.15 75 179.23 99.1 0.08 7.9 7.9

100 179.34 99.1 0.11 10.9 18.8

In order to prevent the loss of additional storage volume from the site it is recommended that external ground levels outside of the area set aside for re‐profiling are maintained as close to existing site levels as possible.

The Flood Extent Plan provided within Appendix J shows the extent of each modelled flood level within the proposed development site.

5.10 Easements

Existing public sewers within the site will require an easement of 3 metres either side of the pipe centerline. Any works to divert or abandon any public sewer within the curtilage of the site will need to be undertaken in accordance with a Section 185 agreement with United Utilities.

The Environment Agency requires an easement of 8 metres from the top of the river bank/wall.

Environment Agency consent is required to ensure that onsite activities do not cause or make existing flood risk worse, interfere with the EA’s ongoing work, and do not adversely affect the local environment, fisheries or wildlife.

Any works within 8 metres will require formal consultation and approval from the EA via an ‘Application for Flood Defence Consent’ in accordance with the Water Resources Act 1991; Flood Defence Byelaws; the Environment Act 1995; and the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.

40

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations

The development has a gross area of 0.25 Hectares and is shown to be located off Burnley Road, within the Lancashire Town of Rawtenstall, predominantly within Flood Zone 3 of the Environment Agency Flood Map.

The application site therefore has a risk from fluvial flooding.

The primary source of flood risk to the development is identified to be from local watercourse Limy Water, which is situated directly adjacent to the east boundary of the site.

From a topographical survey of the site, the lowest level within the existing site is found to be 178.8mAOD.

The 1 in 100 year and 1 in 1000 year modelled flood levels for Limy Water at the development site are 179.34mAOD and 179.45mAOD respectively.

Undertaking a direct comparison against existing ground levels confirms that the site is likely to become inundated during flood events in excess of the 1 in 75 year event; and as such it is concluded that Limy Water presents a flood risk to the proposed development.

In accordance with the requirements of the NPPF; for development within Flood Zones 2 and 3 a Sequential Test should be undertaken. The development is classed as ‘more vulnerable’ and therefore the Exceptions Test should also be applied.

Development proposals incorporate construction of a residential apartment building with associated car parking.

The following measures have either been; or are recommended to be included within the design of the building and associated infrastructure to mitigate against fluvial flood risk; and ensure the safety of the residents during flood events within Limy Water.

 Lobby area set at a level of 180.00mAOD  Ground floor accommodation set at a level of 181.00mAOD  Open undercroft area provided to prevent impedance of flood conveyance routes and the displacement of flood storage volumes; hence ensuring that flooding is not increased elsewhere as a result of the development.  Flood storage compensation is to be provided through ground re‐profiling and careful design of levels within the proposed car park area.  Suitable flood resistance/resilience measures are to be incorporated into the building design i.e. non‐return valves; elevated electricity sockets etc…, where appropriate.  Residents/Housing organisation advised to sign up to receive flood warnings from the EA’s Flood Warning’s Direct Service.  Evacuation plan/procedure to be devised and implemented.

41

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

 Safe refuge is available within residential apartments above ground floor level.

Due to an increase in impermeable area; surface water runoff rates and volumes are estimated to increase as a direct result of the development.

Approved Document H of the current Building Regulations sets out a hierarchy for disposal of surface water from new development i.e. infiltration; watercourse; and sewer.

Investigations suggest that infiltration methods will not be viable; and therefore it is proposed that surface water from the development is directed towards Limy Water; using an existing outfall into the watercourse.

It is noted that flows leaving the development must not exceed existing greenfield runoff rates or 5l/s whichever is the highest. Flows in excess of this will need to be attenuated onsite prior to discharge into the receiving Limy Water.

An evaluation of SUDS indicates that source control methods such as permeable paving, green roof technology, or rainwater harvesting are suitable; and also online/offline storage such as large diameter pipes; or geo‐cellular crate systems, which may provide sufficient storage volume for attenuation purposes.

The Code for Sustainable Homes requires that additional surface water volume generated by the 1 in 100 year 6 hour event is prevented from leaving the site. Infiltration is not considered to be a viable option at the development; and therefore the architect and developer should consider the inclusion of rainwater harvesting or green roof technology.

42

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX A Aerial Photographs

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX B Topographical Survey

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX C Proposed Development Plans

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX D Environment Agency Data

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX E United Utilities Sewer Records

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX F Local Borehole Logs & Soilscape Map

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX G SUD’s Planner

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX H Greenfield Runoff Rates

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX I Indicative Attenuation Volumes

Report No. 12156/I/01 Revision A Project Details. FRA – Site off Burnley Road, Rawtenstall, Lancashire Date. February 14

APPENDIX J Flood Extent Plans

ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y ĞƌŝĂůWŚŽƚŽŐƌĂƉŚƐ $(5,$/ 3+272*5$3+ &,5&$  $(5,$/ 3+272*5$3+ &,5&$  ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y dŽƉŽŐƌĂƉŚŝĐĂů^ƵƌǀĞLJ 7LPEHU3RVW 5DLO)HQFH 77

7)

 



  

 







 

'(16(75((6 



7)





'(16(75((6 

 



  





 

77

 



  

   *5$6658%%/(

     



  

  *5$6658%%/(



 



 

 

 

  

  



7$50$&





 



  *8

,& &/ '(16(75((66+58%6  77 77 





 LO

63

   

   7LPEHU3RVW 5D   ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y WƌŽƉŽƐĞĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚWůĂŶƐ ƌĞ       :/ ϭϲ DP ϭϱ  ϭϰ 7) ϭϯ  ϭϮ  ϭϭ  ϭϬ  ϵ 





 :/ ϭϳϵ͘ϭϱ DP:DWHU&RXUVH

5HWDLQLQJ:DOO

ZĂŵƉ

  ^Ƶď&ůŽŽƌsŽŝĚ  



ϭϳϵ͘Ϭϴ  

 :/  ϭϳϵ͘ϭϬ   >ĂǁŶ    ϭϳϵ͘ϭϯ ϭϳϵ͘Ϭϲ    5HWDLQLQJ:DOO  ϭϴϬ͘ϬϬ 7LPEHU3RVW 5DLO)HQFH 

hW

ϭϳϵ͘ϬϬ    ϭϳϵ͘Ϭϵ  

ϭϳϵ͘Ϭϭ ^Ƶď&ůŽŽƌsŽŝĚ 

WůĂŶƚŝŶŐ 77 5DLOLQJV >       P \   Pð 

%HGURRP 6WRUH %H  Pð %DWKURRP Pð Pð %DWKURRP Pð ULGRU     Pð    )ODW 7\SH  ϭϬ  .LWFKHQ'LQHU Pð  %DWKURRP %DWKURRP Pð  Pð    %HGURRP  Pð

 .LWFKHQ'LQHU Pð /REE\ &RUULGRU /REE\ Pð Pð Pð    )ODW 7\SH

ϭϭ  

67   6WRUH Pð  Pð    )ODW 7\SH 6WRUH .LWFKHQ'LQ Pð Pð ϳ 

 )ODW 7\ /REE\   ϭϱ  .LWFKHQ'LQHU Pð  Pð  %HGURRP  Pð  %DWKURRP 6WRUH 6HUYLFHV Pð 6WRUH 6HYLFHV Pð  Pð Pð Pð         E

ϭϴϭ͘ϬϬ ϭϴϯ͘ϳϳϱ 6WDLUV/LIW  6WDLUV/LIW Pð   Pð hW sŽŝĚKǀĞƌ>ŽďďLJ   .LWFKHQ'LQHU >ŝĨƚ Pð .LWFKHQ' Pð  

)ODW 7\SH     )ODW 7 ϲ  %DWKURRP ϭϰ Pð  6WRUH 67   Pð %HGURRP  Pð

 Pð &RUULGRU  /REE\ Pð ULGRU /REE\ Pð /REE\ Pð Pð  Pð   %HGURRP

Pð 6WRUH  

%DWKURRP   Pð %DWKURRP

 

Pð  %HGURRP     ð 

>

t

'

^



'

h Ɖ

ƵĨ

ZĂŵƉĞĚĂĐĐĞƐƐ DĞƚĂůƌĂŝůŝŶŐƐƚŽďĂƐĞŵĞŶƚŽƉĞŶŝŶŐ ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y ŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚŐĞŶĐLJ ĂƚĂ +LVWRULF)ORRG0DSFHQWUHGRQ%XUQOH\5G5DZWHQVWDOO&UHDWHGWK2FWREHU>355:$5.(@

 k

/HJHQG ? 6LWH/RFDWLRQ +LVWRULF)ORRG(YHQW2XWOLQH 0DLQ5LYHU

/,0<:$7(5

?

‹(QYLURQPHQW$JHQF\FRS\ULJKWDQGRUGDWDEDVHULJKWV$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG‹&URZQ&RS\ULJKWDQGGDWDEDVHULJKW$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG(QYLURQPHQW$JHQF\ &RQWDFW8V1DWLRQDO&XVWRPHU&RQWDFW&HQWUH32%R[5RWKHUKDP6%<7HO 0RQ)UL (PDLOHQTXLULHV#HQYLURQPHQWDJHQF\JRYXN 'HWDLOHG)ORRG0DSFHQWUHGRQ%XUQOH\5G5DZWHQVWDOO&UHDWHGWK2FWREHU>355:$5.(@

6FDOH k

/HJHQG  0RGHO0HDVXUHPHQWV ? 6LWH/RFDWLRQ 0DLQ5LYHU )ORRG=RQH  )ORRG=RQH

  ?





%$//$'(1/$1*:22'%522.

/,0<:$7(5

‹(QYLURQPHQW$JHQF\FRS\ULJKWDQGRUGDWDEDVHULJKWV$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG‹&URZQ&RS\ULJKWDQGGDWDEDVHULJKW$OOULJKWVUHVHUYHG(QYLURQPHQW$JHQF\ &RQWDFW8V1DWLRQDO&XVWRPHU&RQWDFW&HQWUH32%R[5RWKHUKDP6%<7HO 0RQ)UL (PDLOHQTXLULHV#HQYLURQPHQWDJHQF\JRYXN WK$SULO 355:$5.(

0RGHO0HDVXUHPHQWV $(3 LQ $(3 LQ $(3 LQ $(3 LQ $(3 LQ 0DS5HIHUHQFH 0RGHO1RGH5HIHUHQFH (DVWLQJ 1RUWKLQJ 'DWD \HDU \HDU \HDU \HDU \HDU 0RGHOOHG:DWHU/HYHO PDRG       HD/,0<BG   0RGHOOHG)ORZ FXPHFV     

0RGHOOHG:DWHU/HYHO PDRG       HD/,0<BX   0RGHOOHG)ORZ FXPHFV     

0RGHOOHG:DWHU/HYHO PDRG       HD/,0<B   0RGHOOHG)ORZ FXPHFV     

0RGHOOHG:DWHU/HYHO PDRG       HD/,0<BX   0RGHOOHG)ORZ FXPHFV     

0RGHOOHG:DWHU/HYHO PDRG       HD/,0<BG   0RGHOOHG)ORZ FXPHFV     

0RGHOGDWDWDNHQIURP7KH5LYHU,UZHOODQG/LP\:DWHUVWXG\ )ORRG(YHQW&RGH 1DPH 6WDUW'DWH (QG'DWH &DXVHRI)ORRGLQJ 6RXUFH &KDQQHO&DSDFLW\ )(% /LP\   0DLQ5LYHU H[FHHGHG 1RWHV

$(3$QQXDO([FHHGHQFH3UREDELOLW\

PDRGPHWUHVDERYHRUGQDQFHGDWXP

FXPHFVFXELFPHWUHVSHUVHFRQG ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

 WWE/y hŶŝƚĞĚhƚŝůŝƚŝĞƐ ^ĞǁĞƌZĞĐŽƌĚƐ          8QLWHG8WLOLWHV:DWHU3/& 3URSHUW\6HDUFKHV *URXQG)ORRU*UDVPHUH+RXVH /LQJOH\0HUH%XVLQHVV3DUN 7+()/22'5,6.&2168/7$1&< *UHDW6DQNH\ :DUULQJWRQ $1'5(:52$' :$/3 1(/621 ';:DUULQJWRQ /$1&$6+,5( 7HOHSKRQH %%%; )D[1XPEHU 3URSHUW\VHDUFKHV#XXSOFFRXN

'HDU6LUV

/RFDWLRQ 9DFDQW6LWH%XUQOH\5RDG5DZWHQVWDOO%%++

,DFNQRZOHGJHZLWKWKDQNV\RXUUHTXHVWGDWHG  IRULQIRUPDWLRQRQWKHORFDWLRQRIRXUVHUYLFHV

3OHDVHILQGHQFORVHGSODQVVKRZLQJWKHDSSUR[LPDWHSRVLWLRQRIRXUDSSDUDWXVNQRZQWREHLQWKH YLFLQLW\RIWKLVVLWH ,DWWDFK*HQHUDO&RQGLWLRQ,QIRUPDWLRQVKHHWVZKLFKGHWDLOVFRQWDFWQXPEHUVIRUDGGLWLRQDOVHUYLFHV LHQHZVXSSOLHVFRQQHFWLRQVGLYHUVLRQV ZKLFKZHDUHXQDEOHWRGHDOZLWKDWWKLVRIILFH,QDGGLWLRQ \RXVKRXOGHQVXUHWKH\DUHPDGHDYDLODEOHWRDQ\RQHFDUU\LQJRXWDQ\ZRUNVZKLFKPD\DIIHFWRXU DSSDUDWXV

,WUXVWWKHDERYHPHHWVZLWK\RXUHTXLUHPHQWVDQGORRNIRUZDUGWRKHDULQJIURP\RXVKRXOG\RXQHHG DQ\WKLQJIXUWKHU

,I\RXKDYHDQ\TXHULHVUHJDUGLQJWKLVPDWWHUSOHDVHWHOHSKRQHXVRQ

6XH0F0DQXV 2SHUDWLRQV0DQDJHU 3URSHUW\6HDUFKHV

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³88:´ 

7(506$1'&21',7,216 7KLV0DSDQGDQ\LQIRUPDWLRQVXSSOLHGZLWKLWLVLVVXHGVXEMHFWWRWKHSURYLVLRQVFRQWDLQHGEHORZWRWKH H[FOXVLRQ RI DOO RWKHUV DQG QR SDUW\ UHOLHV XSRQ DQ\ UHSUHVHQWDWLRQ ZDUUDQW\ FROODWHUDO FRQWUDFW RU RWKHU DVVXUDQFHRIDQ\SHUVRQ ZKHWKHUSDUW\WRWKLVDJUHHPHQWRUQRW WKDWLVQRWVHWRXWLQWKLVDJUHHPHQWRUWKH GRFXPHQWVUHIHUUHGWRLQLW

7KLV0DSDQGDQ\LQIRUPDWLRQVXSSOLHGZLWKLWLVSURYLGHGIRUJHQHUDOJXLGDQFHRQO\DQGQRUHSUHVHQWDWLRQ XQGHUWDNLQJRUZDUUDQW\DVWRLWVDFFXUDF\FRPSOHWHQHVVRUEHLQJXSWRGDWHLVJLYHQRULPSOLHG

,QSDUWLFXODUWKHSRVLWLRQDQGGHSWKRIDQ\88:DSSDUDWXVVKRZQRQWKH0DSDUHDSSUR[LPDWHRQO\88: VWURQJO\ UHFRPPHQGV WKDW D FRPSUHKHQVLYH VXUYH\ LV XQGHUWDNHQ LQ DGGLWLRQ WR UHYLHZLQJ WKLV 0DS WR GHWHUPLQHDQGHQVXUHWKHSUHFLVHORFDWLRQRIDQ\88:DSSDUDWXV7KHH[DFWORFDWLRQSRVLWLRQVDQGGHSWKV VKRXOGEHREWDLQHGE\H[FDYDWLRQWULDOKROHV

7KHORFDWLRQDQGSRVLWLRQRISULYDWHGUDLQVSULYDWHVHZHUVDQGVHUYLFHSLSHVWRSURSHUWLHVDUHQRWQRUPDOO\ VKRZQRQWKLV0DSEXWWKHLUSUHVHQFHPXVWEHDQWLFLSDWHGDQGDFFRXQWHGIRUDQG\RXDUHVWURQJO\DGYLVHGWR FDUU\RXW\RXURZQIXUWKHUHQTXLULHVDQGLQYHVWLJDWLRQVLQRUGHUWRORFDWHWKHVDPH

7KHSRVLWLRQDQGGHSWKRI88:DSSDUDWXVLVVXEMHFWWRFKDQJHDQGWKHUHIRUHWKLV0DSLVLVVXHGVXEMHFWWR DQ\UHPRYDORUFKDQJHLQORFDWLRQRIWKHVDPH7KHRQXVLVHQWLUHO\XSRQ\RXWRFRQILUPZKHWKHUDQ\FKDQJHV WRWKH0DSKDYHEHHQPDGHVXEVHTXHQWWRLVVXHDQGSULRUWRDQ\ZRUNVEHLQJFDUULHGRXW

7KLV0DSDQGDQ\LQIRUPDWLRQVKRZQRQLWRUSURYLGHGZLWKLWPXVWQRWEHUHOLHGXSRQLQWKHHYHQWRIDQ\ GHYHORSPHQWFRQVWUXFWLRQRURWKHUZRUNV LQFOXGLQJEXWQRWOLPLWHGWRDQ\H[FDYDWLRQV LQWKHYLFLQLW\RI88: DSSDUDWXVRUIRUWKHSXUSRVHRIGHWHUPLQLQJWKHVXLWDELOLW\RIDSRLQWRIFRQQHFWLRQWRWKHVHZHUDJHRURWKHU GLVWULEXWLRQV\VWHPV

 1R SHUVRQ RU OHJDO HQWLW\ LQFOXGLQJ DQ\ FRPSDQ\ VKDOO EH UHOLHYHG IURP DQ\ OLDELOLW\ KRZVRHYHU DQG ZKHQVRHYHUDULVLQJIRUDQ\GDPDJHFDXVHGWR88:DSSDUDWXVE\UHDVRQRIWKHDFWXDOSRVLWLRQDQGRUGHSWKV RI88:DSSDUDWXVEHLQJGLIIHUHQWIURPWKRVHVKRZQRQWKH0DSDQGDQ\LQIRUPDWLRQVXSSOLHGZLWKLW

 ,I DQ\ SURYLVLRQ FRQWDLQHG KHUHLQ LV RU EHFRPHV OHJDOO\ LQYDOLG RU XQHQIRUFHDEOH LW ZLOO EH WDNHQ WR EH VHYHUHGIURPWKHUHPDLQLQJSURYLVLRQVZKLFKVKDOOEHXQDIIHFWHGDQGFRQWLQXHLQIXOOIRUFHDQGDIIHFW

7KLVDJUHHPHQWVKDOOEHJRYHUQHGE\(QJOLVKODZDQGDOOSDUWLHVVXEPLWWRWKHH[FOXVLYHMXULVGLFWLRQRIWKH (QJOLVK FRXUWV VDYH WKDW QRWKLQJ ZLOO SUHYHQW 88: IURP EULQJLQJ SURFHHGLQJV LQ DQ\ RWKHU FRPSHWHQW MXULVGLFWLRQZKHWKHUFRQFXUUHQWO\RURWKHUZLVH

&RS\ULJKW‹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

XS SO \

)L UH 6 1XUVH U\  0HDGRZ9LHZ  5 

 VW%XLOGLQJ 3R  P  0HDGRZ%DQN 6HFRQGDU\ 

 DQG7HFKQRORJ\6FKRRO  $OGHU*UDQJH&RPPXQLW\



5 +2//,1/$1( &HPHWHU\  5DZWHQVWDOO    5    5 5 

  

 

5 D   

 D 9&  5

 :DWHU

    

5 5 

 

 (18(

 9&  9&  5

 &/26(  

 &+$7%851 5 721$9



( $OGHU*UDQJH 6L[WK)RUP&HQWUH

9& 

 (1'/ 5 3

 9&

  

5 



 P  5 5    5

 

$9(18(



5 9&  1

 2

   &

2YHUIORZ

9&  0,77 

'2:1+$0$9(18( 5





 

  

 

&2 

5

  9 

  

 

:  2

56 5

721 '

&/26(  &$/'(552$ 

5 

9&   5 9&   5  

 5 5 9&

 9&

     &2 5    5 5 5 :$<  &2    +2//,1  

  5 &2  9& 5 

 9& 5 (

6W3DXOV&( 6 &RQVWDEOH/HH  3ULPDU\6FKRRO

5  2 



5 

 5 /

 &2 & 2   &  

  5

   

5 ,6:(//  : 

&2 







  

 5  5  

5    5



5      6( 



  5 5 

 (O6XE6WD 5 6'1:     5 *UDQJH)DUP 276&/2  

$%% 

 5

    

5 &2     5 5 5 5  ( 9&    

8 *5($9(&/26( 

  1 (





 

   

5 5 5 5    5

851$9(   +2//,1/$1 6FDOH 'DWH



 

/$,'%  5 5  6 &2    5

17 266KHHW1R

  5  (

&RWWDJH 9&

5(6&  /RZHU&RQVW DEOH/HH &  (O6XE6WD

5         5



 67$%/(/((  5  9& 

5 1      5 5    &2 5 /HH %DUQ   /RZHU

  &RQVW DEOH    

5 5 9&  5



5       5

 &2

  

  5   

5

  60   

5  9&  5         9&  

5 

 5  5    5 5

  

5    5 

:+$//(<'5,9( 5

 

 

60 6/$,'%85 & 9& 5 1 & $9( 1 8 (    9 WKH/HVV  6W-DPHV 5&&KXUFK  HH  3RVW   /

5

9  &2 5

DEOH

  W

  5 5 

 

5

 

     &2  U&RQV

5 H

&    DPHV

 )DUP 5

 9& 6W-

 &HQWU

 /RZH 

  6( 0HGLF DO $ HU

 /2

5 &  :DW  5  

 9& 5

9 5   5

 /LP\ 3UHVE\ WHU\

9LFDUD JH /((%522.  +DO O

   5 

5   5  7KH%X QJDOR Z 5    P 5    5 2

 :,//2:$9(18( &2 

5

 O V&KXUFK 

 &RQVWDEOH/HH&RXUW GLV &   

$  5 DX



W3 

 

W    6 5 5

7KH(OPV    9&  



5  9& 9&

/HH6WUHH

 5    

5  D

  

6W 5



9& 

E

  %851/(<52 $'

5     

5 5

O6X

 

&2167$%/(/(( (

 P  &     5 

9&  

7KH%HHFKHV 9&





   9 +ROOLQ*URY H 

    9& (/0   5 &2

9& 3ULQWHG%\1LFROD0RUULV  5   

5 5    

     

4    $ $ $ $        

      3OHDVHHQVXUHWKDWDFRS\RIWKHVHFRQGLWLRQVLV :KHUHWKHUHLVDSXEOLFVHZHUDORQJWKHOLQHRID SDVVHGWR\RXUUHSUHVHQWDWLYHDQGFRQWUDFWRURQVLWH SURSRVHGGHYHORSPHQWEXLOGLQJDUUDQJHPHQWVVKDOOEH  PDGHE\WKHGHYHORSHUDWKLVFRVWWRGLYHUWWKHVHZHU 8QLWHG8WLOLWLHVSURYLGHVWKHDSSUR[LPDWHORFDWLRQVRILWV DURXQGWKHGHYHORSPHQW:KHUHWKLVLVQRWSRVVLEOHDQGDV VHZHUVDFFRUGLQJWRLWVUHFRUGV7KHVHUHFRUGVDUHQRW DODVWUHVRUWD³%XLOGLQJ2YHU$JUHHPHQW´ZLOOQHHGWREH QHFHVVDULO\DFFXUDWHRUFRPSOHWHQRUGRWKH\QRUPDOO\ FRPSOHWHGXQGHUVHFWLRQRIWKH%XLOGLQJ$FW7KH VKRZWKHSRVLWLRQVRIHYHU\VHZHUFXOYHUWRUGUDLQSULYDWH GHYHORSHUVKDOOGHVLJQEXLOGLQJIRXQGDWLRQVWRHQVXUHWKDW FRQQHFWLRQVIURPSURSHUWLHVWRWKHSXEOLFVHZHUVRUWKH QRDGGLWLRQDOORDGLQJLVWUDQVIHUUHGWRWKHVHZHUDQGVXEPLW SDUWLFXODUVRIDQ\SULYDWHV\VWHP1RSHUVRQRUFRPSDQ\ VXFKGHWDLOVERWKWRWKH/RFDO$XWKRULW\¶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³5HVWULFWHG%XLOGLQJ]RQH´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

&RPELQHGVHZHUVIRXOVHZHUVVXUIDFHZDWHUVHZHUV DQGSXPSHGPDLQV7KHVHDUHVKRZQVHSDUDWHO\LQDUDQJH RIFRORXUVRUPDUNLQJVWRGLVWLQJXLVKWKHPRQRXUGUDZLQJV ZKLFKDUHH[WUDFWVIURPWKHVWDWXWRU\UHJLRQDOVHZHUPDS $OHJHQGDQGNH\LVSURYLGHGRQHDFKH[WUDFWIRUJHQHUDO XVHDOWKRXJKQRWDOOW\SHVRIVHZHUZLOOEHVKRZQRQHYHU\ H[WUDFW

 ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

 WWE/y& >ŽĐĂůŽƌĞŚŽůĞ>ŽŐƐ Θ^ŽŝůƐĐĂƉĞDĂƉ

 ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y' ^h͛ƐWůĂŶŶĞƌ 3DXO:DLWH$VVRFLDWHV 3DJH 6XPPLW+RXVH 5LSDULDQ:D\ .HLJKOH\%'%: 'DWH 'HVLJQHG%\)5&SF )LOH &KHFNHG%\ ,QIUDVRIW 6RXUFH&RQWURO:

68'63ODQQHU

5HVXOWV

2UGHUHG%\7RWDO

4XLFN5DQN +\GURORJLFDO /DQG8VH 6LWH 7RWDO &RPPXQLW\ (FRQRPLFV 9LHZ )HDWXUHV DQG DQG (QYLURQPHQW 0DLQWHQDQFH

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

‹0LFUR'UDLQDJH/WG ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y, 'ƌĞĞŶĨŝĞůĚZƵŶŽĨĨZĂƚĞƐ 3DXO:DLWH$VVRFLDWHV 3DJH 6XPPLW+RXVH 5LSDULDQ:D\ .HLJKOH\%'%: 'DWH 'HVLJQHG%\)5&SF )LOH &KHFNHG%\ ,QIUDVRIW 6RXUFH&RQWURO:

,+0HDQ$QQXDO)ORRG

,QSXW

5HWXUQ3HULRG \HDUV  6$$5 PP  8UEDQ  $UHD KD  6RLO  5HJLRQ1XPEHU 5HJLRQ

5HVXOWV OV

4%$55XUDO  4%$58UEDQ 

4\HDU 

4\HDU  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV  4\HDUV 

‹0LFUR'UDLQDJH/WG ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y/ /ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞƚƚĞŶƵĂƚŝŽŶsŽůƵŵĞƐ            ϭŝŶϭLJĞĂƌ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞƚƚĞŶƵĂƚŝŽŶsŽůƵŵĞƐ











 ϭŝŶϯϬLJĞĂƌ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞƚƚĞŶƵĂƚŝŽŶsŽůƵŵĞƐ

 ϭŝŶϭϬϬLJĞĂƌ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞƚƚĞŶƵĂƚŝŽŶsŽůƵŵĞƐ







 ϭŝŶϭϬϬLJĞĂƌƉůƵƐůŝŵĂƚĞŚĂŶŐĞ/ŶĚŝĐĂƚŝǀĞƚƚĞŶƵĂƚŝŽŶsŽůƵŵĞƐ



 ZĞƉŽƌƚEŽ͘ϭϮϭϱϲͬ/ͬϬϭZĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ WƌŽũĞĐƚĞƚĂŝůƐ͘&Zʹ^ŝƚĞŽĨĨƵƌŶůĞLJZŽĂĚ͕ZĂǁƚĞŶƐƚĂůů͕>ĂŶĐĂƐŚŝƌĞ ĂƚĞ͘&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϰ

WWE/y: &ůŽŽĚdžƚĞŶƚWůĂŶƐ         :/ DP





 5HWDLQLQJ:DOO

 

 LQ  \HDU IORRG HQYHORSH 

 7LPEHU3RVW 5DLO)HQFH  



  

 5DLOLQJV    

  '(16(75((66+58%6  77

 7)

  



7)  

:DWHU&RXUVH   

 

  

5HWDLQLQJ:DOO 7:

77

   :/ DP 



7)  

 

  



 :/ DP  

 



:DOO

 77

:/   DP 

'(16(75((6 5DLOLQJV

  5HWDLQLQJ:DOO 

 

  

   

    7)



 77

'(16(75((6 

5HWDLQLQJ:DOO  

 

 

 

  





 

77

 



  



 

 

7) 

 *5$6658%%/(  

'(16(6+58%6 7:   

 



 

  



  *5$6658%%/(

 





   

 

 

  

    

 



7$50$&





  

 '(16(75((66+58%6

  *8

,& &/ 87/ '(16(75((66+58%6

 

77 

77 

   

6+58%6

 



 63 

  

'(16(  

 7LPEHU3RVW 5DLO)HQFH  

    7$50$& 

58%%/(

   77 .HUE   :9

 

 :9



 

   7)

 

(+  *9 /3

  



7$50$& 

 

   

 

 '. *8  77 *5$66 %7     *9 '.  &$79

   

  0+ &/

'(16(6+58%6   7$50$&  77  :9 

 0+ &/   

%7    *8  0+ &/   :%  63 )3 %866+(/7(5   /3



 HV HQFURDFK WKH VLWH LV   S LQ ZKLFK WKH  LQ  DQG  LQ  \HDU IORRG  \HDU IORRG QYHOR HORSH HORSH RG H H Y Y Q Q