Draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2012 - 2016

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2012 - 2016 Draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2012 - 2016 www.surreycc.gov.uk Making Surrey a better place Why is a strategy needed? Tell us what you think about The Government has recently given local flooding authorities new powers to help manage local flood risk in a more coordinated way. These new Earlier this year, Surrey County Council used responsibilities relate primarily to ‘local’ flood feedback from residents to inform its strategy risk, namely from surface water, groundwater about flood risk. It now wants to know what you and ordinary watercourses (smaller rivers, think of it. streams and ditches). Flood risk from all other To give your views, visit www.surreycc.gov.uk/ rivers (known as main rivers) remains the floodriskstrategy or call 03456 009 009. responsibility of the Environment Agency. The closing date for all responses is 30 November Surrey County Council now has a statutory duty 2012. to produce a strategy. The Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy: • Explains how partners are working together to reduce flood risk. • Provides an overview of the ongoing flood risk management work underway across Surrey. • Outlines which organisations are responsible for different types of flooding to ensure a common understanding of roles, responsibilities and priorities within the county. Extreme weather, existing buildings in floodplains and limited funding mean we cannot stop flood incidents in Surrey. However, through the strategy we will coordinate our services so that flood risk is reduced and the aftermath of flood incidents is minimised. The strategy provides a real opportunity for us to work together with residents and businesses to reduce risk and prepare for the future. Draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Contents Foreword 3 Our ambitions 1. Introduction 5 1.1 The purpose of the strategy 5 1.2 Structure 5 1.3 Why have we produced a strategy? 6 1.4 Who is the strategy aimed at? 6 1.5 Our objectives 6 1.6 Legislative context 7 1.7 Corporate plans and priorities 9 1.8 Surrey Flood Risk Partnership Board 9 1.9 Scrutiny and review 10 2. Flood risk in Surrey 11 2.1 Types of flood risk 11 2.2 Existing information on flood risk 13 2.3 Future changes to risk 24 2.4 How is information on flood risk currently communicated? 26 3. Roles and responsibilities 27 3.1 Surrey County Council (including Surrey Fire and Rescue Authority) 27 3.2 Environment Agency 32 3.3 District and borough councils 35 3.4 Internal drainage boards 37 3.5 Regional flood and coastal committees 38 3.6 Water companies 38 3.7 Highways Agency 39 3.8 Residents and businesses 40 4. Objectives and actions 43 4.1 Capital schemes 44 4.2 Maintenance 45 4.3 Sustainable drainage 46 4.4 Communication 47 4.5 Improving knowledge and skills 47 4.6 Partnership working on the implementation of the Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy 48 4.7 Developing a holistic response to flood risk 48 4.8 Actions 48 5. Flood risk management funding 49 5.1 National funding 49 5.2 Local funding 50 5.3 Additional funding sources 50 6. Sustainable development and environment 53 6.1 How will the strategy make a contribution to sustainable development? 53 6.2 The environmental impact of the strategy: strategic environmental assessment 54 1 6.3 The impact of the strategy on sites of European importance for nature conservation: Habitat Regulations Assessment 54 6.4 The Water Framework Directive 55 6.5 The environmental impacts of schemes: Environmental Impact Assessment and Habitat Regulations Assessment 56 7. Next steps 58 Annexes Annex 1: Glossary of terms 59 Annex 2: Technical annex 63 Annex 3: Action plan 69 Annex 4: Annual programme of schemes 2012/ 13 75 Annex 5: Public feedback from a survey to inform the strategy 78 Annex 6: Contact details 81 Boxes Box 1: Our objectives 6 Box 2: Our approach to catchments in the strategy 14 Box 3: What is a sustainable drainage system? 29 Box 4: Case study Guildford Borough Council, Flood Risk Reduction Measures, November 2012 36 Box 5: Case study Spelthorne Borough Council, Supplementary Planning 36 Document on Flooding, consultation draft April 2012 Box 6: Case study Chobham Community Resilience Action Group (CCRAG) 41 Box 7: Case study Farnham River Management Committee (FRMC) 41 Box 8: Case study community payback 46 Box 9: Case study HydroCast: Rainfall forecast and analysis system 48 Box 10: What is sustainable development? 53 Box 11: Case study The Moors Project, Redhill 57 Figures Figure 1: Upper Medway Internal Drainage Board 37 Maps (these are available at www.surreycc.gov.uk/floodriskstrategy) Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 1 - Lower Thames Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 2 - Lower Wey Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 3 - Mole Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 4 - South London Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 5 - Upper Wey Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 6 - Surrey overview Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Map 7 - Surrey flood alleviation schemes 2012/ 13 Tables Table 1: Surrey clusters 17 Table 2: Means of calculating the amount of Flood Defence Grant in Aid 49 Table 3: Communities at risk of fluvial flooding – National Flood Risk Assessment Data 63 Table 4: Thames Catchment Flood Management Plan – Policy unit areas 64 Table 5: Historic flooding incidents 65 Table 6: Current and potential future flood zones in Surrey’s main urban centres 66 Table 7: Water Framework Directive - ecological status or ecological potential 67 2 Draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy Foreword Recent Government legislation has provided local authorities with a number of new responsibilities in relation to flood risk management. It has also provided a timely opportunity to review the activities that we already carry out. This draft Surrey Local Flood Risk Management Strategy marks the start of a new, more coordinated approach to the work that we all carry out in this important area. The strategy draws in the work of other important risk management authorities within the county, such as water companies and the Environment Agency. This document is a first step in explaining how all these organisations plan to work together, what their priorities are, and who is responsible for what. Under legislation, the strategy has to explain what is being done to manage ‘local flood risk’, namely flooding from groundwater, ordinary watercourses and surface water. However, it also provides a unique opportunity to provide information on all sources of flooding and to discuss the links between them. It would not be possible to stop all flooding in the county, even with unlimited funding. The priorities identified represent the best way to manage the risk. They show how we are attempting to create a balance, between focusing on modelled risk, and the work needed to support areas that have already experienced flooding. We are in a period of great change with the transfer of responsibilities. We are improving our understanding of the nature of local flood risk. Early priorities therefore include a focus on what needs to be done to meet new responsibilities. We are also committed to developing our knowledge and understanding through the use of innovative technology. In April 2012, the way that the Government funds flood risk management projects changed. We are developing an understanding of areas in Surrey that have the highest eligibility for national funding to ensure that Surrey receives its fair share. Changes in national funding mean we also need to consider what local funding may be allocated to local flood risk priorities. Set out below are our ambitions to 2017 (in no particular order): 1. Drainage strategy - We will develop a long term drainage asset management strategy, which covers highways and ordinary watercourse maintenance. As a result we will target high risk and high need areas in a joined up way. 2. Infrastructure - The relevant local authorities will work together with the Environment Agency to ensure the development and implementation of flood risk management strategies including the Lower Thames and Wey. This will bring tangible reductions in flood risk to some Surrey communities. 3. Sustainable drainage - We will develop an approach to sustainable drainage systems that is fully integrated with the planning system. Large development sites will be exemplars. We also want to see more retrofitting of sustainable drainage systems in high risk areas. 3 4. Resilience - Together we will promote flood resilience and resistance measures to ‘at risk’ households and businesses in Surrey. This will include the continued development and sharing of ‘self help’ opportunities. 5. Insurance - We will urge the Government to work with the insurance industry to guarantee the availability and affordability of flood insurance. 6. Funding - We will be ambitious in our approach to securing national flood risk management funding, and in exploring additional funding sources. We will assist, where possible, in supporting the funding of property level protection schemes in high risk areas. 7. Communications - We will continue to explain what work is underway to reduce flood risk, how this is prioritised and what role residents and businesses can play. 8. Technology - We will continue to promote and use innovative technologies, to better understand the nature of flood risk, and identify potential flood risk mitigation measures. I hope you find the following document a useful source of information. Links to more detailed and technical information are provided throughout. This is our first step in ensuring that you are kept up to date with work that is underway or planned throughout the county and the role that you can play in this. Councillor John Furey, Cabinet Member for Transport and Environment, Surrey County Council Jason Russell, Chairman, Surrey Flood Risk Partnership Board 4 1.
Recommended publications
  • Farnham Neighbourhood Plan Review Sustainability Appraisal
    Farnham Neighbourhood Plan Review (Regulation 15) Sustainability Appraisal/ Strategic Environmental Assessment Farnham Town Council December 2018 1 Contents Section 1 Introduction 3 Section 2: Key Sustainability Issues 10 Section 3: Sustainability Objectives 13 Section 4: Testing the Neighbourhood Plan Review Objectives 14 Section 5: Sustainability Appraisal of Development Options 19 Section 6: Sustainability Appraisal of Neighbourhood Plan Review Policies 29 Section 7: Conclusions 32 Appendix 1: Topic-based assessment of Farnham Baseline situation and Key 34 Issues Appendix 2: Sustainability Appraisal/ Strategic Environmental Assessment of 73 Policies Appendix 3: Sustainability Appraisal/ Strategic Environmental Assessment of 171 submitted housing sites not included in the Regulation 15 Neighbourhood Plan Review 2 Section 1 Introdiction What is Sustainability Appraisal/Strategic Environmental Appraisal? To help ensure that the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan Review is sustainable, it is best practice in the UK to undertake a Sustainability Appraisal (SA). An SA is a process that aims to predict and then assess the economic, environmental and social effects likely to arise from the adoption of the Neighbourhood Plan Review. Where a neighbourhood plan could have significant environmental effects, it may fall within the scope of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 and so require a strategic environmental assessment (SEA). In April 2016, Waverley Borough Council issued a screening opinion that an SEA was required to be undertaken for the Farnham Neighbourhood Plan. As the Neighbourhood Plan Review provides for additional housing development to that included in the adopted Neighbourhood Plan, an SEA has been prepared for the Regulation 15 Review. One of the basic conditions that will be tested by the independent examiner of a Neighbourhood Plan is whether the making of the plan is compatible with European Union obligations (including under the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive).
    [Show full text]
  • Downstream Workshop Word for Word Report
    Process sponsored by: Process facilitated by: River Thames Scheme Walton Bridge to Richmond (downstream of the proposed flood channel) Workshop Word for Word Report November 17th 2016 Dialogue Matters Ltd, Registered in England and Wales 7221733 Professional workshop facilitators: Lucy Armitage Dialogue Matters Ltd. Joel Pound Dialogue Matters Ltd. Laurence Tricker Dialogue Matters Ltd. Volunteer small group facilitators: Gemma Carey GBV Andrew Todd GBV Vicky Lutyens GBV Kerry Quinton GBV Jenny Marshall-Evans GBV Ed Ferguson GBV Colette Walmsley Environment Agency Laura Littleton Environment Agency Leanne McKrill Environment Agency Liz Etheridge Environment Agency Laura Littleton Environment Agency Leanne McKrill Environment Agency Typed by: Gemma Carey GBV Andrew Todd GBV Jenny Marshall-Evans GBV Sorted by: Gemma Carey GBV Lucy Armitage Dialogue Matters Ltd. Checked and sign off Dialogue Matters Ltd. 1 Dialogue Matters Ltd, Registered in England and Wales 7221733 Contents 1 About the workshop and this report 3 2 Vision Question 4 2.1 Its 2030 and you are chatting with people about how much better things are now if a flood happens. Why what pleases you most? 4 3 Question & Answers session following presentation 6 4 Sharing Knowledge 8 4.1 Consider the weir options 8 4.2 Information 9 4.3 Local Flooding - Tell us your ‘on the ground’ knowledge 10 4.4 Mapping communities 20 4.5 Flood Storage on the Ham Lands 21 5 Session 2: Community Resilience Measures 23 5.1 What information would your community/interest group like to know as we approach this work? 23 5.2 What types of information will your community/interest group be able to provide to help us progress and develop this work? 26 5.3 What do we need to factor in when considering the location defence options (permanent, temporary and PLP).
    [Show full text]
  • Rythe Close, Esher, KT10 9DD £725,000 Rythe Close, Esher, KT10 9DD
    Rythe Close, Esher, KT10 9DD £725,000 Rythe Close, Esher, KT10 9DD This beautifully presented three bedroom family home is located in the heart of Claygate Village. Claygate's Parade is only 0.3 miles away with its boutique Three double bedrooms shops, grocery store, butchers, baker, cooperative supermarket, and Claygate Train Station with its fantastic links into London Waterloo within 30 minutes. This property is perfectly situated for its countryside feel with walks around Allocated parking space Littleworth Common, Claygate Common and Telegraph Hill, coupled with bustling eateries and gastro pubs all within walking distance. The Rythe Close small gated development was built in 2006 and this property 0.3 miles from Claygate has one of the largest plots of the development. As you enter you are greeted with a hallway with access to all downstairs rooms, the stairs to the upper Train Station floors and a W/C with basin and window for light and ventilation. To your left is the kitchen which has built in oven and gas hob with a window overlooking the front of the property. Straight ahead is the main reception room which Study area has been cleverly extended by the current owners and has maximised the living space, creating a perfect place to relax and dine but also entertain. The glass extension to the rear generates a bright and airy room and creates the feeling of being outside while enjoying home comforts. Landscaped garden To the first floor, straight ahead of the stairs is one of the double bedrooms which has recently been decorated and has two windows overlooking the Extended reception room garden and built in wardrobes.
    [Show full text]
  • Waverley Borough Council Water Quality Assessment
    Waverley Borough Council Waverley Borough Council Water Quality Assessment 23 June 2017 Amec Foster Wheeler Environment & Infrastructure UK Limited 3 © AMEC Environment & Infrastructure UK Limited Contents Glossary 6 Summary 7 1. Introduction 9 1.1 Purpose of the Water Quality Assessment 9 1.2 Aims and objectives 9 1.3 Local Plan and the growth areas 10 2. Water Quality Assessments 12 2.1 Overview 12 2.2 Assessment methodology 12 Data collation 12 Baseline data 13 Growth Scenarios 16 Use of Simcat and River Quality Planning (RQP) tool 17 Graphical representation of Results 17 Overall assumptions and caveats for all water quality assessments 18 3. Results 20 3.1 Overview 20 3.2 Cranleigh, Alfold, Dunsfold, Ewhurst, Hascombe and Dunsfold Aerodrome Growth Areas 20 Upstream impacts 20 No deterioration – preventing class deterioration 20 No deterioration – limiting in class deterioration to below the 10% threshold 20 Length of river impacted 21 Getting to Good (or 2027 objective) 21 Downstream impacts beyond main water body 21 Indicative permit calculations 21 Impact of quicker housing growth 22 3.3 Elstead, Peper Harow and Thursley Growth Areas 24 Upstream impacts 24 No deterioration – preventing class deterioration 24 No deterioration – limiting in class deterioration to below the 10% threshold 24 Length of river impacted 24 Getting to Good (or 2027 objective) 24 Downstream impacts beyond main water body 24 Indicative permit calculations 25 3.4 Farnham, Churt, Dockenfield, Frensham and Tilford Growth Areas 27 Upstream impacts 27 No deterioration
    [Show full text]
  • Flood Risk Assessment
    Flood Risk Assessment 20-22 Bridge Street, Staines, TW18 4TW Client Consulting Engineers CDP Staines Ltd GTA Civils Ltd 22 Gilbert Street Gloucester House London 66a Church Walk W1K 5EJ Burgess Hill West Sussex Ref: 6988 RH15 9AS Date: August 2017 Tel: 01444 871444 Flood Risk Assessment: 20-22 Bridge Street, Staines Index 1 Introduction 2 2 Existing Site & Flood Risk Profile 3 3 Proposed Development & Mitigation 5 Schedule of Appendices A Site Location Map & Aerial Photos B Environment Agency & SFRA Flood Maps C Architect’s Scheme Drawings D Flood Response Plan Issue Issue date Compiled Checked Preliminary Issue 22 August 2017 JP GK/MR 2nd Preliminary Issue 29 August 2017 JP MR 3rd Preliminary Issue 21 October 2017 JP MR First Issue 31 October 2017 JP MR Report by: John Pakenham BSc (Hons) Checked by: Grant Kahil BEng (Hons) Overseen by: Martin Roberts I Eng, ACIWEM, MCIHT W:\Projects\6988 FRA, Compagnie Du Parc, 22 Bridge Street, Staines TW18 4TW\2.3 Job No: 6988 Specifications & Reports\F. Flood Risk Assessments Date: August 2017 1 Flood Risk Assessment: 20-22 Bridge Street, Staines 1 Introduction 1.1 GTA Civils Ltd. was appointed by its client, CDP Staines Ltd, to provide a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) report. This objective is to get the Environment Agency’s (EA) pre-application for the development of 20-22 Bridge Street, Staines TW18 4TW. This FRA has been written to satisfy the needs of the EA and the 2012 National Planning Policy Framework. 1.2 This report has been prepared for the Client in relation to the proposed development at the above address and no responsibility is accepted to any third party for all or part of this study in connection with this or any other development.
    [Show full text]
  • Surrey Future Congestion Programme 2014
    Congestion Programme 2014 i Foreword Surrey is renowned for its strong economy and high quality environment of open countryside and historic market towns. It is a great place in which to live, work and do business. However, congestion and past lack of investment in transport infrastructure are having a negative impact on Surrey’s economic competitiveness. Managing congestion on Surrey’s roads – which are some of the busiest in the country - is urgently needed to improve traffic flow and to avoid wasting time in traffic jams and losing business through delayed journeys. Surrey Future, which brings together local authorities and businesses to agree strategic infrastructure priorities for Surrey, have developed this Congestion Programme to help ensure Surrey’s economy remains strong and that planned growth set out in local plans is managed in a sustainable way. Building on the Surrey Transport Plan Congestion Strategy (2011), it sets out a strategic programme for tackling Surrey’s road congestion problems. We consulted with a wide range of residents, businesses and organisations during 2013 on a draft version of this Congestion Programme, and a number of changes have been made to this final version as a result of the comments we received. Those who responded broadly supported the aims and approach of the programme and we will work together with businesses, Local Enterprise Partnerships, new Local Transport Bodies and Government to help deliver our programme. We would like to thank all those who responded and contributed to making this programme as relevant and up-to-date as possible. Local Transport Strategies are now being developed for each district and borough and there will be consultations on these during 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Fourteenth Report of Session 2006–07
    House of Lords House of Commons Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments Fourteenth Report of Session 2006–07 Ordered by The House of Lords to be printed 28 March 2007 Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 28 March 2007 HL Paper 86 HC 82-xiv Published on 3 April 2007 by authority of the House of Lords and the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments Current membership House of Lords House of Commons Earl Attlee (Conservative) David Maclean MP (Conservative, Penrith and The Border) Lord Dykes (Liberal Democrat) (Chairman) Baroness Gale (Labour) Dr Roberta Blackman-Woods MP (Labour, City of Durham) Lord Gould of Brookwood (Labour) Mr Peter Bone MP (Conservative, Wellingborough) Lord Kimball (Conservative) Michael Jabez Foster MP (Labour, Hastings and Rye) Countess of Mar (Crossbench) Mr David Kidney MP (Labour, Stafford) Lord Walpole (Crossbench) Mr John MacDougall MP (Labour, Central Fife) David Simpson MP (Democratic Unionist, Upper Bann) Powers The full constitution and powers of the Committee are set out in House of Commons Standing Order No. 151 and House of Lords Standing Order No. 74, available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk/jcsi. Remit The Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments (JCSI) is appointed to consider statutory instruments made in exercise of powers granted by Act of Parliament. Instruments not laid before Parliament are included within the Committee's remit; but local instruments and instruments made by devolved administrations are not considered by JCSI unless they are required to be laid before Parliament. The role of the JCSI, whose membership is drawn from both Houses of Parliament, is to assess the technical qualities of each instrument that falls within its remit and to decide whether to draw the special attention of each House to any instrument on one or more of the following grounds: i.
    [Show full text]
  • Surrey Hills Aonb Areas of Search
    CONFIDENTIAL SURREY COUNTY COUNCIL LCA PHASE 2 SURREY HILLS AONB AREAS OF SEARCH NATURAL BEAUTY EVALUATION by Hankinson Duckett Associates HDA ref: 595.1 October 2013 hankinson duckett associates t 01491 838175 f 01491 838997 e [email protected] w www.hda-enviro.co.uk The Stables, Howbery Park, Benson Lane, Wallingford, Oxfordshire, OX10 8BA Hankinson Duckett Associates Limited Registered in England & Wales 3462810 Registered Office: The Stables, Howbery Park, Benson Lane, Wallingford, OX10 8BA CONTENTS Page 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Assessment Background ............................................................................................................. 1 Table 1: LCA Landscape Types and Character Areas ...................................................................................... 2 3 Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 5 4 Guidance ....................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: Natural England Guidance Factors and Sub-factors ........................................................................... 6 4.5 Application of the Guidance ............................................................................................................................. 10 5 The Surrey Hills Landscape
    [Show full text]
  • South Colne Sub-Area 3
    SOUTH COLNE DETAILED STRATEGIES SUB-AREA 3 South Colne character South Colne is characterised by flatter topography as the River Colne approaches its confluence with the Thames. Braided watercourses and flood meadows typify the landscape, which is dominated in aerial views by a series of large reservoirs, the product of historic gravel extraction industry in the area. The South West London Reservoirs are internationally significant for the populations of overwintering birds they support, some from as far afield as the Arctic. This area also includes Heathrow airport and the extensive associated transport infrastructure. In close proximity to the airport lie some significant heritage assets including Harmondsworth Barn, the largest timber- framed building in England. © Brian Robert Marshall CC Andreas Trepte, www.photo-natur.net Harmondsworth Barn River Colne flowing through Staines Moor Lakes and reservoirs important for SOUTH COLNE overwintering wildfowl DETAILED SUB-AREA 3 STRATEGIES © Stefan Czapski The Causeway at Staines Reservoir Ankerwycke Priory - home to the Ankerwycke Colne Brook at Wraysbury - important for Yew wildlife Colne & Crane valleys green infrastructure strategy 51 South Colne area strategy overview The strategy for South Colne and Heathrow associated opportunities for education and is to improve and repair the landscape and interpretation and new viewpoints. connectivity for people and wildlife, conserve INTERWOVEN RIVERS and enhance valuable ecological habitats and Water and biodiversity enhancements should aim promote access for all to new and improved to restore floodplains and focus on the benefits of RECREATION landscape destinations. natural landscapes to contribute to natural flood LOCAL + GLOBAL management in this low lying landscape. The Roads and other major infrastructure in this area Duke of Northumberland’s River and Longford WATER SPORTS create particular severance and impair the River close to Heathrow could be enhanced TRANSFORM quality of the user experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Kentish Weald
    LITTLE CHART PLUCKLEY BRENCHLEY 1639 1626 240 ACRES (ADDITIONS OF /763,1767 680 ACRES 8 /798 OMITTED) APPLEDORE 1628 556 ACRES FIELD PATTERNS IN THE KENTISH WEALD UI LC u nmappad HORSMONDEN. NORTH LAMBERHURST AND WEST GOUDHURST 1675 1175 ACRES SUTTON VALENCE 119 ACRES c1650 WEST PECKHAM &HADLOW 1621 c400 ACRES • F. II. 'educed from orivinals on va-i us scalP5( 7 k0. U 1I IP 3;17 1('r 2; U I2r/P 42*U T 1C/P I;U 27VP 1; 1 /7p T ) . mhe form-1 re re cc&— t'on of woodl and blockc ha c been sta dardised;the trees alotw the field marr'ns hie been exactly conieda-3 on the 7o-cc..onen mar ar mar1n'ts;(1) on Vh c. c'utton vPlence map is a divided fi cld cP11 (-1 in thP ace unt 'five pieces of 1Pnii. THE WALDEN LANDSCAPE IN THE EARLY SEVENTEENTH CENTERS AND ITS ANTECELENTS Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of London by John Louis Mnkk Gulley 1960 ABSTRACT This study attempts to describe the historical geography of a confined region, the Weald, before 1650 on the basis of factual research; it is also a methodological experiment, since the results are organised in a consistently retrospective sequence. After defining the region and surveying its regional geography at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the antecedents and origins of various elements in the landscape-woodlands, parks, settlement and field patterns, industry and towns - are sought by retrospective enquiry. At two stages in this sequence the regional geography at a particular period (the early fourteenth century, 1086) is , outlined, so that the interconnections between the different elements in the region should not be forgotten.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity Opportunity Areas: the Basis for Realising Surrey's Local
    Biodiversity Opportunity Areas: The basis for realising Surrey’s ecological network Surrey Nature Partnership September 2019 (revised) Investing in our County’s future Contents: 1. Background 1.1 Why Biodiversity Opportunity Areas? 1.2 What exactly is a Biodiversity Opportunity Area? 1.3 Biodiversity Opportunity Areas in the planning system 2. The BOA Policy Statements 3. Delivering Biodiversity 2020 - where & how will it happen? 3.1 Some case-studies 3.1.1 Floodplain grazing-marsh in the River Wey catchment 3.1.2 Calcareous grassland restoration at Priest Hill, Epsom 3.1.3 Surrey’s heathlands 3.1.4 Priority habitat creation in the Holmesdale Valley 3.1.5 Wetland creation at Molesey Reservoirs 3.2 Summary of possible delivery mechanisms 4. References Figure 1: Surrey Biodiversity Opportunity Areas Appendix 1: Biodiversity Opportunity Area Policy Statement format Appendix 2: Potential Priority habitat restoration and creation projects across Surrey (working list) Appendices 3-9: Policy Statements (separate documents) 3. Thames Valley Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (TV01-05) 4. Thames Basin Heaths Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (TBH01-07) 5. Thames Basin Lowlands Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (TBL01-04) 6. North Downs Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (ND01-08) 7. Wealden Greensands Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (WG01-13) 8. Low Weald Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (LW01-07) 9. River Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (R01-06) Appendix 10: BOA Objectives & Targets Summary (separate document) Written by: Mike Waite Chair, Biodiversity Working Group Biodiversity Opportunity Areas: The basis for realising Surrey’s ecological network, Sept 2019 (revised) 2 1. Background 1.1 Why Biodiversity Opportunity Areas? The concept of Biodiversity Opportunity Areas (BOAs) has been in development in Surrey since 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Kittiwake Black-Headed Gull
    Kittiwake International threshold: 20,000** Rissa tridactyla Great Britain threshold: ? † † All-Ireland threshold: ? GB max: 1,394 Oct NI max: 84 Sep During WeBS counts, Kittiwakes were It is important to note that because a recorded at most of the traditional sites few key WeBS sites are near breeding during 2008/09. The peak monthly total of colonies it is likely that breeding success 1,394 birds in October is very low compared may significantly affect WeBS counts at to recent years. The highest counts these sites. Nevertheless, low numbers received were from Arran (800, October) recorded through WeBS may be associated and Dungeness & Rye Bay (500, January) with both the declining UK breeding but, relatively, few were reported from population and recent abysmal productivity Loch Strathbeg where the largest numbers (JNCC 2009). All records in Northern Ireland have frequently been seen in the past. were from Belfast Lough. 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 Mon Mean Sites with mean peak counts of 200 or more birds in Great Britain † Loch of Strathbeg 152 1,130 3,282 785 37 Jul 1,077 Arran 340 701 400 1,000 800 Oct 648 Tay Estuary (690) (740) (190) 300 (17) Aug 577 Dungeness and Rye Bay 500 Jan 500 Beadnell to Seahouses 140 512 850 (460) 200 Apr 432 Durham Coast 279 250 (363) (71) (225) Apr 297 Forth Estuary 170 (276) (379) (127) (334) Oct 290 Otter Estuary to Kingsbridge Estuary 250 250 Winterfield to Catcraig 285 430 3 Sep 239 Glyne Gap 19 457 (233) (78) Dec 238 Dee Estuary (Scotland) 161 191 175 458 183 Sep 234 Tweed Estuary 114 340 410
    [Show full text]