Allerdale Borough Council 2010 SFRA Update

Volume 2

Final Report

January 2011

Allerdale Borough Council Allerdale House Workington Cumbria CA14 3YJ

JBA Office

JBA Consulting The Brew House Wilderspool Park Greenall's Avenue Warrington WA4 6HL JBA Project Manager

Chris Smith Revision History

Revision Ref / Date Issued Amendments Issued to Version 1.0 Draft Report Allerdale BC and EA Final report. Version 2.0 Updated following EA and Allerdale BC and EA ABC reviews

Contract

This report describes work commissioned by Steve Robinson, on behalf of Allerdale Borough Council, by an email dated 26/08/10. Allerdale Borough Council’s representative for the contract was Steve Robinson. Sam Wingfield and Chris Smith of JBA Consulting carried out this work. Prepared by ...... Samuel Wingfield BSc MRes Analyst

Prepared by ...... Chris Isherwood BSc MSc DipWEM Analyst Purpose

This document has been prepared as a final report for Allerdale Borough. JBA Consulting accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the Client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared. JBA Consulting has no liability regarding the use of this report except to Allerdale Borough Council.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx i

514g

A printed copy of the main text in this document will result in a carbon footprint of 404g if 100% post-consumer recycled paper is used and 514g if primary-source paper is used. These figures assume the report is printed in black and white on A4 paper and in duplex. JBA is a carbon neutral company and the carbon emissions from our activities are offset.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx ii

Executive Summary

2010 Allerdale SFRA In 2006 JBA Consulting were commissioned by Allerdale BC to undertake a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) for the Allerdale area, this was completed in 2007. The purpose of this assessment was to identify the strategic flood risk constraints to the area. This report is an update to the 2007 SFRA. For this update, the SFRA has been broken down in to two volumes. Volume 1 covers the more general policy and guidance information that requires updating. It includes updates to the planning framework, flood risk policy, SFRA methodology and strategic guidance for developers. Volume 1 also includes specific flood risk policy ideas for areas at a high risk of flooding. This volume (Volume 2) contains flood risk information specific to Allerdale. It includes a review of the November 2009 flood event, updates to the Flood Zones, production of a Flood Zone 3b for the Derwent and the production of new surface water and Flood Zone mapping. The impact of the new Flood Zones on Allerdale’s proposed future development allocations along the Derwent has been assessed. All of the allocations have been initially assessed within the Sequential Test Spreadsheet. Surface water / local drainage flooding information has been collected and displayed in figures that show the main surface water flood risk locations. These maps have also been used in the Sequential Test spreadsheet to show the allocations that may have surface water flooding issues.

Main Findings During the November 2009 flood event, an intense, prolonged rain storm lead to high river flows and flooding problems which were exacerbated by the very wet ground conditions. The rainfall totals and river flows were the highest on record in the Derwent catchment. The worst hit areas were affected by flooding from the Rivers Derwent & Cocker. Cockermouth was impacted the most, but flood damage also occurred in Keswick and Workington. Following this flood event, some updates to the Flood Zones have been made along with a hydrology study by the Environment Agency. This work will eventually lead to full flood mapping updates along the River Derwent. The hydrology study indicates that Flood Zones 3a (1 in 100 year fluvial flood event) and 3b (1 in 20 year fluvial flood event) will increase in extent. The latest information available has been used to assess flood risk to Allerdale’s proposed development allocations. Some sites may need to be removed or a more detailed study undertaken as a result of these updates, while others are shown to be at a reduced risk of flooding. Recommendations have been made on how to take these sites forward. Local drainage flooding information and the Environment Agency’s Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding maps have been collected. This information has been used to identify the main surface water hot spot locations which will be taken forward in the Cumbria SWMP. These are: • Workington • Flimby • Maryport • Cockermouth • Keswick • Wigton The Sequential Test spreadsheet also shows that a number of proposed development allocations are vulnerable to surface water flooding.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx iii

Recommendations The policy ideas produced in Volume 1 should be used to produce specific policies for the areas at high risk of flooding in Allerdale. These policies should be produced in consultation with the Environment Agency, in order to get an agreement before being submitted in the Core Strategy. Volume 1 of this SFRA update also provides guidance for developers and planners with regards to development and flood risk. This should be referred to and provided to developers where appropriate. The Sequential Test spreadsheet should be used to complement the Sequential Test along with the updated guidance produced for this SFRA. The evidence for the completion of the Sequential Test should be recorded and submitted as part of the Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Strategy. The recommendations provided in Table 7 (including the development sites at risk near to Cockermouth) should be reviewed. If any of these sites are essential to the Core Strategy, then a more detailed assessment (Level 2 SFRA) may be required. The Sequential Test spreadsheet should also be used to highlight allocations where surface water flooding may be an issue. Once the full flood mapping for the Derwent has been undertaken, the existing and any additional future development allocations should be reviewed to ensure they are not at risk of flooding and can be allocated in the Core Strategy. The Cumbria Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) is underway. The areas at greatest risk of surface water flooding will be taken forward to an ‘intermediate assessment’ and some of these will then be taken forward into the options appraisal stage. This will not pick up all of the surface water / local drainage issues. Allerdale BC should maintain their Making Space for Water (MSFW) group hotspots list and continue to tackle to local flood risk issues. Some of these smaller flood risk locations may be picked up by the Cumbria SWMP ‘quick wins’ option or registered on the SWMP Action Plan.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx iv

Contents

Executive Summary ...... iii 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1 SFRA Update ...... 1 1.2 Study Area ...... 1 1.3 Flood Risk in Allerdale ...... 2 2. Review of November 2009 Flood Event ...... 6 2.1 Summary 2009 flood event ...... 6 2.2 Keswick ...... 10 2.3 Cockermouth ...... 15 2.4 Workington ...... 17 3. Latest Flood Zones ...... 20 3.1 Introduction ...... 20 3.2 Changes to the Flood Zones ...... 20 4. New Flood Zones and future development ...... 27 4.1 Introduction ...... 27 4.2 Allocations at risk of flooding in Cockermouth ...... 27 4.3 Allocations at risk of flooding in Workington ...... 29 4.4 Sequential Test spreadsheet ...... 30 5. Surface Water Flooding and CDAs ...... 35 5.1 Introduction ...... 35 5.2 Data provided ...... 36 5.3 Critical Drainage Areas ...... 39 5.4 Allocations with surface water issues ...... 42 5.5 Suitability for SUDs ...... 43 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 45 6.1 2010 SFRA Update ...... 45 6.2 Recommendations ...... 45 Appendices...... I A. Figures ...... I B. Sequential Test Spreadsheets ...... IV C. 2007 SFRA Site Assessments ...... V D. Glossary ...... XXXVIII References...... XLIII

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx v

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Study area and Main Rivers ...... 2 Figure 2 – 72 hour rainfall totals in Cumbria, 17th to the 20th November 2009 ...... 7 Figure 3 – Cumbria rainfall totals from 17th to the 20th November 2009 ...... 7 Figure 4 - Spatial distribution of 24-hour event rainfall during the November 2009 event ...... 8 Figure 5 – Return period of November 2009 event rainfall at raingauge sites ...... 9 Figure 6 – Flooding in Keswick following the November 2009 event ...... 11 Figure 7 – Floodwater seeping through the River Greta floodwall, November 2009 ...... 12 Figure 8 – Resulting improvements being made to the River Greta floodwall ...... 12 Figure 9 – Damage to properties on the River Greta following the November 2009 flood event ...... 13 Figure 10 – Flood level in Cockermouth high street and the flooding at night ...... 16 Figure 11 – Construction of new flood defences on the River Cocker in Cockermouth ...... 17 Figure 12 – The collapsed Northside (Navvies) footbridge in Workington ...... 18 Figure 13 – The Barker Crossing, pedestrian footbridge ...... 19 Figure 14 – Comparison of version 3.1 and version 4 of the Flood Zones ...... 22 Figure 15 – Comparison of version 3.1 and version 4 of the Flood Zones ...... 23 Figure 16 - Comparison of flows from the three different studies d/s of Cocker/Derwent Confluence ...... 25 Figure 17 - Comparison of flows from the three different studies at Camerton Gauging station ...... 25 Figure 18 - The latest Flood Zones and the proposed development sites in Cockermouth ...... 28 Figure 19 - The November 2009 flood event outline and the proposed development allocations ...... 29 Figure 20 -The latest Flood Zones and the proposed development sites in Workington ...... 30 Figure 21 – Flow chart for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet ...... 32 Figure 22 – Indicative suitability for SUDS in Allerdale based on soil types ...... 44 List of Tables

Table 1 – Main towns in the study area and their population (2001 Census data) ...... 1 Table 2 – Recorded flood events in Cockermouth ...... 4 Table 3 – Fluvial flood risk for key communities ...... 4 Table 4 - Return period river flows for the November 2009 flood...... 10 Table 5 – Catchment sizes and peak flows ...... 13 Table 6 - Hydrology comparisons on the River Derwent and Cocker in

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx vi

Cockermouth and Workington ...... 24 Table 7 – Colour codes for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet ...... 32 Table 8 – Colour codes for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet ...... 33 Table 9 – Colour codes for the allocations and the ASSWF maps ...... 42

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx vii

Abbreviations

ABD Areas Benefiting from Defences AEP Annual Exceedance Probability CFMP Catchment Flood Management Plans CLG Communities and Local Government COW Critical Ordinary Watercourse CS Core Strategy DPDs Development Plan Documents EA Environment Agency EU European Union FAS Flood Alleviation Schemes FEH Flood Estimation Handbook FCERM Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management FRA Flood Risk Assessment FRM Flood Risk Management IDB Internal Drainage Board IDD Internal Drainage District IFM Indicative Floodplain Map LDDs Local Development Documents LDF Local Development Framework LPAs Local Planning Authorities NFCDD National Fluvial and Coastal Defence Database NPD National Property Dataset NWL Northumbrian Water Ltd PPG Planning Policy Guidance PPS Planning Policy Statement RBD River Basin District RBMP River Basin Management Plan RFRA Regional Flood Risk Assessment RPB Regional Planning Bodies RPG Regional Planning Guidance RSS Regional Spatial Strategy RVFD Receptors Vulnerable to Flooding Database SA Sustainability Appraisal SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SFRA Strategic Flood Risk Assessment SMP Shoreline Management Plans SoP Standard of Protection SPD Supplementary Planning Document SuDS Sustainable (Urban) Drainage Systems SWMP Surface Water Management Plan UDP Unitary Development Plan WCS Water Cycle Study

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx viii

1. Introduction

1.1 SFRA Update In March 2006 JBA Consulting was commissioned by Allerdale Borough Council (BC) to undertake a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) for the Allerdale area, excluding the Lake District National Park. The purpose of this assessment was to identify the strategic flood risk constraints to the area. JBA have now been commissioned to update the SFRA following recent flooding events in Allerdale BC and developments in flood risk management policy. For this update, the SFRA has been broken down in to two volumes. Volume 1 covers the more general information that requires updating. This includes SFRAs and planning policy, (including completion of the Sequential and Exception Tests), guidance on how to use the SFRA and the methodology. The original text from 2007 SFRA has been updated to reflect policy and guidance changes. This volume (Volume 2) includes a review of the November 2009 flood event and the impact on the Flood Zones and development planning. This volume also revisits the assessment of Allerdale’s development allocations in relation to the latest Environment Agency Flood Zones.

1.2 Study Area This study comprises the local authority area of Allerdale Borough Council, excluding the part of Allerdale within the Lake District National Park. This part of Allerdale covers an area of 750km² and has a population of approximately 84,500 (2001 census). The main towns and their populations are shown in Table 1. Table 1 – Main towns in the study area and their population (2001 Census data) Town Population Workington 19,884 Maryport 11,275 Cockermouth 7,877 Wigton 5,360 Silloth 3,305 Aspatria 3,266

The main rivers in the District include the Derwent, Cocker, Marron, Ellen, Waver and Wampool. These rivers generally flow from the Lake District fells towards the Irish Sea as they pass through the study area. The study area is shown in Figure 1.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 1

Figure 1 – Study area and Main Rivers

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2010

1.3 Flood Risk in Allerdale The Environment Agency has carried out Catchment Flood Management Plans (CFMP) for all areas in England. Nearly all of Allerdale is covered by the River Derwent CFMP. Some of the information from the Derwent CFMP is presented below discussing fluvial flood risks in Allerdale. Updates to the original 2007 SFRA flood history section have been updated following the recent flooding events. However, a full detailed review of the November 2009 flood event can be found in Chapter 2. 1.3.1 History of flooding Keswick, Cockermouth & Workington (the principal towns in the River Derwent catchment) have developed on the natural floodplains of the Rivers Greta, Derwent and Cocker and for this reason the towns have had a long history of flooding. Recorded historic floods have tended to be those on the River Derwent, probably because the towns along it sustain the greatest flood damage. Newspaper reports of flooding over the last 250 years point to a long history of flooding in the Derwent catchment. Historical analysis carried out in 2000 suggests that the events of 1898, 1938, 1918 and 1932 may be considered the four largest events on record for the town of Cockermouth and in Keswick the

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 2

events of 1822, 1831, 1861 and 1985 are the largest1. The January 2005 flood event is believed to be the largest since gauging began in the early 1970s2. However, this has recently been surpassed by the November 2009 event.

January 2005 event In January 2005 Keswick and Cockermouth experienced an extreme flood event. The flood was due to heavy rainfall, with 180 mm recorded at Thirlmere in the preceeding two days. In Cockermouth around 150 properties were flooded during this event. The peak flow at Camerton gauging station (downstream of Cockermouth) was estimated at 290 m3/s, the largest in over 40 years of recorded data3. Flood damage was not limited to Keswick and Cockermouth; during the same period of bad weather the Ellen burst its banks causing flooding in Blennerhasset and Baggrow and parts of Wigton flooded from Wiza Beck. Other parts of Allerdale were hit by severe flooding during October 2005. During this event the areas of Bridgefoot and Branthwaite on the River Marron, Church Street in Workington and Lawson Street in Maryport were affected. Again the flood was due to heavy rainfall; in this case 90 mm was recorded at Honister within 24 hours.

October 2008 event Unlike the January 2005 flood, the October 2008 event occurred at night and for this reason there are no photographs to enable visualisation of its magnitude. Also unlike January 2005, there was no flooding in Keswick other than the ponding of surface water at the United Utilities’ Elliot Park pumping station. It would appear that the first place to flood was the A66 from Coledale Beck near Brathwaite village west of Keswick and from Tom Rudd Beck (at and near to Station Terrace in Embleton outside Cockermouth) sometime during the afternoon of the 23rd of October 2008. There was also flooding of properties from the River Cocker near Low Lorton Bridge, several miles south of Cockermouth on the same day (although the precise timing is unknown). In Cockermouth itself, although levels in the Rivers Derwent and Cocker were rising, flooding did not occur until a day later on the 25th. Anecdotal information suggests that flooding started in Cockermouth during the early evening of the 25th of October 2008 in The Gote (Goat) area of the town. Flooding of the town centre itself did not start until approximately 23:00 hours with the first defence to overtop being the grass embankment behind Graves Mill, resulting in flooding of Waterloo Street. Meanwhile the properties in the Low Lorton Bridge area flooded for the second time in as many days. A river gauge in the River Derwent at Harris (Foot) Bridge indicates that the event reached its peak in Cockermouth approximately 4 hours later at 03:30 in the morning of 26 October 2008.

Summary Table 2 below lists key floods on the gauged and ungauged record at Cockermouth (prior to the November 2009 flood event which would come top). As information on the historic levels reached was not available, it proved impractical to ascribe magnitudes to the floods. Nevertheless, from descriptions in the records of the areas of the towns flooded, it was possible to make a judgement as to event severity. This allowed the floods to be given the approximate rankings listed in Table 3. However, this analysis completed for the 2007 SFRA does not take into account the 2008 and 2009 flood events. The November 2009 event is believed to be the worst event on record and approximately a 1 in 600 year event in Cockermouth and Workington. It is difficult to say whether flooding caused by insufficient sewer capacity and poor drainage systems (as opposed to rivers) has become worse as development has increased, but

1 The Environment Agency - Circular 30/92 Development and Flood Risk Section 105 Surveys. River Derwent Catchment Final Modelling Report Volume 2 Hydrological Assessment. JBA Consulting (December 2000). 2 The Environment Agency – Keswick Post January 2005 Flood Event Modelling Work. Hydraulic Modelling. Final Report. JBA Consulting (September 2005). 3 Allerdale borough Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment, October 2007

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 3

planning policy is now heavily weighted against development which will cause or worsen flooding in any areas. The financial consequences of flooding are also more severe for most properties now than historically because of the greater value of the buildings and their contents. The average insurance claim for domestic flooding is now between £15,000 and £30,000 (Association of British Insurers). Table 2 – Recorded flood events in Cockermouth Cockermouth Event Rank1 Historic Record Nov 1898 1 Jul 1938 2 Oct 1918 3 Dec 1932 4 Feb 1852 5 Gauged Record Jan 2005 7 Oct 1977 8 Jan 1995 9 Oct 1968 10 Dec 2003 11 1 An event in Nov 1761 ranks number 6

The highest concentration of flood risk to property today is at Keswick and Cockermouth. Other towns in the area may also be at risk (Wigton, Workington, Maryport) but the numbers of properties involved is smaller. Floods can also pose a risk to life. In an area where large numbers of people are enjoying the outdoors this is a particular issue. Campers and countryside users are therefore potentially at risk. Flood risk in Allerdale is managed by a combination of: • Flood defences and channel improvements; • A programme of maintenance for key flood protection infrastructure; • A flood warning system (for Cockermouth and tidal areas); • Operational plans to be put into effect during a flood event.

1.3.2 Consequences of flooding The flood risk to communities within the SFRA area is summarised in Table 3 below. There are significant uncertainties in some of the data presented so caution is therefore needed when drawing conclusions about the results. The flood risk in Cockermouth and Wigton has the potential to affect the greatest number of properties and cause the most damage. Flooding at areas such as Bridgefoot and Ullock where rapid runoff leads to a fast rate of rise of floodwater and high velocities may cause the greatest risk to life. These situations can only worsen with the increases in flow predicted for climate change. Table 3 – Fluvial flood risk for key communities Community Primary Source Risk to Properties Current Social vulnerability, of flooding people at risk economic Score damages, £000 2 3 4 5 Cockermouth Derwent/ Cocker HIGH 161 273 13 12 1 Ullock Marron MEDIUM 5 33 1 Bridgefoot Marron/ Lostrigg HIGH 8 86 1 Beck Workington Derwent LOW 8 53 3 29 37 2 Blennerhasset Ellen MEDIUM 15 131 1 1 Maryport Ellen LOW 69 132 1 4 Abbeytown Waver/ Stank LOW 8 23* 2 Beck Waverbridge Waver LOW 10 29* 2 Kirkbride Wampool/ Monk’s LOW 25 36 2 1

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 4

Community Primary Source Risk to Properties Current Social vulnerability, of flooding people at risk economic Score damages, £000 2 3 4 5 Dyke Wigton Wiza Beck/ Speet MEDIUM 147 686 1 2 2 1 Gill Westnewton Westnewton LOW 19 55* 1 Beck River Derwent CFMP Scoping Report

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 5

2. Review of November 2009 Flood Event

One of the requirements of the SFRA update is to review the flood event that affected Allerdale in November 2009. This was the worst flooding event on record in the Derwent catchment and caused widespread flooding and damage in Keswick, Cockermouth and Workington. The information gathered from this flood event is likely to influence development planning as the Environment Agency’s Flood Zones will be updated following analysis of the new data. New flood mapping will eventually be undertaken by the Environment Agency on the Derwent. Chapter 4 reviews the potential impact on the Flood Zones as a result of this extreme flood event and what this could mean for future development in Allerdale. The nature and extent of the flooding will also influence what development should be approved in these areas in the future. As large parts of old and established towns are at risk of flooding, a balance needs to be made between the high level of flood risk and maintaining these communities. Ultimately, flood risk policies will need to be developed for the new Local development Framework (LDF) that are unique to Allerdale BC. The current flood risk policies and ideas for future policies are discussed in Chapter 2 of Volume 1. This chapter reviews the nature of the November 2009 event in the Derwent catchment and the impact on the main communities affected. T he current and future improvements are also summarised.

2.1 Summary 2009 flood event 2.1.1 Weather system The Met Office states that between Wednesday 18th and Friday 20th of November 2009 a warm, moist south-westerly airstream was affecting the UK associated with a very deep Atlantic depression tracking slowly north-eastwards between Scotland and Iceland. A weather front within this airstream became stationary over Cumbria and Northern Ireland. Strong south westerly winds, laden with moisture from the Atlantic, fed the front causing rainfall which was further enhanced by the mountainous terrain of the Lake District and brought with it exceptionally prolonged and heavy rainfall. This feature persisted across northern England for around 36 hours. The result was near continuous rainfall over a period of 29 hours. Some areas of high ground received more than 400 mm of rainfall in a 72-hour period, and Seathwaite, Cumbria, recorded 316 mm of rainfall within 24 hours (a UK record for any 24-hour period). Figures 2 and 3 from the Met Office website shows the 72 hour rainfall totals for Cumbria.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 6

th th Figure 2 – 72 hour rainfall totals in Cumbria, 17th to the 20th November 2009 Figure 3 – Cumbria rainfall totals from 17 to the 20 November 2009

Crown Copyright. Extracted from the Met Office website Crown Copyright. Extracted from the Met Office website

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 7

2.1.2 Rainfall Data collection was followed by analysis of the rainfall that caused the November 2009 flood event. Although the River Derwent catchment has benefited from many flood hydrology studies in the past, these preceded the November 2009 floods. In July 2010, JBA Consulting completed a study to review the November 2009 and event calculate new hydrology estimates4. The outputs of this study include updated river flows for a number of different return periods. These new flow estimates will eventually be put into a river model and new flood extents can then be produced. A comparison of the old and new hydrology estimates can be found in section 4.2.2. The rainfall distribution of the November 2009 event can be seen in Figure 4 below (extracted from the JBA 2010 report).

Figure 4 - Spatial distribution of 24-hour event rainfall during the November 2009 event

Extracted from the JBA July 2010 report

Following the analysis, Figure 5 (from the JBA July 2010 study) shows the return periods for the 24 hour rainfall event at the rainfall gauge sites in the Derwent catchment. The November 2009 storm event was highest at the southern edge of the catchment, i.e. in the headwaters of both the Rivers Derwent & Cocker. The majority of the raingauges in general (and the Seathwaite Farm, Honister and High Snab Farm raingauges in particular) consistently registered record breaking rainfall totals for all the storm durations considered in the JBA July 2010 study.

4 Review of November 2009 Flooding in Cumbria (River Derwent Catchment), Event Analysis Report, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, July 2010

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 8

Figure 5 – Return period of November 2009 event rainfall at raingauge sites

Extracted from the JBA July 2010 report

2.1.3 Flooding The associated high river flows and flooding problems were exacerbated by the very wet ground conditions. Cumbria had already received close to the whole month November average rainfall before this event occurred. It had been raining almost non stop throughout October and with the soils at or near to saturation, runoff rates would have been increased beyond those already normally experienced in this catchment. The worst hit areas were affected by flooding from the Rivers Derwent & Cocker, draining an area of the southern fells and flowing through Borrowdale (the River Derwent via the Derwent Water and Bassenthwaite lakes and the River Cocker via the Buttermere, Crummock Water and Loweswater lakes) past Cockermouth to the coast in Workington. Fire crews were called in from surrounding towns to help pump water out of flooded homes and get trapped householders out. By the early hours flood water levels in Cockermouth and Keswick had stopped rising, allowing rescuers to reach people trapped in their homes. The perception immediately afterwards was of an event with close to a 0.1% chance of occurring in any one year, i.e. the 1 in 1,000-year return period, at least in the town of Cockermouth which suffered the most severe damage. Table 4 from the JBA July 2010 study shows the estimated return period frequency of the November 2009 event (for key locations in the River Derwent catchment).

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 9

Table 4 - Return period river flows for the November 2009 flood

Extracted from the JBA July 2010 report

In summary: • The flooding in Keswick is estimated as between a 1 in 60 to 1 in 70 year event. • Cockermouth, between a 1 in 600 to 1 in 700 year event • Workington, between a 1 in 500 to 1 in 600 year event

2.2 Keswick 2.2.1 Impacts Approximately 360 residential and 150 commercial properties were flooded during the November 2009 event in Keswick (estimated as a 1 in 70 year event). Homes in the lower lying part of Keswick were evacuated after the River Greta burst its banks, rising to about 1.5m higher than normal. In addition, Newlands Beck Bridge in Braithwaite, near Keswick collapsed. The flooding was due to unprecedented rainfall on already saturated ground causing a combination of fluvial (River Greta), pluvial and sewer flooding. Figure 6 below shows the extent of the flooding in Keswick following the November 2009 flood event.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 10

Figure 6 – Flooding in Keswick following the November 2009 event

2.2.2 Threshold of flooding in Keswick The July 2010 JBA study produced hydraulic river models to estimate the standard of flood protection in Keswick. The estimated standard of flood protection along the River Greta in Keswick is variable but generally above the 1 in 50-year return period. However, there are locations where the estimate is as low as the 1 in 2 year event, but flooding in these areas is into open fields such as Fitz Park, the fields west of High Hill and Greta Park Rugby Football Ground. Although a 1 in 10-year return period flood event would just overtop the Fitz Park embankment, there would be more significant spills over the embankment during the 1 in 25- year and larger floods, inundating the Great Crosthwaite and High Hill areas of Keswick. The threshold of overtopping of the High Hill floodwall is of the order of the 1 in 60-year return period equivalent and that of the left bank, i.e. into the Pencil Museum, is of the order of the 1 in 90-year return period. 2.2.3 Current and future improvements There is currently a combination of formal and informal flood defences along the River Greta in Keswick. The most recent flood alleviation scheme was built in 1989. Following the November 2009 flood event, a structural assessment was undertaken which found that sections of the flood wall needed strengthening. Figure 7 below shows flood water seeping through one of the flood defence walls during the November 2009 flood event. As a result, 200m of flood wall has been strengthened. The construction of these improvements can be seen in Figure 8. However, a full flood alleviation scheme is required for Keswick. The Environment Agency is undertaking a strategy which will decide on the preferred option for reducing flood risk to people and property in Keswick. The current preferred option is to raise the existing and construct new flood defences (embankments and walls). This option also involves flood resilience measures for selected properties. The approval of a scheme will be subject to national funding priorities.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 11

Figure 7 – Floodwater seeping through the River Greta floodwall, November 2009

Figure 8 – Resulting improvements being made to the River Greta floodwall

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 12

Figure 9 – Damage to properties on the River Greta following the November 2009 flood event

2.2.4 Thirlmere Reservoir One of the issues that came to light following the flood event was the influence of Thirlmere Reservoir on flooding in downstream Keswick. Thirlmere Reservoir (constructed in 1894) has a storage capacity of 42,000 million litres and is located above St John’s Beck. St John’s Beck converges with the River Greta before it enters Keswick. The River Greta converges with the River Derwent at Derwent Water. However, the St John’s Beck/ Thirmere catchment is not as large as the other catchments that contribute to flooding in Keswick, Cockermouth and Workington (see Table 5 below). Despite this, the peak flow on St John’s Beck during the November 2009 event was proportionally higher than the other contributing catchments (see Table 5). Table 5 – Catchment sizes and peak flows Watercourse/catchment Catchment Area (km2) November 2009 Peak Flow (m3/sec)5 St John’s Beck (d/s of Thirlmere) 42 155 River Greta (just u/s of Keswick 147 266

5 Review of November 2009 Flooding in Cumbria (River Derwent Catchment), Event Analysis Report, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, July 2010

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 13

River Derwent (u/s of Cockermouth) 363 378 Cocker Beck (u/s of Cockermouth) 116 201 River Derwent (just u/s of Workington) 662 700

The peak flow on St John’s Beck would be much greater if the reservoir and control structures were not there. This is because Thirlmere Reservoir attenuates flood flows into St John’s Beck and therefore also attenuates flows on the River Greta. This is not the primary purpose of the reservoir, which was constructed for water supply. However, according to United Utilities, for 70 to 75% of the time, there is enough ‘spare storage’ available in the reservoir to attenuate flood flows. In addition, United Utilities in collaboration with the Environment Agency have agreed to lower the reservoir at certain times to allow for more storage capacity. From the 2nd of September to the 19th of November 2009, United Utilities released 100 million litres of water per day to create additional flood storage capacity in the reservoir. However, from the 27th of October onwards United Utilities were unable to keep the reservoir low enough to provide additional flood storage capacity due to the very wet summer and wet weather from late October onwards. 56% of the total volume of the reservoir flowed into Thirlmere during first 19 days of November. 27% of the total the volume of reservoir flowed in Thirlmere in 24 hours on 19 November (10,000 Ml/d / 116 cumecs). This meant that it was not possible to use Thirlmere Reservoir for additional attenuation during the November 2009 event. Following November 2009 floods, Unitied Utilities has been working with Keswick Flood Action Group (KFAG) and the Environment Agency to assess what further measures could be taken at Thirlmere. United Utilities face a conflict between providing water (the primary purpose of the reservoir) and providing flood storage (a secondary function). If the reservoir is lowered too much, then supply would be threatened. This was highlighted in summer 2010 where there were drought and flood warnings at the same time in Cumbria, with Thirlmere at critically low levels. However, trials are continuing on Thirlmere in collaboration with KFAG and the Environment Agency.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 14

Thirlmere Reservoir

2.3 Cockermouth 2.3.1 Impacts Cockermouth was impacted the most by the November 2009 flood event which is estimated at between a 1 in 600 and 1 in 700-year event. The River Cocker meets the River Derwent in Cockermoth and the combination of flooding from these two rivers affected 607 residential and 199 commercial properties along with the loss of road and foot bridges. Much of central Cockermouth was flooded leaving huge amounts of destruction, and most of the shops, restaurants and pubs in the town completely ruined. The town centre was under two metres or more of floodwater with fast flowing torrents of water coming from the Cocker, through the side streets and down the main street into the Derwent. This type of flooding is particularly hazardous for people. Figure 10 shows the flood level in Cokermouth High Street.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 15

Figure 10 – Flood level in Cockermouth high street and the flooding at night

2.3.2 Threshold of flooding in Cockermouth The July 2010 JBA study produced hydraulic river models to estimate the standard of protection in Cockermouth. As in Keswick, the standard of flood protection in Cockermouth is variable but generally above the 1 in 100-year return period flood. The exception is on the left bank of the Derwent/Cocker in the vicinity of the confluence of the two rivers (and one or two locations further downstream) and on the right bank of the River Derwent past The Gote (Goat) residential area. In these locations, the onset of flooding in Cockermouth town centre is approximately equivalent to the 1 in 20-year return period. In The Gote (Goat) area, the onset of flooding is approximately equivalent to 1 in 10-year return period. 2.3.3 Current and future improvements The January 2005 and October 2008 events caused flooding in Cockermouth which triggered inspections to the current flood defences. Just before the November 2009 event, engineers were on site assessing the deficiencies in existing defences. Some of the defences are privately owned and had not been sufficiently maintained. The Environment Agency was therefore proposing to carry out improvements to flood defences in Cockermouth before the flood event. The improvement and construction of new flood defences within Cockermouth is now underway. As the defences were designed before the November 2009 flood event, the design standard was set using superseded extreme river flow estimates. To take account of the November 2009 event, the design standard for the defences has been set at the 1 in 100- year event plus an addition 1m freeboard.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 16

Figure 11 – Construction of new flood defences on the River Cocker in Cockermouth

2.4 Workington 2.4.1 Impacts The greatest impact on Workington was the destruction and damage to bridges crossing the River Derwent. A police officer died after the A596 Northside Road Bridge (on which he was standing whilst re-directing traffic) collapsed. The Calva Bridge was reported on 22 November to have dropped by about 300mm and was closed. The Northside and Camerton footbridges also collapsed. Figure 12 shows the remains of the collapsed Northside (Navvies) footbridge. The Dock Bridge, which carries the railway line linking Workington was also damaged and closed. Further upstream, the Lorton Bridge near Cockermouth and Southwaite Footbridge (on the trackbed of the dismantled Cockermouth & Workington Railway) collapsed. In total, three bridges were destroyed and 20 were closed due to damage. 10 bridges are still closed as of October 2010. Across Cumbria 1600 bridges required damage inspections and 253 required repair or replacement. Within 24 hours of the flood event, all the bridges between Cockermouth and Workington were closed. This caused significant problems in the immediate and aftermath of the flood. The emergency response was hampered as the main routes across the Derwent being cut off. Workington was effectively cut in half as, at the peak, there was a 90 mile roundtrip to get from the north side to the south side of Workington. This damage caused a significant social impact. The north side of Workington is mainly a residential area and is relatively deprived. The south side of Workington contains the supermarkets, cash machines and health services. Access to these services was cut off to the many people who did not have cars. In addition to the bridge damages, the docks and the steelworks were badly damaged and at least one of the concrete trestles was washed away, dislodging the rails on the bridge. The

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 17

port of Workington was closed and it is estimated that £6.75m of damage was done here. 55 other properties were flooded in Workington and 30 were flooded in Barepot.

Figure 12 – The collapsed Northside (Navvies) footbridge in Workington

2.4.2 Current and future improvements Within a week, the army had built the Barker Crossing footbridge (named in memory of PC Bill Barker), this can be seen in Figure 13. Temporary bus links were put in place either side of the bridge. Within 6 weeks, a temporary railway station was built by Network Rail in north Workington to provide access to south Workington. A temporary road bridge is now in place (upstream of Northside Bridge). A permanent bridge should be complete by early 2011. Works are currently being undertaken to repair the Calva Bridge.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 18

Figure 13 – The Barker Crossing, pedestrian footbridge

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 19

3. Latest Flood Zones

3.1 Introduction The local planning authority (LPA) should review their future development allocations against the latest Environment Agency Flood Zones before submission within the Core Strategy. The three Flood Zones (2, 3a and 3b) represent areas that at risk of flooding from three different probabilities. PPS25 (government guidance on development and flood risk) states that different development types are appropriate in these zones (see Appendix A and B in Volume 1). The LPA should undertake the Sequential Test, and if appropriate, the Exception Test for all their future development plans. The Sequential and Exception Tests are described in Chapter 4 of Volume 1. Evidence for the completion of these tests should form part of the Sustainability Appraisal of Allerdale BC's Core Strategy. This is to ensure that future development takes full regard of flood risk. The Flood Zones are based on the latest available modelling data. As data improves and/or flood events occur, the Flood Zones are updated with the new and improved data. Since the 2007 SFRA, some new modelling and the November 2009 flood event has occurred on the River Derwent. This means that the Flood Zones on the River Derwent have changed. This chapter describes these changes. Although new updated Flood Zone information is available following the November 2009 flood event, full flood mapping updates have not yet been undertaken. A hydrology review was completed in July 20106, which will be used give an indication of the likely Flood Zone changes. The impact of the Flood Zone changes on potential future development in Workington and Cockermouth will be discussed. All potential future development allocations will initially be reviewed against the new (draft version 4) Flood Zones within the Sequential Test spreadsheet (see Chapter 4 and the Sequential Test tables in Appendix B).

3.2 Changes to the Flood Zones 3.2.1 Current changes The 2007 SFRA Flood Zones (version 3.1) for the River Derwent were based on several different modelling studies/techniques: • Flood Zone 2 is based on generalised modelling methods (JFLOW). • Flood Zone 3 is base on a 1D hydraulic modelling completed by JBA in 20007. • Flood Zone 3b is also based on the 2000 flood study. The latest issue of the Flood Zone maps is version 3.17. Version 4 of the maps was released, but this was recalled. However, version 4 has been provided for the update of this SFRA as it contains the latest information. The conclusions in this report (which are based on this version 4 of the Flood Zones) should be treated as draft as they have not been officially released by the Environment Agency. Version 4 of the flood map: • Flood Zone 2 is partly based on the same generalised modelling and partly on historic flood event outlines (including the November 2009 event). • Flood Zone 3 is based on the 2000 modelling and updates from recent flood events (updates in Cockermouth made in 2006). Along the tidal extent of the River Derwent, updates have also been made, which make a significant difference to the Flood Zones in this area. This is because a combined tidal/fluvial

6 Review of November 2009 Flooding in Cumbria (River Derwent Catchment), Event Analysis Report, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, July 2010 7 Development and Flood Risk Section 105 Surveys, River Derwent Catchment Final Modelling Report, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, December 2000

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 20

event has been modelled and integrated into the Flood Zones. The previous version of the Flood Zones showed a step between the purely fluvial extent and the purely tidal extent. In addition to these updates on the River Derwent, flood mapping has been undertaken on Bitter Beck in Cockermouth in 2008 (Jacobs) and further improvement in 2010 (Capita).

Functional Floodplain (Flood Zone 3b) A number of different modelled flood outlines on the River Derwent and Cocker have been made available for this SFRA update. The 1 in 25/20-year event should represent Flood Zone 3b, the functional floodplain. The available 1 in 25 year modelled flood outline is based on the JBA 2000 modelling study. This flood outline was also used to produce Flood Zone 3b in the 2007 SFRA. However, updates to the hydrology on the Rivers Derwent and Cocker (JBA 2010 study) means that the 1 in 100-year event on the Derwent and 1 in 50-year event on the Cocker are more representative of the 1 in 20-year flood event, and should therefore be used for Flood Zone 3b. The reasons for this are explained in section 3.2.2. The new defences on the Derwent (Gote Road) and the defences on the River Cocker were taken into account when producing Flood Zone 3b, as areas protected by flood defences should not be included in Flood Zone 3b. This fluvial functional floodplain outline on the Derwent is continued into the tidally influenced part of the Derwent as fluvial flooding rather than tidal is influenced by floodplain development. A comparison of the 2007 and 2010 Flood Zones in Cockermouth and Workington can be seen in Figures 14 and 15 below. Full sized figures can be found in Appendix A Figures A1 to A11. In and around Cockermouth, Flood Zone 2 has increased since 2007 due to the introduction of the November 2009 flood event outline. Flood Zone 3 is slightly less in extent around Cockermouth due some modelling updates. However, Bitter Beck in Cockermouth now has modelled Flood Zones. The 2010 Flood Zone 3b is similar to the 2007 SFRA version on the Cocker, as the 1 in 25 year flood event stays in bank. However, on the Derwent, the 2010 version of Flood Zone 3b is greater due to the predicted increase in flood flows (see section 3.2.2). Flood Zone 3b is the only extent that has been represented by the new hydrology (flood flow) calculations. This increase in Flood Zone 3b is also represented just upstream of Workington. The big difference between the 2007 and 2010 Flood Zone 2 and 3 is due to the new combined tidal/fluvial modelling completed in this area. Flood Zone 2 and 3 show a reduced extent in the 2010 version.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 21

Figure 14 – Comparison of version 3.1 and version 4 of the Flood Zones 2007 (version 3.1) Flood Zones in Cockermouth 2010 (version 4) Flood Zones in Cockermouth

Flood Zone 3b Flood Zone 3 v4 Flood Zone 2 v4

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 22

Figure 15 – Comparison of version 3.1 and version 4 of the Flood Zones 2007 (version 3.1) Flood Zones in Workington 2010 (version 4) Flood Zones in Workington

Flood Zone 3b Flood Zone 3 v4 Flood Zone 2 v4

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 23

3.2.2 Future changes A review of the November 2009 flood event in Cumbria has been completed by the Environment Agency in July 20108. This study includes a review of the hydrology on the Derwent catchment. Hydrology refers the volume water that enters a river system. Estimates of the extreme hydraulic flow predictions for different return period events (e.g. 1 in 100-year event) need revising following the three significant flood events that have occurred on the River Derwent and Cocker in 2005, 2008 and 2009. A hydrology review was also completed by JBA after the 2005 flood event9. This hydrology was used to produce draft flood outlines for the River Derwent. However, this study has been superseded by the July 2010 study which predicts higher flows than both the 2000 and 2005 studies. Using the data collected from the November 2009 flood event, the JBA 2010 study has calculated flow predictions for return periods up to the 1 in 1000-year event. Table 6 and Figures 15 and 16 below compare the flow predictions from the three different studies. The Jul 2010 study uses the latest data and predicts flows significantly higher than both the 2000 and 2006 studies.

Table 6 - Hydrology comparisons on the River Derwent and Cocker in Cockermouth and Workington Study Location Return Period - 1 in xxx year event 2 5 10 25 30 50 75 100 200 1000 Peak flow (unit - m3/sec) JBA River Derwent. 157 179 195 217 221 233 243 249 266 2000 Downstream of the Cocker/Derwent JBA 158 178 191 207 210 232 245 255 confluence 2006 JBA 171 211 238 275 305 324 338 405 566 2010

JBA Camerton Gauging 192 221 243 268 274 285 294 311 318 2000 Station on the JBA Derwent near 197 222 239 259 262 290 306 319 345 2006 Workington JBA 204 257 296 355 406 439 465 520 767 2010

JBA River Cocker 57.9 77.7 89.7 106.4 109.9 120.3 129.1 135.6 2006 upstream of Derwent JBA confluence 64.4 86.8 102.5 123.7 140.2 150.2 157.5 175.5 262.4 2010

8 Review of November 2009 Flooding in Cumbria (River Derwent Catchment), Event Analysis Report, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, July 2010 9 Strategic Flood Risk Management Framework, River Derwent Model, Cockermouth Update, JBA Consulting / Environment Agency, September 2006

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 24

Figure 16 - Comparison of flows from the three different studies d/s of Cocker/Derwent Confluence C 5 /

W.! W.!

C C W.!

Figure 17 - Comparison of flows from the three different studies at Camerton Gauging station C 5 í W.! W.!

C C W.! w

For flood risk and development purposes, we are primarily concerned with the following return periods • 1 in 25-year event – used to produce Flood Zone 3b. • 1 in 100-year fluvial and 1 in 200-year tidal events used to produce Flood Zone 3. • 1 in 1000-year event – used to produce Flood Zone 2.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 25

Using Table 6, it can be concluded that the 1 in 25-year event (using the July 2010 data) is approximately equivalent to the 1 in 200-year event calculated in the 2000 and 2006 studies on the Derwent and the 1 in 50-year event on the Cocker. The 1 in 100 (River Derwent) and 1 in 50 (River Cocker) modelled flood extents can therefore be used as an interim 1 in 25- year event (functional floodplain). This extent has been used for Flood Zone 3b in this SFRA update (see section 3.2.1) The 2010 1 in 100-year and 1 in 1000-year flood flow events are significantly higher than the 2000 and 2006 flow estimates. However, there are no higher return period modelled flood extents to use as a representation of the JBA 2010 hydrology update. When the new July 2010 flow predictions from Table 6 are put into a hydraulic model, new flood extents can be produced, which are likely to show an increase in flood extent. However, the flood mapping part of the study has not yet been undertaken. When the flood mapping has been completed, the new extents will be integrated into the Environment Agency Flood Zones. In summary: • Version 4 of the Flood Zones = JBA 2000 hydrology using the S105 model (1 in 100- year event) and JFLOW (1 in 1000-year event). Updates have been made using flood event outlines (Including the November 2009 event). • New flood extents have not been produced using the JBA 2010 hydrology. The 2010 study predicts much higher flows than the 2000 and 2006 studies. • The 2010 1 in 25-year event is roughly equivalent to the 1 in 200-year event on the Derwent and 1 in 50-year even on the Cocker (2000 and 2006 studies). Modelled flood outlines exist for the 1 in 100-year event on the Derwent and the 1 in 50 on the Cocker (2000 hydrology). This can be used as an interim Flood Zone 3b. • New model runs using the July 2010 hydrology will be required to find out how the flood extents will increase for the 1 in 100 and 1 in 1000-year flood events (Flood Zones 3 and 2).

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 26

4. New Flood Zones and future development

4.1 Introduction The 2007 SFRA divided Allerdale BC into four catchment areas. All of Allerdale’s proposed future development allocations were assessed against the Environment Agency’s Flood Zones. Where a proposed future development fell within Flood Zone 2 or 3, more information was provided for that site e.g. soil type, other sources of flood risk, whether the Exception Test is applicable. All of these tables have been included in this 2010 SFRA update (see Appendix C). However, one of the purposes of this SFRA update is to assess the latest development allocations against the latest Flood Zones in Cockermouth and Workington. This is because the Flood Zones on the Derwent and Cocker have changed as a result of the flood events in 2005, 2008 and 2009 (see Chapter 3). Section 4.2 and 4.3 describes flood risk to the Allerdale’s proposed future development allocations in Cockermouth and Workington. Section 4.4 describes the initial assessment of all Allerdale’s allocations against the latest Flood Zones and ASSWF maps for use in the Sequential Test. Allerdale BC have provided the following allocations for this assessment: • 5 year housing land supply • Employment land • SHLAA sites The assessment of the allocations from the 2007 SFRA is included in Appendix C.

4.2 Allocations at risk of flooding in Cockermouth Within Cockermouth, three proposed future development allocations are shown to be within either Flood Zone 2 or Flood Zone 3. The Sequential Test (ST) should be undertaken for these sites. This should show that there are no other available sites (within the area of search) that are at a lower risk of flooding. If these sites remain following the application of the ST, the Exception Test should be undertaken as they are entirely within Flood Zone 2 (see section 4.4). This next section includes a short description on flood risk at these sites and the recommendations.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 27

Figure 18 - The latest Flood Zones and the proposed development sites in Cockermouth

Derwent Mills

Low Road

Ref:2560

Proposed development allocations Flood Zone 3b Flood Zone 3 v4

4.2.1 Low Road and Derwent Mills The Low Road and Derwent Mills sites are within Flood Zone 2. Both of these sites appear to be undeveloped open green space and have been allocated for employment use. Under PPS25, this type of development is appropriate within Flood Zone 3 once the Sequential Test has been passed. If there are any other appropriate sites available within Flood Zone 1 (in and around Cockermouth) it would be difficult for these sites to pass the Sequential Test. The Sequential Test should also identify any alternative brownfield sites within Flood Zone 2 which would be deemed more appropriate than these sites on open green land within Flood Zone 2. However, if no other sites are available and there are good reasons for employment land use here, then the sites can be allocated subject to a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA), which should include how the development will remain safe and appropriate mitigation measures. If these sites are allocated, the evidence and thought process for passing the Sequential Test should be recorded and submitted as part of the Sustainability Appraisal. An added issue with these sites is that they were flooded during the November 2009 flood event (see Figure 19). Flooding to these sites occurred due to overtopping of the flood defences on the Derwent. As explained in Chapter 3, the flood event in Cockermouth has been estimated as between a 1 in 500 and 1 in 600 year event (a very rare event). This is why the sites are still shown as being within Flood Zone 2 (and not Flood Zone 3). The current modelling shows that the 1 in 100 year flood event (Flood Zone 3) would not flood this area (see Figure 18). However, as these sites were flooded in 2009, the public perception of flood risk should be taken into account before allocating them.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 28

Figure 19 - The November 2009 flood event outline and the proposed development allocations

4.2.2 Site on Bitter Beck New modelling has been undertaken on Bitter Beck in Cockermouth (see section 3.2.1). As a result, Flood Zones have bee mapped for this watercourse. The 5 year supply site (reference: 2560) is shown to be at risk of flooding from this watercourse and it is within both Flood Zone 3 and 2. It is likely that part of this site is also within the functional floodplain (Flood Zone 3b), but modelling has not been produced to prove this. If this site is only within Flood Zone 3a, then the Sequential and Exception Test will need to be completed. This Exception Test should show that the site will be safe once developed and will not increase flood risk downstream. This will include the requirement for compensatory flood storage on site, which could become problematic due to the loss of developable area. It is recommended that this site is removed from the 5 year supply list.

4.3 Allocations at risk of flooding in Workington Within Workington, some of the proposed development allocations adjacent to the Derwent are at risk of flooding (see Figure 20). Parts of the sites are within Flood Zone 2, 3a and 3b. The flood risk originates from the Derwent and Mill Beck before it converges with the Derwent. The sites at risk are: • Stanley Street SHLAA (ref: AAWK05) – Flood Zone 2 and 3a • Church Street 5 year supply (ref: 1659) – Flood Zone 2 and 3a • Land at Dock Road employment land (ref: 2/154) – Flood Zone 3b

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 29

For the Stanley Street and Church Street allocations, the risk appears to be tidal. If flooding did occur, Mill Beck would back up during an extreme tidal event and overtop, flooding low lying parts of the sites. However, the November 2009 flood event outline shows part of Town Quay road near these sites did flood. This would indicate that there may be a risk of fluvial flooding, but only during a very extreme event. In Workington, the November 2009 flood is estimated as between a 1 in 500 and 1 in 600-year event. For the Dock Road site, the risk is combined tidal and fluvial from the River Derwent. An extreme tide event could propagate up the Derwent and overtop, flooding low lying parts of the site, or fluvial flood event could overtop the banks of the Derwent here. This site is also at risk from a combined tidal and fluvial flood event. Only small parts of the sites are at risk of flooding, so the yield could easily be achieved while still avoiding the area at risk. The allocations can therefore be allocated subject to a FRA. The 2007 Flood Zones covered large parts of this area. Due to a revision of the Flood Zones (version 4, see section 3.2 of this report), the extent of the Flood Zones has been reduced. This removes the flood risk constraint to redevelopment in this area.

Figure 20 -The latest Flood Zones and the proposed development sites in Workington

Proposed development allocations Flood Zone 3b Flood Zone 3 v4 Flood Zone 2 v4

Land at Dock Road

Stanley Street Ref:1659

4.4 Sequential Test spreadsheet This SFRA update should provide information that will enable Allerdale BC to carry out the Sequential Test as outlined in Annex D of PPS25. This SFRA has provided Allerdale BC with PPS25 Flood Zone classifications for all locations identified for development provided within this assessment. The Council will be required to prioritise the allocation of land for

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 30

development in ascending order from Flood Risk Zone 1 to 3, including the subdivisions of Flood Risk Zone 3, if necessary. The Environment Agency has statutory responsibility and must be consulted on all development applications allocated with medium and high risk zones, including those in areas with critical drainage problems and for any development on land exceeding 1 hectare outside flood risk areas. In these circumstances, the Environment Agency will require the Council to demonstrate that there are no reasonable alternatives, in lower flood risk categories, available for development. A Sequential Test spreadsheet has been produced showing the results of all allocations provided by Allerdale BC against PPS25 Flood Zones and as an extra layer of information against the ASSWF maps and historic flooding locations. Area (ha) and percentage cover of each Flood Zone and surface water flooding is provided. A screenshot of the spreadsheet is provided below. The full spreadsheet is included in Appendix B.

A step by step guide on how to complete the Sequential Test can be found in section 4.8 of Volume 1. In particular, Figure 6 in Volume 1 shows how the Sequential Test spreadsheet can be used for each proposed development allocation. This is copied below.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 31

Figure 21 – Flow chart for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet

Each allocation has been colour coded according to Table 7 below which also aligns with Figure 21.

Table 7 – Colour codes for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet Flood Zone 1 Low % Flood Zone 2/3 a and b Less than 20% High % Flood Zone 2/3a Greater than 20% High % flood Zone 3b Greater than 20%

Allerdale BC should use this information to carry out the first sieve of the Sequential Test, by identifying and removing those sites at greatest risk. Once a decision has been made by Allerdale BC on whether to remove or keep (due to wider social/economic reasons) those sites at higher risk, these sites should be brought forward to the Exception Test. This process should be recorded to ensure that there is an evidence base for replacing sites at a high risk of flooding with those that are at a lower risk. Or for keeping the sites and bringing them forward for Exception Testing. Once the sequential sieving process has been carried out, the Environment Agency will require the Council to demonstrate that there are no reasonable alternatives in lower flood risk categories available for development. The vulnerability of the remaining sites at risk should be considered and substituted with lower risk development (if possible) before any mitigation measures are considered.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 32

4.4.1 Site recommendations from the ST Spreadsheet Table 8 below identifies those sites that have a high Flood Zones 2/3 coverage and the sites within the functional floodplain. These have been taken from the Sequential Test spreadsheet (see Appendix B) and are the sites coloured red or purple. In figure 21, these are the sites that fall within the boxes to the right. These sites should either be avoided or (if they have strategic planning objectives) taken forward to the Exception Test (ET) and a more detailed study undertaken in a Level 2 SFRA. If the sites are small and not essential to the Core Strategy, they could be allocated and the more detailed assessment could be undertaken at the planning application stage (FRA). However, the future developer should be made aware that the site could still be objected to by the Environment Agency on flood risk grounds following a detailed FRA. Allerdale BC should be able to assess if the sites are important for the future sustainability of Allerdale BC. I.e., if the site were removed, it would impact on the Core Strategy. If this is the case, a detailed assessment should be undertaken before submission (Level 2 SFRA). If they are not essential, they should be avoided, or allocated subject to an FRA (due to the size of the site). Table 8 provides recommendations for these sites before submission within the Core Strategy. Table 8 – Colour codes for the Sequential Test Spreadsheet Reference Site name Comments EXRU159 Land at Small site and the fluvial FZ modelling is course. Greenfield, so Branthwaite it will be difficult to allocate in the ST (other flood risk brownfield sites should be sought first). Suggest removing this site or, if it is an essential site, a more detailed study should be undertaken to see if it would pass the ET. AARU53 Land adjacent to Small site, the fluvial FZ modelling is course. Greenfield, so it Millcroft will be difficult to allocate in the ST. Suggest removing or a more detailed study to see if it would pass the ET if it is an essential site. EXRU186 Land at Larger site, the fluvial (and possibly tidal) FZ modelling is Abbeytown course. Greenfield so it will be difficult to allocate in the ST. Suggest removing or a more detailed study to see if it would pass the ET if it is an essential site. AAWK05 Site between Town Small site, the fluvial FZ modelling is course (Derwent/adjacent Quay & Stanley watercourse). Brownfield so should be able to allocate if the Street risk is manageable. Allocate and assess risk at FRA stage as it is only a small site. EXWG27 Park Square Wigton, Flosh Beck, modelling is suspect. It could be functional floodplain on greenfield land which would make it very difficult to allocate. More detailed study may show the risk is not great which would allow it to be allocated. Suggest remove or more detailed study to see if it can be allocated. AASL16 Land off Tidal/fluvial FZ is course. More detailed modelling may show Skinburness Road the site is not at risk. Greenfield, so difficult to justify. Remove or more detailed study to show the site is not at risk or at low risk. 2/022 GLASSON Small site, the fluvial FZ modelling is course. Brownfield so INDUSTRIAL should be able to allocate if the risk is manageable. Allocate ESTATE and assess risk at FRA stage as it is only a small site. MARYPORT 2/102 DERWENT MILLS Larger site, flooded during November 2009 flood from Derwent. COCKERMOUTH Risk perceived to be between 1 in 100 and 1 in 1000 year event. Greenfield but in FZ2. Remove or more detailed study (Exception Test). 2/077 LOW ROAD Flooded during November 2009 flood from Derwent. Risk COCKERMOUTH perceived to be between 1 in 100 and 1 in 1000 year event. Brownfield so easier to allocate. Remove or more detailed study (Exception Test). 2/123 EAST Larger site. Tidal/fluvial FZ modelling is course. Greenfield so

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 33

Reference Site name Comments CAUSEWAYHEAD difficult to allocate under the ST. Remove or more detailed SILLOTH study (ET). SLD1 Acre Bank Close Course tidal FZ but benefitting from flood defences. Greenfield constraint. Remove or more detailed assessment (possibly breach analysis). 1659 2.2009/0040 Small site. Allocate as not essential to housing numbers. Detailed FRA should assess risk (risk of it being rejected at planning application stage though). 2336 2/2009/0250 Small site. Allocate as not essential to housing numbers. Detailed FRA should assess risk (risk of it being rejected at planning application stage though). 2367 2/2006/0333 Small site, protected by tidal flood defences. Detailed FRA including breach assessment should assess the risk (risk of it being rejected at planning application stage though). 2560 2/2009/0633 Small site at risk from Bitter Beck. Remove or allocate subject to more detailed FRA as not essential to housing numbers (risks being rejected at planning application stage though). AAWG05 To rear of Bog Small site within the function floodplain and high surface water Cottage flood risk. This site is also greenfield which is an added constraint. Suggest this site is removed. If allocated, the site could be rejected at the planning application stage following a detailed FRA.

If more potential future development allocations are to be submitted as part of the Core Strategy, then these will also need to be screened in this way. If large parts of an allocation is within Flood Zone 2 or 3, then evidence to show that the site is likely to pass the Exception Test will be required before being allocated. If new flood mapping is produced by the Environment Agency for the Derwent, before submission of the Core Strategy, then these sites around the Derwent should be screened again.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 34

5. Surface Water Flooding and CDAs

5.1 Introduction Following the Summer 2007 floods, it became apparent that intense rainfall events can occur anywhere and can cause extensive flooding, not just from main rivers, but also local sources of flood risk (surface water runoff, sewers, drains etc). This led the Pitt Review10 to publish the following recommendation. • Recommendation 18: “Local Surface Water Management Plans, as set out in PPS25 and coordinated by local authorities, should provide the basis for managing all local flood risk.” In addition, the Floods and Water Management Act11 outlines the intention for local authorities to take a ‘leadership role’ in local flood risk management in partnership with other stakeholders. This clearly puts the responsibility of local flooding into the hands of the local authorities. Surface Water Management Plans (SWMPs) should be the main vehicle for managing local/surface water flooding, but the SFRAs should also have an increased role in this area. As part of this new role, SFRAs should aim to collect historical flooding information on all ‘other sources’ of flood risk from a number of different data holders. This SFRA update will show whether any of the historic flooding locations falls within (or near) a proposed future development allocation (see section 4.4 on the Sequential Test spreadsheet). This historic flooding data should be kept by the local authority for future reference. The SFRAs should also provide the first step in identifying Critical Drainage Areas (CDAs). CDAs are those areas identified from historical flood events and/or modelled data as having a significant risk from surface water flooding or subject to potential large changes in runoff due to development. PPS25 Practice Guide states that SFRAs should provide the evidence and recommendations for LPAs to understand the need for a SWMP by identifying CDAs within their borough. The figure below, taken from PPS25 Practice Guide, shows how SFRAs link to SWMPs and then to overall spatial planning.

10 The Pitt Review. Lessons Learnt from the 2007 floods, June 2008, Cabinet Office 11 Flood and Water Management Act, 2010, government

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 35

5.1.1 Definition of surface water flooding Local flooding and surface water flooding can be defined in a number of different ways. For the purpose of this report, the definition given in the SWMP guidance12 will be used as this part of the study links with SWMPs. In this context surface water flooding includes: • Surface water runoff; runoff as a result of high intensity rainfall when water is ponding or flowing over the ground surface before it enters the underground drainage network or watercourse, or cannot enter it because the network is full to capacity, thus causing flooding (known as pluvial flooding); • Flooding from groundwater where groundwater is defined as all water which is below the surface of the ground and in direct contact with the ground or subsoil. sewer flooding; flooding which occurs when the capacity of underground systems is exceeded due to heavy rainfall, resulting in flooding inside and outside of buildings. Note that the normal discharge of sewers and drains through outfalls may be impeded by high water levels in receiving waters as a result of wet weather or tidal conditions; • Flooding from open-channel and culverted watercourses which receive most of their flow from inside the urban area and perform an urban drainage function; • Overland flows from the urban/rural fringe entering the built-up area; and • Overland flows resulting from groundwater sources.

5.2 Data provided 5.2.1 Surface water flooding maps

Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding Maps The Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding Maps (ASSWF) show actual surface water flood extent and variation in depths for particular geographical areas of interest, assuming a 1 in 200-year rainfall event and a “hard surface” ground model. The ASSWF zones have been provided on a set of eleven maps, and are largely based on information provided in the Environment Agency national Surface Water Map (see Figures B1 to B11 in Appendix A). The ASSWF are split between three zones relating to risk highlighted below:

More Susceptible

Susceptible

Less Susceptible

These maps are extremely helpful in supplementing the PPS25 Flood Zone Maps as they show where localised, flash flooding can cause problems, even if the Main Rivers are not overflowing. The maps have been used to help define the candidate CDAs (see Section 5.3). These maps have also been used in the Sequential Test spreadsheet to identify the proposed future development allocations that may be at risk of surface water flooding (see Section 4.3).

12 Surface Water Management Plan Technical Guidance, March 2010, Defra

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 36

Flood Map for Surface Water As this update was being undertaken, another set of surface water flooding maps was released by the Environment Agency. In March 2009 JBA Consulting (working in partnership with Halcrow) were employed by the Environment Agency to develop the 2nd generation surface water flooding maps. This included a number of improvements to the original model in areas where it was known to be weaker; for example considering: • more storm events • the influence of buildings • the influence of the sewer system These are called the Flood Map for Surface Water (FMfSW). These maps pick out natural drainage channels, rivers, low areas in floodplains and flow paths between buildings. But they only indicate flooding caused by local rainfall. These maps do not show flooding that occurs from overflowing watercourses, drainage systems or public sewers caused by catchment-wide rainfall events or river flow. Two rainfall events, one with a 1 in 30 and the other with a 1 in 200 chance of occurring in any year, have been modelled and mapped. For each rainfall probability, the map provides two extents, one which indicate surface water flooding greater than 100mm (shallow) and another which indicate surface water flooding greater than 300mm (deep). The 300mm threshold is chosen as it represents a typical value for the onset of significant property damages when property flooding may start (above doorstep level) and because it is at around this depth that moving through floodwater (driving or walking) may become more difficult; both of which may lead users to consider the need to close roads or evacuate areas. The FMfSW maps have been provided on a set of eleven maps (see Figures C1 to C11 in Appendix A). 5.2.2 Historical flooding data A number of historical flooding datasets have been collected from a range of flood risk stakeholders. Data agreements are in place to use this data in the Allerdale SFRA update. Historic flood incident data should be combined with the existing Environment Agency Areas ASSWF maps to identify areas more vulnerable or susceptible to surface water flooding. The Sequential Test spreadsheet (Appendix B) has also been populated with this data.

Local authority data Allerdale BC has formed a Making Space for Water (MSFW) group, comprising representatives from the LA engineers, Cumbria Highways, United Utilities and the Environment Agency. These MSFW groups meet regularly to identify and discuss solutions for the main flood risk locations in their local authority area (including surface water flooding locations). One of the main outputs from these groups is a MSFW hotpots list which shows the location of flooding, the number of properties flooded, the frequency of flooding and some notes on the flooding mechanism. The flood risk locations are also prioritised. A meeting with the drainage engineer for Allerdale BC was held to find any other surface water flooding locations.

Environment Agency data The Environment Agency’s Historical Flood Map is the only historical flooding dataset provided by the Environment Agency for the SWMP. The attributes include the date of flooding and whether it is: main river, ordinary watercourse, sewer or drainage flooding events. This dataset also includes details about the flood event, flood mechanism (e.g.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 37

channel capacity) and whether residential/commercial properties were flooded. Where specific to surface water flooding, this information has been used to identify areas of surface water flooding.

Cumbria Fire Service Cumbria Fire Service log all flood related emergency calls. These call logs have grid references so they have been georeferenced for use in the SFRA. The data goes back to April 2000 but does not include the large flood event in November 2009. The data includes the date, time, incident summary and a location description. The incident summary is focussed on how the incident was dealt with rather than the flood mechanism. The quality of this data may not be good enough to validate significant surface water flood risk locations when used in isolation. This is because all flooding types have been recorded including artificial flooding sources such as burst water mains and in some cases the sources was not identified. The Flood Risk Regulations state that man made flood incidents should not be classed as flooding for the purpose of the flood management plans. However, when combined with other datasets, include the ASRSWF maps, they may provide a good flood risk indicator.

Cumbria Highways Cumbria Highways have provided data from road users and highways inspectors about flooding on their road network. This data has been georeferenced for use in the SFRA. The recorded incidents are usually associated with very local issues such as blocked drains and lack of road drainage. As a result, there are many incidents within this database, on much of the road network. This makes it difficult to identify specific areas that are at risk of flooding. A description of the mechanism of flooding is not included in the data attributes. However, the data does show whether the incident was related to a blocked drain, whether the flooding was over 3 inches in depth and if any properties were flooded. Larger scale flood events are not normally recorded in this database, but it should be possible to use the data to verify surface water flow pathways in some locations. The data has been filtered to highlight the more significant events e.g. flooding over 3 inches deep and where properties have been flooded.

United Utilities data United Utilities have provided data for use in the Cumbria SWMP and Allerdale SFRA update. DG5 records have been provided, this is a register that lists properties that have flooded either internally of externally. This register may include properties where the risk of flooding has been recently mitigated through works and where works are planned in the near future. This dataset has been used to verify surface water flooding locations. Where a more detailed assessment is proposed based on this data, United Utilities should be consulted so that the areas where work has been completed can be taken into account. Two other sewer flooding records have been provided, Sewerage Incident Register System (SIRS) and Wastewater Incident Register System (WIRS). The SIRS is an old database and was replaced by the WIRS in 2009. The SIRS and WIRS are databases that record all sewer incidents (not just flooding). So entries such as ‘smell’ or ‘pollution’ have been filtered out. The WIRS dataset includes details of the cause of flooding (e.g. blockage, collapse, capacity, pump failure). The WIRS also states what the asset is that failed (e.g. combined sewer, private drain, foul sewer, highway sewer) who is responsible for it and the effect (e.g. foul flooding, surcharging system). United Utilities also provided GIS information on drainage areas. These boundaries identify the natural breaks in the catchment drainage, usually by treatment works or a pumping station.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 38

5.3 Critical Drainage Areas 5.3.1 Introduction SFRAs provide the opportunity for local authorities to assess, at a strategic level, the risk from multiple sources of flooding, which can then feed into more detailed assessments where appropriate by both themselves and other operating authorities. This includes the identification of Critical Drainage Areas (CDAs). CDAs are those areas identified from historical flood events and/or modelled data as having a significant risk from surface water flooding. Recommendations for further assessment can then be made in the Surface Water Management Plans (SWMP) for high risk locations or areas of significant development for which an integrated drainage solution is possible. This SFRA should identify candidate CDAs using the Environment Agency's national Areas Susceptible to Surface Water Flooding (ASSWF) maps, data from UU and historic flooding locations (many of which are from surface water flooding). This SFRA should then recommend that these sites/communities are investigated further within the Cumbria SWMP (modelling and further consultation). However, the Cumbria SWMP has already been started and identified some draft CDAs for Allerdale BC. The work already completed for Allerdale BC is summarised below.

5.3.2 Cumbria SWMP candidate CDAs A SWMP study is undertaken in order to provide the evidence base to produce an action plan. The SWMP action plan should outline the preferred surface water management strategy and identify the actions, timescales and responsibilities of each partner. This is the principal output from a SWMP study. The Cumbria SWMP Started in June 2010 and is due to be completed in summer 2011. One of the first tasks in the SWMP study is to identify CDAs (see 5.3.1). The Cumbria SWMP has used guidance set out in the draft Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA) guidance13 to identify areas of significant surface water flood risk (or candidate CDAs). The National Receptor Dataset (NRD) was obtained from the Environment Agency for this assessment. The NRD contains information on economic, social and environmental receptors. A GIS tool has been used to assess the risk across Cumbria, summarised to 1km grid squares. This has been undertaken using three flood risk indicators based on data contained within the NRD. The indicators chosen are in line with the current Defra thinking on how a lead local flood authorities (LLFA) should identify significant flood risk areas. • Indicator 1 - Number of people (based on number of residential properties) • Indicator 2 - Number of critical services (the number of schools, hospitals, nursing homes, police/fire/ambulance stations) • Indicator 3 - Number of non-residential properties (any property that is not a residential property) The maps provided in this report show how each of the different indicators have been scored. The intermediate ASSWF map has been used for this assessment not the FMfSW as the ASSWF generally show the greatest flooding extent. The ASSWF maps are less accurate than the second generation maps and generally show a greater flooding extent. Additional historic flooding information has been used to identify candidate CDAs within Allerdale. This information was digitised and made available from the following sources: • Cumbria Highways flood incident database • Unite Utilities historic sewer flooding data • Cumbria Fire Service flood incident locations

13 Preliminary flood risk assessments “Living Draft”, Guidance for Lead Local Flood Authorities May 2010, Environment Agency

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 39

• Local authority MSFW flood risk locations • Environment Agency’s flood event outlines • The Environment Agency's national ASSWF maps The NRD grid square analysis for Allerdale BC can be seen in Appendix A, Figure F1. The properties at risk from the intermediate ASSWF map can be seen in Appendix A, Figures D1 to D3. Figures showing the historic flooding locations can be seen in Appendix A, Figures E1 to E3. The candidate CDAs for Allerdale BC, from the Cumbria SWMP (draft) are shown below: • Workington • Flimby • Maryport • Cockermouth • Keswick • Wigton An assessment of the main surface water flooding locations is currently being undertaken in the Cumbria SWMP. The above list is therefore draft and will be subject to confirmation. This is why they have been called ‘candidate’ CDAs. Not all of the surface water flooding locations can be brought forward into the Cumbria SWMP due to limited time and budget for this project. Some of these locations should therefore be retained by Allerdale and used for FRA recommendations, Drainage Impact Assessments and for future studies when funding within Allerdale is available for this purpose. The Sequential Test spreadsheet includes a column identifying any historical flooding incidents in Allerdale’s proposed future development allocations. Some additional information on surface water flooding in Allerdale is included below. 5.3.3 Some local detail on the draft CDAs From consultation with Allerdale BC and looking at some of the data in more detail, this section provides more detail on the locations in Allerdale that have local drainage issues and identified as candidate CDAs in the Cumbria SWMP (draft). Figures C1 to C3 show the historic flood incidents and Figures D1 to D3 show the ASSWF maps with properties at risk covering the locations referred to in this section.

Workington There is a cluster of historic flood risk incidents in the centre of Workington around Oxford Street, south of the Derwent. The ASSWF show a number of properties at risk in this area (to the east of the A597). There is a known sewer flooding location within this area (Vulcan Lane), but a scheme was completed by United Utilities (UU) in 1992. The roads in this area have flooded in the past from surface water, but in general, the drainage system is adequate and this is not perceived to be a major surface water flood risk location.

Harrington (Workington) A linear cluster of historic flooding incidents follow a surface water flow pathway, where a number of properties are shown to be at risk. The flow pathway follows Church Road. This is a known local drainage problem location but resewering has been undertaken by UU so the system should now be of sufficient capacity. However, with climate change increasing the likelihood of heavy storms (of the magnitude of the November 2009 event), this area could flood again.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 40

Flimby Throughout Flimby there are a number of historic flooding incidents. In addition, the ASSWF map shows that the bottom part of Flimby (near the coast) is at risk of surface water flooding. Five culverted watercourses pass through Flimby that can surcharge due to inadequate capacity, causing highway flooding. However, these flooding incidents do not occur year on year and due to the small scale of the flooding, this location is not deemed significant.

Maryport There are not many historic surface water flooding incidents for a settlement of this size and there is no pattern from the few recorded incidents. The ASSWF map does show a surface water flow pathway that puts a number of properties at risk though. This is near to the A596 and may be from a part open part culverted watercourse (Eel Sike). Maryport is not known to have drainage / surface water flooding issues so this is not perceived to be a significant risk location.

Cockermouth There are a number of historic flooding incidents sporadically distributed around Cockermouth. The ASSWF maps pick up the main watercourses in Cockermouth (Derwent, Cocker and Bitter Beck). Main river flooding is the responsibility of the Environment Agency and this appears to be the main issue in Cockermouth. However, a lack of maintenance on highway drains can cause minor surface water flooding. Flooding from surface water runoff is known to occur on Isel Road and groundwater flooding is an issue in the Gote Road area

Keswick A number of historic flooding issues from several different flow paths (surface water flow paths and gullies) originate from the fells to the southeast and flow SE-NW through Keswick and into the River Greta. The main flood mechanism is culverts blocking and gullies overtopping causing overland /surface water flooding. These flood pathways put properties at risk as development has been built next to all the watercourses and drains that run through Keswick. There is likely to be a scheme in Keswick that deals with Main River flooding (River Greta), but there are still many flood prone highway drains and smaller culverted watercourses passing through private land in Keswick. Throughout Allerdale, Keswick is the one significant surface water / local drainage flooding location. It is likely that this location will be taken forward to the options appraisal stage in the Cumbria SWMP.

Braithwaite (Keswick) There are very few historic flooding locations but the ASSWF map shows that many properties are at risk. The surface water flow pathway comes from Coledale Beck. This beck is heavily canalised as it passes through Braithwaite. Surface water runoff form the high sided catchment is the main contributor to this river. However, the river itself is Main, so the flooding issues fall under the responsibility of the EA rather than it being a local surface water/ drainage issue.

Wigton There are a low number of historic flooding incidents in Wigton but the ASSWF maps show that there are a number of properties at risk in the centre. The surface water flow paths pick up the main watercourses in Wigton, Wiza Beck and Black Beck. In Wigton, the higher surrounding ground can send large amounts of rainfall into the village via these rivers and

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 41

culverts which lack capacity and can surcharge. However, the main flooding comes from Main Rivers so this location is the responsibility of the Environment Agency rather than a local drainage issue.

5.4 Allocations with surface water issues The Sequential Test spreadsheet (see Section 4.4 and Appendix B) has also been used to identify which sites may have drainage and surface water flooding issues. A GIS tool was used to calculate the percentage of the allocation that is as risk of flooding from one of the ASSWF maps. Each of the allocations has been given a colour depending on the percentage coverage, as shown in Table 9 below and the screen shot. The spreadsheet also includes whether the allocation has a historic flooding incident within it. The surface water flood risk spreadsheet is included in Appendix B. As a rough guide, the red and purple areas should be investigated further for existing surface water flood risk and the risk of developments increasing surface water flooding to other areas. This should be a recommendation for future FRAs and at the master planning stage.

Table 9 – Colour codes for the allocations and the ASSWF maps No risk of surface water flooding Low risk and % cover Medium risk and medium % cover Medium/high risk and high % cover

It should be noted that the Environment Agency ASSWF maps provided for this SFRA were only produced as a strategic assessment, and whilst they help identify potential depths of flooding, drainage routes and ponded areas, they should not be used for site-specific flood risk assessments. They do not preclude the need for more detailed drainage assessment

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 42

during site specific FRAs rather they identify the potential problems and where greater detail is needed. Sites of particular concern are those situated on immediate flow paths, sites with large surface water susceptibility coverage and large sites on open undeveloped land which could increase flood risk downstream. Flat floodplains adjacent to rivers and estuaries are generally susceptible to many forms of flooding, and protection from the fluvial or tidal source does not necessarily reduce or remove the other sources. Surface water flooding and management for such sites should be considered during master planning stage.

5.5 Suitability for SUDs The consideration of soil type will provide an indication of the suitability for soakaway solutions (SUDS). It should be stressed that whilst the permeability of the soil is an important consideration for infiltration techniques, some SUDS techniques can be used on impermeable soils and could help aid attenuation by reducing conveyance time. All developments must take a site specific approach to drainage issues to demonstrate the flood risk elsewhere is not increased. A map showing the general suitability of SUDS techniques based on soil types is shown in Figure 21 below. This map based on soil maps indicates Medium suitability for SUDS through much of the Allerdale study area. Much more variable suitability is indicated towards the north of Allerdale.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 43

Figure 22 – Indicative suitability for SUDS in Allerdale based on soil types

Low

Medium/Low

Medium

High

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 44

6. Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 2010 SFRA Update This study has updated the 2007 SFRA, including updates to the planning framework, flood risk policy, SFRA methodology and strategic guidance for developers (see Volume 1). Volume 1 also includes specific flood risk policy ideas for areas at a high risk of flooding. Volume 2 includes a review of the November 2009 flood event which was the largest recorded flood event on the Derwent and impacted many locations in Allerdale BC including Keswick, Cockermouth and Workington. Updates to the Flood Zones have been made since the 2007 SFRA. Flood Zone 3b has been updated for the Derwent using the available modelled flood outlines and taking into account the November 2009 flood event. The changes to the Flood Zones have been described and new PPS25 Flood Zone maps produced. The impact of the new Flood Zones on Allerdale’s proposed future development allocations along the Derwent has been assessed. All of the allocations have initially been assessed within the Sequential Test spreadsheet with recommendations made for how they should be taken forward. Surface water / local drainage flooding information has been collected and displayed in figures that show the main surface water flood risk locations. Figures showing the Environment Agency’s ASSWF and FMfSW maps been produced. These maps have also been used in the Sequential Test spreadsheet to show the allocations that may have surface water flooding issues.

6.2 Recommendations The review of the November 2009 flood event highlights the severity of this event and the impact on people and property. Bearing this in mind and using the policy ideas in Volume 1, flood risk policies should be produced for the areas at high risk of flooding in Allerdale. These policies should be produced in consultation with the Environment Agency, in order to get an agreement before being submitted in the Core Strategy. The Sequential Test spreadsheet should be used to complete the Sequential Test, using the updated guidance produced for this SFRA. The evidence for the completion of the Sequential Test should be recorded and submitted as part of the Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Strategy. The recommendations in Table 8 (including the allocations at risk near to Cockermouth) should be reviewed. If any of these sites are essential to the Core Strategy, then a more detailed assessment (Level 2 SFRA) may be required. The Sequential Test spreadsheet should also be used to highlight allocations where surface water flooding may be an issue. Once the full flood mapping for the Derwent has been undertaken, the existing and any additional future development allocations should be reviewed to ensure they are not at risk of flooding and can be allocated in the Core Strategy. The Cumbria SWMP is underway. The areas at greatest risk of surface water flooding will be taken forward into an ‘intermediate assessment’ and some of these will then be taken forward into the options appraisal stage. This will not pick up all of the surface water / local drainage issues. Allerdale BC should maintain their MSFW group and continue to tackle to local flood risk issues. Some of these smaller flood risk locations may be picked up by the Cumbria SWMP ‘quick wins’ option or registered on the SWMP Action Plan. Volume 1 of this SFRA update provides guidance for developers and planners. This should be referred to and provided to developers where appropriate.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx 45

Appendices A. Figures

Provided separately

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx I

A.1 2011 SFRA Figures

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx II

A.2 2007 SFRA Figures

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx III

B. Sequential Test Spreadsheets

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx IV

Allerdale Borough Council Sequential Test Spreadsheet

JBA ref Site Area Area Flood Zones Historic flooding incidents ASSWF m2 within the site REF Ha m2 FZ3b FZ3a FZ2 Low Medium High

SHLAA 15 Year_region EXRU25_J0 EXRU25 Land at Langrigg, Aspatria 0.15 1527 0 0 0 5 0 0 EXRU159_J1 EXRU159 Land at Branthwaite 0.81 8099 1 17 21 15 9 3 EXRU10_J2 EXRU10 Land at Marron Terrace 1.12 11240 0 0 0 4 0 0 AAWK31_J3 AAWK31 Millburn Croft, Low Seaton (a) 0.56 5707 0 9 12 18 0 0 AARU49_J4 AARU49 Land adjacent to High Mains 0.13 1369 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU64_J5 AARU64 Land near Bridge HIll 0.2 2049 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU65_J6 AARU65 Land adjacent to Lynholme 0.1 994 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU125_J7 EXRU125 Land at Eaglesfield 0.272681 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU126_J8 EXRU126 Land at Eaglesfield 0.27 2187 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU05_J9 AARU05 Land off Hadrians Avenue 0.17 1664 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU208_J10 EXRU208 Land nr Mellfield 0.43 4356 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 9 7 0 AARU131_J11 AARU131 East House Farm 0.2 1933 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU164_J12 EXRU164 Land at gilcrux 0.4 3947 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU21_J13 EXRU21 Land at Gilcrux 0.72 7242 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU15_J14 AARU15 Land adjacent to Woodside Lodge 0.1 1016 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU13_J15 EXRU13 Land at La Maison 0.19 1952 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU53_J16 EXRU53 Land at Dearham 0.7 7038 0 0 0 49 40 11 EXRU94_J17 EXRU94 Land at Blencogo Farm 0.22 2166 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU151_J18 EXRU151 Land at Newton Arlosh 0.9 9089 0 0 0 5 0 0 EXWK24_J19 EXWK24 Land at Workington 21.05 211328 0 7 7 9 7 0 EXWK27_J20 EXWK27 Land at High Harrington 3.64 36776 0 0 0 1 0 0 EXWK30_J21 EXWK30 Land near Scaw Road 3.72 37366 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU112_J22 EXRU112 Land at Great Broughton 0.34 3379 0 0 0 0 0 0

SHLAA 10 Year_region EXRU104_J23 EXRU104 Land at Bank End, Prospect 0.15 1470 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU105_J24 EXRU105 Land at Bolton Low Houses 0.36 3598 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU213_J25 EXRU213 Land at the Went 0.38 4627 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 EXRU62_J26 EXRU62 Land at Ashtree Cottage, Glasson 0.11 1097 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU128_J27 AARU128 Land at Well Head Farm, Dean 0.6 5954 0 0 0 1 highway and 1 fire service flooding incident 7 4 0 AARU28_J28 AARU28 Land adjacent to the Forelands 0.12 1205 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU32_J29 AARU32 Land adjacent to Meadow Lodge 0.26 2737 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU60_J30 AARU60 Land adjacent to the Glebe 0.59 5978 0 0 0 1 0 0 EXRU200_J31 EXRU200 Land at Thorndene 0.16 1617 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU105_J32 AARU105 Land near Blencogo School 0.36 3653 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 AARU35_J33 AARU35 Land off School Lane (a) 0.41 4183 0 0 0 2 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 AARU56_J34 AARU56 Land adjacent to Westnewton Hall 0.2 2023 0 13 15 28 21 0 EXRU216_J35 EXRU216 Lattimer Storage Yard 0/7 7398 0 0 0 1 1 0 EXRU217_J36 EXRU217 Lattimer Office 0.2 1738 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU227_J37 EXRU227 Land at Bothel 0.41 4076 0 0 0 18 0 0 AARU02_J38 AARU02 LAnd off Solway Drive (a) 0.14 1383 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU122_J39 AARU122 Land at 270 Skinburness Road 0.46 4681 0 0 1 0 0 0 AARU125_J40 AARU125 East Elms Farm 0.31 3050 0 0 0 3 0 0 EXRU106_J41 EXRU106 Land at Thursby 1 10446 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU11_J42 EXRU11 Home Farm 0.72 7179 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 33 5 0 EXRU111_J43 EXRU111 Land at Kirkbampton 1.4 14061 0 0 0 6 1 0 EXRU12_J44 EXRU12 Land at Sunny Bank 0.53 5299 0 0 0 64 12 0 EXRU178_J45 EXRU178 Garage at Brough Hill 0.72 7189 0 0 0 4 4 0 EXRU189_J46 EXRU189 Retreat Farm 0.58 5778 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU41_J47 AARU41 Land at Brownrigg Farm 0.14 1393 0 0 0 3 0 0 AARU53_J48 AARU53 Land adjacent to Millcroft 0.27 2715 0 82 92 22 16 1 EXRU108_J49 EXRU108 Land at Hayton 0.6 6023 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU117_J50 EXRU117 Land at Great Clifton 0.1 1027 0 0 0 1 fireservice flooding incident 54 0 0 EXRU121_J51 EXRU121 Land at Kirkbampton 1.04 10402 0 0 0 59 23 0 AARU111_J52 AARU111 Land near High Croft 0.2 1997 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU57_J53 AARU57 Land adjacent to Burn View 0.12 1230 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU150_J54 EXRU150 Land at Little Broughton 0.65 6514 0 0 0 1 highways flooding and 3 historic sewer flooding incidents0 0 0 EXRU184_J55 EXRU184 Land at Pear Tree Gardens 0.25 2519 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU96_J56 EXRU96 Land at Bothel 2.72 27276 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU180_J57 EXRU180 Land at Bothel Parks 0.55 5549 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU29_J58 AARU29 The Garth 0.31 3094 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU119_J59 EXRU119 1.12 11202 0 0 0 12 0 0 EXRU195_J60 EXRU195 Land at Blooming Heather 0.18 1764 0 0 0 1 fireservice flooding incident 0 0 0 AARU133_J61 AARU133 Former Social Club 0.13 416 0 0 0 60 0 0 EXRU114_J62 EXRU114 Land at Oulton 0.94 9444 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU116_J63 EXRU116 Land at Great Clifton 0.39 3909 0 0 0 1 UU surface water flooding incident 0 0 0 EXRU86_J64 EXRU86 Land at Great Clifton 1.22 12240 0 0 0 2 LA flooding hotspots and 1 UU surface water flooding36 indicent 27 0 EXRU77_J65 EXRU77 Land at Gilcrux 0.75 7521 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK28_J66 EXWK28 Land at High Harrington 0.91 9182 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU94_J67 AARU94 Land at Townhead 0.35 3478 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU225_J68 EXRU225 Wilson Farm 0.552 5541 0 0 0 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents and 1 fire service flooding16 incident 3 0 EXS002_J69 EXS002 Land at Silloth 0.25 2556 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK35_J70 EXWK35 Land adjoining Little Croft 0.8 14857 0 0 0 10 8 4 AARU85_J71 AARU85 Land adjacent to Rhyhill Farm (a) 0.32 3317 0 0 0 15 0 0 EXRU144_J72 EXRU144 West End Farm 0.46 4654 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU161_J73 EXRU161 land at Broughton Moor 1.14 11455 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU207_J74 EXRU207 Croft Farm 0.53 5361 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU23_J75 AARU23 Land off Abbot Wood 0.33 3245 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU05_J76 EXRU05 Land at William Street 0.55 5484 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 EXRU224_J77 EXRU224 Land at Witzend 0.4 4017 0 0 0 9 0 0 EXRU51_J78 EXRU51 Land at Great Clifton 1.3 12694 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 48 24 0 AAAS07_J79 AAAS07 Land off Park Road 0.27 2618 0 0 0 7 2 0 AASL06_J80 AASL06 Land at Skiddaw Street 0.23 2318 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWK35_J81 AAWK35 Land off Barnett Drive 0.67 6759 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU186_J82 EXRU186 Land at Abbeytown 3.45 34640 0 38 48 11 5 0 EXRU32_J83 EXRU32 Land adjacent to Overcroft Farm, Greysouthen 0.73 7350 0 0 0 2 DG5 sewer flooding, 1 historic sewer flooding and27 1 highway flooding12 incident 0 AARU135_J84 AARU135 Thursby Glebe 1 5831 0 0 0 85 34 0 AARU79_J85 AARU79 Land near North View 0.17 1909 0 0 0 0 0 0 AASL01_J86 AASL01 Rear of Epsom Green 0.31 3151 0 0 0 55 0 0 EXRU124_J87 EXRU124 Land at Dearham 3.44 45916 0 0 0 39 24 0 AAMP23_J88 AAMP23 Land at Crummock Road 0.72 7257 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU43_J89 AARU43 Land near Oulton Grange 0.16 1557 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWK36_J90 AAWK36 Land at Sunnyside 0.32 3136 0 0 0 37 0 0 EXRU133_J91 EXRU133 Land at the Pow 0.28 2817 0 0 0 56 35 0 AARU22_J92 AARU22 Land adjacent to Old Ginn House 0.26 2578 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU18_J93 EXRU18 Land at Broughton Cross 0.54 5394 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU45_J94 EXRU45 Land at Broughton 0.8 8044 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAAS05_J95 AAAS05 Aspatria Car Park 0.45 4587 0 0 0 5 0 0 AARU17_J96 AARU17 Land adjacent to Bakers Meadow 0.35 3475 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU138_J97 EXRU138 Land at The Crofts, Crosby 0.27 2700 0 0 0 0 0 0 AASL13_J98 AASL13 Land off Skinburness Road 0.12 1257 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU170_J99 EXRU170 Dovenby Hall (a) 1.03 10285 0 0 0 53 24 0 AARU96_J100 AARU96 Land adjacent to Redlands 0.11 1083 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAAS12_J101 AAAS12 Aspatria Farmers 1 6193 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 6 0 0 EXRU147_J102 EXRU147 Land at Bolton Low Houses 1.2 11620 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 AARU54_J103 AARU54 Land adjacent to village hall 0.15 1546 0 0 0 10 0 0 EXRU79_J104 EXRU79 Croft Hill Farm 0.51 5097 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU142_J105 EXRU142 Land at Brigham 0.27 2745 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU136_J106 EXRU136 Land at West Curthwaite 0.69 6883 0 0 0 21 3 0 EXRU15_J107 EXRU15 Land at South Terrace 0.66 6641 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU42_J108 EXRU42 Field to rear of 18 Greenbank Close, Prospect 1.64 16500 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU81_J109 AARU81 Land at the Fothergills 0.1 1027 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 99 92 6 AARU134_J110 AARU134 Broughton Moor Allotments 0.1 1392 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 EXRU145_J111 EXRU145 Former Brickworks 0.27 2665 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 AARU36_J112 AARU36 Land at Bothel Parks 0.8 8030 0 0 0 2 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 AAWG22_J113 AAWG22 Land off Highmoor Gardens 0.1 1011 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWG08_J114 EXWG08 Land at Wigton 3.98 39918 0 0 0 15 11 0 AAWG01_J115 AAWG01 Land at Orchard Garth 0.72 12439 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWG25_J116 EXWG25 Land off West Road 8.35 83782 4 8 8 19 9 4 EXWG21_J117 EXWG21 Land at Wigton 0.19 1882 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK06_J118 EXWK06 Land at High Harrington 3.1 31027 0 0 0 8 2 0 AAAS02_J119 AAAS02 Land at Aspatria 0.85 8346 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAAS11_J120 AAAS11 Land off Pringle 0.36 3597 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAMP04_J121 AAMP04 Maryport Harbour (a) 1.53 15903 0 0 0 16 1 0 AAMP24_J122 AAMP24 Land at The Arches 0.81 8162 0 0 0 2 fire service flooding incidents 100 64 7 EXMP06_J123 EXMP06 Land at Rose Vale 12.23 106317 0 0 0 1 UU surface water flooding incident 14 7 1 AARU27_J124 AARU27 43-70 Bow Flatts 0.81 7928 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU83_J125 AARU83 Flimby Lodge 1.87 18852 0 0 0 77 0 0 AAWK05_J126 AAWK05 Site between Town Quay & Stanley Street 0.36 3607 0 4 40 37 3 0 EXRU127_J127 EXRU127 Rose Farm 3.77 37694 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident and 3 historic sewer flooding1 incidents 0 0 EXRU206_J128 EXRU206 Land at The Hill 2.18 21847 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU19_J129 EXRU19 Land at Whitestiles, Seaton 2.69 27040 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU211_J130 EXRU211 Newlands Park 3.74 37117 0 0 0 15 2 0 AAWK02_J131 AAWK02 Land at Stanley Street 1.02 10310 0 1 1 0 0 0 EXRU146_J132 EXRU146 Land at Thursby 12.6 126232 0 0 0 30 17 1 AARU93_J133 AARU93 Mid Town Farm 1.82 18301 0 0 0 3 LA flooding hotspots and 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident0 0 0 EXRU47_J134 EXRU47 Land at Dearham 1.71 17190 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK17_J135 EXWK17 Land at Main Road 3.3 33087 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK21_J136 EXWK21 Land at Stainburn 1.68 22650 0 0 0 1 historic sewer flooding incident 4 3 0 EXWK31_J137 EXWK31 Land near Coachman Inn 3.73 37389 0 0 0 4 0 0 EXMP04_J138 EXMP04 Land at Kirkborough Farm 1.66 16625 0 0 0 3 0 0 EXRU71_J139 EXRU71 Land at Great Clifton 0.59 5907 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0001 Build_J140 0001 Build 1E+15 Buildi 21 0 0 0 0 0 0

SHLAA - 5 Year_region AAWK21_J141 AAWK21 Land off Solway Rd 0.8 7896 0 0 0 6 4 0 EXWG31_J142 EXWG31 Land at Scholars Green 1.32 12219 0 0 0 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 AAMP05_J143 AAMP05 Maryport Harbour (b) 0.9 9426 0 0 0 3 0 0 AAWK44_J144 AAWK44 Land at Grey Street 0.11 1126 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWG27_J145 EXWG27 Park Square 1.51 15162 11 23 23 1 highway flooding incident 21 9 0 AAWK06_J146 AAWK06 Land adjacent to Northside Post Office 0.13 1313 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU198_J147 EXRU198 Ellerbeck Brow 1.64 16492 0 0 0 4 3 1 EXRU37_J148 EXRU37 Land at The Beeches, Waverton 1.7 17043 0 0 0 3 0 0 AAMP19_J149 AAMP19 Land at Mulgrew Close 0.62 6350 0 0 0 0 0 0 AARU34_J150 AARU34 Land to read of Bryn Awel 0.39 4086 0 0 0 0 0 0 AASL03_J151 AASL03 Former Fisons Factory 6.2682872 0 0 0 1 0 0 EXWK20_J152 EXWK20 Land at Main Road 4.77 47888 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAMP33_J153 AAMP33 Land at Loweswater Road 0.29 2802 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWG06_J154 AAWG06 Land rear of Supermarket 0.84 8421 0 1 1 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 AAWK07_J155 AAWK07 Land off New South Watt St 0.1 534 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK33_J156 EXWK33 Land adjoining Coronation Ave 7.28 72926 0 0 0 1 historic sewer flooding incident 13 5 0 AAWG03_J157 AAWG03 Land off Grange Gardens 0.8 8069 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU158_J158 EXRU158 Land at Papcastle 0.15 1479 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU221_J159 EXRU221 Land at Abbey Farm, Abbeytown 2.93 29443 0 0 0 6 0 0 AASL16_J160 AASL16 Land off Skinburness Road 1.35 13262 0 0 33 0 0 0 AASL15_J161 AASL15 Land off Ryehill Road (b) 1.7 16645 0 0 0 0 0 0 AASL14_J162 AASL14 Land adjacant to Ryhills Road (a) 1.23 13125 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWG05_J163 AAWG05 To rear of Bog Cottage 0.19 1973 26 34 36 1 fires service flooding incident 87 14 0 EXWG33_J164 EXWG33 Highmoor Park 9 89984 0 0 0 12 6 0 AAWG04_J165 AAWG04 Butchers Field 1.64 16467 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK32_J166 EXWK32 Land at Moor Road 5.66 55133 0 0 0 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 EXMP05_J167 EXMP05 Land at Maryport 9.3 93387 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWG23_J168 AAWG23 Land at Wigton 0.54 5452 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXWK05_J169 EXWK05 Land accessed off Seaton Road 3.75 37658 0 0 0 1 0 0 AAMP09_J170 AAMP09 Land at the beeches 0.21 2101 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU160_J171 EXRU160 Land at Birkby Lodge 2.7 26681 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXAS03_J172 EXAS03 Land adj. Aspatria RUFC 2.61 26205 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXAS06_J173 EXAS06 Land at Aspatria 9.05 90877 0 0 0 28 17 7 EXWG16_J174 EXWG16 Land at Wigton 2.07 20782 0 0 0 0 0 0 AACK01_J175 AACK01 Land off Brigham Rd 0.91 9092 0 0 0 64 39 4 EXWG07_J176 EXWG07 Land at Wigton 3.11 31225 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 EXWG28_J177 EXWG28 Land adjoining auction mart 5.22 52397 1 2 3 9 1 0 EXAS09_J178 EXAS09 Land off Brayton Road 0.7 7177 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWG01_J179 AAWG01 Land at Orchard Garth 1.24 12439 0 0 0 0 0 0 AAWK23_J180 AAWK23 Former Corus Steel Works 25.14 253576 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 46 28 8 EXRU220_J181 EXRU220 Glebe Land 0.5 5191 0 0 0 40 8 0 EXRU84_J182 EXRU84 Land at Brigham 0.86 8672 0 0 0 4 0 0 EXRU76_J183 EXRU76 Land at Torpenhow 0.12 1241 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU50_J184 EXRU50 Site at Kirkbride 0.67 6701 0 0 1 0 0 0 EXRU181_J185 EXRU181 Land at Dearham 0.29 2983 0 0 0 1 fires service flooding incident 0 0 0 AAWK32_J186 AAWK32 Millburn Croft, Low Seaton (b) 0.69 6884 0 0 0 2 UU surface water flooding and 1 historic sewer flooding10 incidents 0 0 EXRU24_J187 EXRU24 Land at Flimby 3.16 31685 0 0 0 4 1 0 AARU123_J188 AARU123 Land at Manildra, Abbeytown 0.25 2643 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU78_J189 EXRU78 Land at School Brow 0.8 8065 0 0 0 10 7 0 EXWK11_J190 EXWK11 Field 2686 Stainburn 1 10491 0 0 0 6 0 0 EXRU38_J191 EXRU38 Land at Heatherfields 2.24 22485 0 0 0 4 1 0 EXRU212_J192 EXRU212 Chruch Meadows 1.72 17167 0 0 0 3 historic sewer flooding incidents 0 0 0 EXRU93_J193 EXRU93 Land at Bolton Low Houses 0.92 9211 0 0 0 10 5 0 EXWK29_J194 EXWK29 Land at Moor Road 1.4 14042 0 0 0 0 0 0 EXRU85_J195 EXRU85 Land at Crosby 0.16 1625 0 0 0 0 0 0 0030 Obstr_J196 0030 Obstr 1E+15 Land 57 0 0 0 0 0 0

Employment land_region 2/010D_J197 2/010D LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM2) BRANTHWAITE17.33 ROAD 173299 0 0 0 3 0 0 2/010C_J198 2/010C LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM3) JUBILEE ROAD25.08 250755 0 0 0 4 0 0 2/010A_J199 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON1.43 14272 0 0 0 51 0 0 2/010A_J200 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON1.73 17307 0 0 0 9 0 0 2/010E_J201 2/010E LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM4) 7.48 74821 0 0 0 8 2 0 2/010E_J202 2/010E LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM4) 0.70 6953 0 0 0 1 0 0 2/010A_J203 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON0.80 7975 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/010A_J204 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON1.22 12246 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/010A_J205 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON0.84 8366 0 0 0 10 0 0 2/010A_J206 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON0.89 8913 0 0 0 38 2 0 2/010B_J207 2/010B LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM5) 0.84 8352 0 0 0 4 0 0 2/017_J208 2/017 OLDSIDE WORKINGTON 9.7297199 0 0 0 38 12 0 2/016_J209 2/016 PORT OF WORKINGTON WORKINGTON 3.44 34364 0 0 0 5 0 0 2/016_J210 2/016 PORT OF WORKINGTON WORKINGTON 1.83 18254 0 0 0 16 0 0 2/154_J211 2/154 LAND AT DOCK ROAD (WKEM8) WORKINGTON1.86 18557 12 12 15 1 fire service flooding incident 3 0 0 2/124_J212 2/124 JUNCTION OF A596 AND DOCK ROAD WORKINGTON0.77 7686 0 0 0 2 fire service flooding incidents 52 27 0 2/018_J213 2/018 ST HELENS BUSINESS PARK WORKINGTON 0.51 5077 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/126_J214 2/126 STATION GOODS YARD WORKINGTON 1.47 14715 0 0 0 34 6 0 2/172_J215 2/172 ADJ 16 LOWTHER ROAD WORKINGTON 0.08 760 0 0 0 1 UU surface water flooding incident 0 0 0 2/171_J216 2/171 SNAPE ROAD WORKINGTON 0.06 639 0 0 0 41 11 0 2/164_J217 2/164 REEDLANDS ROAD WORKINGTON 0.17 1666 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/011_J218 2/011 DERWENT HOWE INDUSTRIAL WORKINGTON 0.68 6810 0 0 0 99 79 7 2/011_J219 2/011 DERWENT HOWE INDUSTRIAL WORKINGTON 0.96 9587 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/170_J220 2/170 LAND AT DERWENT ROAD WORKINGTON 0.30 3027 0 0 0 100 99 89 2/152_J221 2/152 PRINCES WAY (WKEM7) WORKINGTON 3.67 36741 0 0 0 17 1 0 2/167_J222 2/167 GRAY STREET WORKINGTON 0.11 1122 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/019B_J223 2/019B ST HELENS FLIMBY 1.83 18272 0 0 0 97 93 8 2/020_J224 2/020 RISEHOW INDUSTRIAL ESTATE FLIMBY 0.54 5391 0 0 0 8 0 0 2/022_J225 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.76 7618 0 0 0 20 5 0 2/022_J226 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.93 9336 0 0 0 1 0 0 2/022_J227 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 2.97 29681 0 0 0 3 0 0 2/022_J228 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.17 1702 0 0 39 8 0 0 2/102_J229 2/102 DERWENT MILLS COCKERMOUTH 1.24 12402 0 0 93 29 3 0 2/077_J230 2/077 LOW ROAD COCKERMOUTH 0.82 8198 0 0 100 46 24 0 2/026_J231 2/026 LAKELAND BUSINESS PARK COCKERMOUTH 0.61 6109 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/099_J232 2/099 MOOR ROAD GREAT CLIFTON 1.06 10642 0 0 0 1 LA hotspot and 1 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 2/084_J233 2/084 ASPATRIA BUSINESS PARK ASPATRIA 2.54 25427 0 0 0 60 18 0 2/138_J234 2/138 LEEGATE FARM HOUSE WIGTON 0.12 1156 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/125_J235 2/125 SYKE ROAD NURSERIES WIGTON 0.35 3538 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/123_J236 2/123 EAST CAUSEWAYHEAD SILLOTH 1.63 16292 0 44 84 10 2 0 2/005_J237 2/005 STATION YARD SILLOTH 0.16 1616 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/155_J238 2/155 ABBEY ROAD ABBEYTOWN 0.29 2924 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/157_J239 2/157 SOUTH OF CARLISLE ROAD KIRKBRIDE 0.30 3009 0 0 0 0 0 0 2/022_J240 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.38 3809 5 5 5 32 23 4

5 year supply 2010_rw_region WKD01_J241 WKD01 Workington Infirmary 2.91 29140 0 0 0 0 0 0 RUD01_J242 RUD01 Rhy Hill Farm 1.33 13325 0 0 0 46 11 0 RUD2_J243 RUD2 The Brick Yard 1.13 11319 0 0 0 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 5 0 0 MPD1_J244 MPD1 Victory Crescent 2.11 21104 0 0 0 28 11 0 RUD3_J245 RUD3 Craika Close 0.82 8194 0 0 0 1 LA flooding hotspot, 5 DG5, 1 highway flooding and0 5 fire service flooding0 incidents 0 SLD1_J246 SLD1 Acre Bank Close 1.31 13140 0 71 78 0 0 0 RUA1_J247 RUA1 Abbot Wood 2.30 22982 0 0 0 1 LA and 1 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 WKA1_J248 WKA1 Ashfield Road 10.56 105635 0 2 2 4 0 0 WGA1_J249 WGA1 Kirkland Road 1.62 16155 0 0 0 2 0 0 WKA2_J250 WKA2 Barncroft Avenue 3.09 30949 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 0 0 0 2/2010/003_J251 2/2010/003 89805 0 0 0 1 0 0 RUD2_J252 RUD2 The Brick Yard 1.13 11319 0 0 0 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 5 0 0 WGA2_J253 WGA2 Howrigg Bank 0.81 8144 0 0 0 0 0 0

5 year supply 2010_rw_planningapps_region 2748_J254 2748 2/2010/0078 0.14 1406 0 0 0 0 0 0 2751_J255 2751 2/2010/0089 0.02 155 0 0 0 0 0 0 2749_J256 2749 2/2010/0079 0.05 531 0 0 0 0 0 0 2742_J257 2742 2/2010/0039 0.07 719 0 0 0 0 0 0 2616_J258 2616 2/2009/0775 0.06 584 0 0 0 0 0 0 2597_J259 2597 2/2009/0625 0.15 1545 0 0 0 0 0 0 1626_J260 1626 2/2008/00898 2.67 26667 0 0 0 15 3 0 1611_J261 1611 2/2008/0806 0.01 99 0 0 0 41 0 0 2543_J262 2543 2/2008/0901 0.12 1159 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 14 0 0 2353_J263 23532/2009/0317 0.02170 0 0 0 0 0 0 1657_J264 1657 2/2009/0030 0.22 2208 0 0 0 0 0 0 1659_J265 1659 2.2009/0040 0.07 666 0 26 26 1 LA flooding hotspot and 1 fire service incident. 0 0 0 1623_J266 1623 2/2008/0885 0.03 330 0 0 0 100 97 0 1640_J267 1640 2/2008/0962 0.05 514 0 0 0 0 0 0 1629_J268 1629 2/2008/0909 0.01 81 0 0 0 100 0 0 1624_J269 1624 2/2008/0888 0.02 236 0 0 0 0 0 0 559_J270 559 2/2008/0517 0.05 465 0 0 0 0 0 0 2730_J271 2730 2/2010/0013 0.18 1754 0 0 0 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 23 20 11 64_J272 64 2/2007/0686 0.16 1646 0 0 0 13 10 2 161_J273 161 2/2007/1103 0.13 1318 0 0 0 0 0 0 117_J274 117 2/2007/0900 0.03 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 33_J275 33 2/2007/0527 0.22 2223 0 0 0 0 0 0 432_J276 432 2/2006/0332 2.93 29276 0 9 9 1 highway and 4 fire service flooding incidents 9 8 5 1621_J277 1621 2/2008/0879 31.01 310127 0 6 6 1 UU surface water flooding incident 39 24 7 422_J278 422 2/2007/0606 0.04 410 0 0 0 84 70 0 421_J279 421 2/2005/0918 0.05 527 0 0 0 0 0 0 419_J280 419 2/2007/0619 0.09 851 0 0 0 0 0 0 2698_J281 2698 2/2009/0855 0.20 2004 0 0 0 1 0 0 2492_J282 2492 2/2009/0453 0.32 3180 0 1 12 1 highway flooding incident 7 2 0 1647_J283 1647 2/2008/0976 0.01 146 0 0 0 0 0 0 2679_J284 2679 2/2009/0799 0.04 416 0 0 3 0 0 0 2302_J285 2302 2/2009/0210 0.03 321 0 0 0 28 0 0 1668_J286 1668 2/2009/0082 0.03 326 0 0 0 0 0 0 1650_J287 1650 2/2008/0988 0.07 748 0 0 0 0 0 0 551_J288 551 2/2008/0479 0.09 950 0 0 0 13 0 0 409_J289 409 2/2007/0685 0.13 1317 0 0 0 2 0 0 2695_J290 2695 2/2009/0859 0.04 371 0 0 0 0 0 0 2599_J291 2599 2/2009/0715 0.04 366 0 0 0 2 0 0 2434_J292 2434 2/2009/0357 0.05 504 0 0 0 0 0 0 2569_J293 2569 2/2009/0657 0.03 281 0 0 0 0 0 0 214_J294 214 2/2010/0282 0.23 2330 0 0 0 1 LA flooding hotspot 0 0 0 2566_J295 2566 2/2009/0650 0.05 476 0 0 0 0 0 0 2526_J296 2526 2/2009/0564 0.04 386 0 0 0 0 0 0 1510_J297 1510 2/2009/0518 0.26 2596 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 21 12 0 2466_J298 2466 2/2009/0391 0.04 433 0 0 0 2 0 0 2333_J299 2333 2/2009/0232 0.09 879 0 0 0 0 0 0 1618_J300 1618 2/2008/0728 0.51 5077 0 0 0 0 0 0 1678_J301 1678 2/2009/0103 0.07 723 0 0 0 0 0 0 1635_J302 1635 2/2008/0937 0.44 4414 0 1 12 0 0 0 29_J303 29 2/2007/0456 0.46 4619 0 0 0 45 6 0 600_J304 600 2/2008/0631 0.09 867 0 0 0 0 0 0 65_J305 65 2/2010/0057 0.02 212 0 0 0 0 0 0 395_J306 395 2/2007/0275 0.11 1095 0 0 0 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 81_J307 81 2/2007/0740 0.03 321 0 0 0 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 0 0 0 2607_J308 2607 2/2009/0746 0.18 1754 0 0 0 1 fire service flooding incident 0 0 0 2556_J309 2556 2/2009/0618 0.04 427 0 0 0 1 highway and 1 histroic sewer flooding incidents 0 0 0 2499_J310 2499 2/2009/0491 0.13 1340 0 0 0 0 0 0 1604_J311 1604 2/2008/0777 0.70 6952 0 0 0 3 0 0 2469_J312 2469 2/2009/0424 0.02 174 0 0 9 1 historic sewer flooding and 13 fire service flooding27 incidents 8 0 2470_J313 2470 2/2009/0427 0.05 526 0 0 0 0 0 0 2336_J314 2336 2/2009/0250 0.03 255 0 0 100 1 historic sewer flooding incidents 100 100 0 1639_J315 1639 2/2008/0956 0.02 197 0 0 0 0 0 0 454_J316 454 2/2008/0128 0.07 675 0 0 0 0 0 0 453_J317 453 2/2008/0126 0.06 564 0 0 0 0 0 0 152_J318 152 2/2007/1045 0.37 3744 0 0 0 1 0 0 136_J319 136 2/2007/0983 0.39 3950 0 0 0 4 0 0 118_J320 118 2/2007/0906 0.23 2260 0 0 0 21 0 0 2367_J321 2367 2/2006/0333 0.20 1965 0 98 98 0 0 0 2560_J322 25602/2009/0633 0.03281 0 47 100 100 100 0 2348_J323 2348 2/2009/0286 0.05 478 0 0 0 0 0 0 1617_J324 1617 2/2008/0838 0.33 3313 0 0 0 0 0 0 1563_J325 1563 2/2009/0064 0.32 3250 0 0 0 0 0 0 1570_J326 1570 2/2008/0663 0.07 705 0 0 0 7 0 0 146_J327 146 2/2007/1017 0.01 123 0 0 0 0 0 0 1596_J328 1596 2/2008/0732 0.04 433 0 0 0 2 LA flooding hotspots 0 0 0 1582_J329 1582 2/2008/0682 0.03 306 0 0 0 0 0 0 401_J330 401 2/2007/0620 0.17 1737 0 0 0 0 0 0 190_J331 190 2/2007/1244 0.11 1105 0 0 0 10 2 0 76_J332 76 2/2007/0730 0.05 454 0 0 0 0 0 0 2727_J333 2727 2/2009/0895 0.08 759 0 0 0 0 0 0 2606_J334 2606 2/2009/0737 0.06 624 0 0 0 1 0 0 96_J335 96 2/2010/0165 0.08 825 0 0 0 0 0 0 455_J336 455 2/2008/0135 0.32 3228 0 0 0 0 0 0 WK101_J337 WK101 2/2010/0020 0.06 643 0 0 0 0 0 0 RU1010_J338 RU1010 2/2010/0214 0.10 979 0 0 0 0 0 0 WK102_J339 WK102 2/2010/0257 0.02 153 0 0 0 100 23 0 WK103_J340 WK103 2/2010/0348 0.03 311 0 0 0 0 0 0 RU102_J341 RU102 2/2010/0272 0.89 8928 0 0 0 4 DG5 sewer flooding, 1 highway flooding and 1 fire0 service flooding incidents.0 0

Flood Zone 1 Low % Flood Zone 2/3 a and b Less than 20% High % Flood Zone 2/3a Greater than 20% High % flood Zone 3b Greater than 20% Allerdale Borough Council Development Allocations Surface Water Flood Risk

JBA ref Ref Site Area Area Historic flooding incidents ASSWF m2 within the site Ha m2 Fire_Services_Flooding_IncidentsLow Medium High

SHLAA 15 Year_region EXRU25_J0 EXRU25 Land at Langrigg, Aspatria 0.15 1527 0 5 0 0 EXRU159_J1 EXRU159 Land at Branthwaite 0.81 8099 0 15 9 3 EXRU10_J2 EXRU10 Land at Marron Terrace 1.12 11240 0 4 0 0 AAWK31_J3 AAWK31 Millburn Croft, Low Seaton (a) 0.56 5707 0 18 0 0 AARU49_J4 AARU49 Land adjacent to High Mains 0.13 1369 0 0 0 0 AARU64_J5 AARU64 Land near Bridge HIll 0.2 2049 0 0 0 0 AARU65_J6 AARU65 Land adjacent to Lynholme 0.1 994 0 0 0 0 EXRU125_J7 EXRU125 Land at Eaglesfield 0.27 2681 0 0 0 0 EXRU126_J8 EXRU126 Land at Eaglesfield 0.27 2187 0 0 0 0 AARU05_J9 AARU05 Land off Hadrians Avenue 0.17 1664 0 0 0 0 EXRU208_J10 EXRU208 Land nr Mellfield 0.43 4356 1 highway flooding incident 0 9 7 0 AARU131_J11 AARU131 East House Farm 0.2 1933 0 0 0 0 EXRU164_J12 EXRU164 Land at gilcrux 0.4 3947 0 0 0 0 EXRU21_J13 EXRU21 Land at Gilcrux 0.72 7242 0 0 0 0 AARU15_J14 AARU15 Land adjacent to Woodside Lodge 0.1 1016 0 0 0 0 EXRU13_J15 EXRU13 Land at La Maison 0.19 1952 0 0 0 0 EXRU53_J16 EXRU53 Land at Dearham 0.7 7038 0 49 40 11 EXRU94_J17 EXRU94 Land at Blencogo Farm 0.22 2166 0 0 0 0 EXRU151_J18 EXRU151 Land at Newton Arlosh 0.9 9089 0 5 0 0 EXWK24_J19 EXWK24 Land at Workington 21.05 211328 0 9 7 0 EXWK27_J20 EXWK27 Land at High Harrington 3.64 36776 0 1 0 0 EXWK30_J21 EXWK30 Land near Scaw Road 3.72 37366 0 0 0 0 EXRU112_J22 EXRU112 Land at Great Broughton 0.34 3379 0 0 0 0

SHLAA 10 Year_region EXRU104_J23 EXRU104 Land at Bank End, Prospect 0.15 1470 0 0 0 0 EXRU105_J24 EXRU105 Land at Bolton Low Houses 0.36 3598 0 0 0 0 EXRU213_J25 EXRU213 Land at the Went 0.38 4627 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 0 EXRU62_J26 EXRU62 Land at Ashtree Cottage, Glasson 0.11 1097 0 0 0 0 AARU128_J27 AARU128 Land at Well Head Farm, Dean 0.6 5954 1 highway and 1 fire service flooding1 incident 7 4 0 AARU28_J28 AARU28 Land adjacent to the Forelands 0.12 1205 0 0 0 0 AARU32_J29 AARU32 Land adjacent to Meadow Lodge 0.26 2737 0 0 0 0 AARU60_J30 AARU60 Land adjacent to the Glebe 0.59 5978 0 1 0 0 EXRU200_J31 EXRU200 Land at Thorndene 0.16 1617 0 0 0 0 AARU105_J32 AARU105 Land near Blencogo School 0.36 3653 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 0 AARU35_J33 AARU35 Land off School Lane (a) 0.41 4183 2 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 0 AARU56_J34 AARU56 Land adjacent to Westnewton Hall 0.2 2023 0 28 21 0 EXRU216_J35 EXRU216 Lattimer Storage Yard 0/7 7398 0 1 1 0 EXRU217_J36 EXRU217 Lattimer Office 0.2 1738 0 0 0 0 EXRU227_J37 EXRU227 Land at Bothel 0.41 4076 0 18 0 0 AARU02_J38 AARU02 LAnd off Solway Drive (a) 0.14 1383 0 0 0 0 AARU122_J39 AARU122 Land at 270 Skinburness Road 0.46 4681 0 0 0 0 AARU125_J40 AARU125 East Elms Farm 0.31 3050 0 3 0 0 EXRU106_J41 EXRU106 Land at Thursby 1 10446 0 0 0 0 EXRU11_J42 EXRU11 Home Farm 0.72 7179 1 highway flooding incident 0 33 5 0 EXRU111_J43 EXRU111 Land at Kirkbampton 1.4 14061 0 6 1 0 EXRU12_J44 EXRU12 Land at Sunny Bank 0.53 5299 0 64 12 0 EXRU178_J45 EXRU178 Garage at Brough Hill 0.72 7189 0 4 4 0 EXRU189_J46 EXRU189 Retreat Farm 0.58 5778 0 0 0 0 AARU41_J47 AARU41 Land at Brownrigg Farm 0.14 1393 0 3 0 0 AARU53_J48 AARU53 Land adjacent to Millcroft 0.27 2715 0 22 16 1 EXRU108_J49 EXRU108 Land at Hayton 0.6 6023 0 0 0 0 EXRU117_J50 EXRU117 Land at Great Clifton 0.1 1027 1 fireservice flooding incident 1 54 0 0 EXRU121_J51 EXRU121 Land at Kirkbampton 1.04 10402 0 59 23 0 AARU111_J52 AARU111 Land near High Croft 0.2 1997 0 0 0 0 AARU57_J53 AARU57 Land adjacent to Burn View 0.12 1230 0 0 0 0 EXRU150_J54 EXRU150 Land at Little Broughton 0.65 6514 1 highways flooding and 3 historic sewer0 flooding incidents0 0 0 EXRU184_J55 EXRU184 Land at Pear Tree Gardens 0.25 2519 0 0 0 0 EXRU96_J56 EXRU96 Land at Bothel 2.72 27276 0 0 0 0 EXRU180_J57 EXRU180 Land at Bothel Parks 0.55 5549 0 0 0 0 AARU29_J58 AARU29 The Garth 0.31 3094 0 0 0 0 EXRU119_J59 EXRU119 1.12 11202 0 12 0 0 EXRU195_J60 EXRU195 Land at Blooming Heather 0.18 1764 1 fireservice flooding incident 1 0 0 0 AARU133_J61 AARU133 Former Social Club 0.13 416 0 60 0 0 EXRU114_J62 EXRU114 Land at Oulton 0.94 9444 0 0 0 0 EXRU116_J63 EXRU116 Land at Great Clifton 0.39 3909 1 UU surface water flooding incident0 0 0 0 EXRU86_J64 EXRU86 Land at Great Clifton 1.22 12240 2 LA flooding hotspots and 1 UU surface0 water flooding indicent36 27 0 EXRU77_J65 EXRU77 Land at Gilcrux 0.75 7521 0 0 0 0 EXWK28_J66 EXWK28 Land at High Harrington 0.91 9182 0 0 0 0 AARU94_J67 AARU94 Land at Townhead 0.35 3478 0 0 0 0 EXRU225_J68 EXRU225 Wilson Farm 0.552 5541 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents and 11 fire service flooding16 incident 3 0 EXS002_J69 EXS002 Land at Silloth 0.25 2556 0 0 0 0 EXWK35_J70 EXWK35 Land adjoining Little Croft 0.8 14857 0 10 8 4 AARU85_J71 AARU85 Land adjacent to Rhyhill Farm (a) 0.32 3317 0 15 0 0 EXRU144_J72 EXRU144 West End Farm 0.46 4654 0 0 0 0 EXRU161_J73 EXRU161 land at Broughton Moor 1.14 11455 0 0 0 0 EXRU207_J74 EXRU207 Croft Farm 0.53 5361 0 0 0 0 AARU23_J75 AARU23 Land off Abbot Wood 0.33 3245 0 0 0 0 EXRU05_J76 EXRU05 Land at William Street 0.55 5484 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 EXRU224_J77 EXRU224 Land at Witzend 0.4 4017 0 9 0 0 EXRU51_J78 EXRU51 Land at Great Clifton 1.3 12694 1 fire service flooding incident 1 48 24 0 AAAS07_J79 AAAS07 Land off Park Road 0.27 2618 0 7 2 0 AASL06_J80 AASL06 Land at Skiddaw Street 0.23 2318 0 0 0 0 AAWK35_J81 AAWK35 Land off Barnett Drive 0.67 6759 0 0 0 0 EXRU186_J82 EXRU186 Land at Abbeytown 3.45 34640 0 11 5 0 EXRU32_J83 EXRU32 Land adjacent to Overcroft Farm, Greysouthen 0.73 7350 2 DG5 sewer flooding, 1 historic sewer0 flooding and 1 highway27 flooding incident12 0 AARU135_J84 AARU135 Thursby Glebe 1 5831 0 85 34 0 AARU79_J85 AARU79 Land near North View 0.17 1909 0 0 0 0 AASL01_J86 AASL01 Rear of Epsom Green 0.31 3151 0 55 0 0 EXRU124_J87 EXRU124 Land at Dearham 3.44 45916 0 39 24 0 AAMP23_J88 AAMP23 Land at Crummock Road 0.72 7257 0 0 0 0 AARU43_J89 AARU43 Land near Oulton Grange 0.16 1557 0 0 0 0 AAWK36_J90 AAWK36 Land at Sunnyside 0.32 3136 0 37 0 0 EXRU133_J91 EXRU133 Land at the Pow 0.28 2817 0 56 35 0 AARU22_J92 AARU22 Land adjacent to Old Ginn House 0.26 2578 0 0 0 0 EXRU18_J93 EXRU18 Land at Broughton Cross 0.54 5394 0 0 0 0 EXRU45_J94 EXRU45 Land at Broughton 0.8 8044 0 0 0 0 AAAS05_J95 AAAS05 Aspatria Car Park 0.45 4587 0 5 0 0 AARU17_J96 AARU17 Land adjacent to Bakers Meadow 0.35 3475 0 0 0 0 EXRU138_J97 EXRU138 Land at The Crofts, Crosby 0.27 2700 0 0 0 0 AASL13_J98 AASL13 Land off Skinburness Road 0.12 1257 0 0 0 0 EXRU170_J99 EXRU170 Dovenby Hall (a) 1.03 10285 0 53 24 0 AARU96_J100 AARU96 Land adjacent to Redlands 0.11 1083 0 0 0 0 AAAS12_J101 AAAS12 Aspatria Farmers 1 6193 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 6 0 0 EXRU147_J102 EXRU147 Land at Bolton Low Houses 1.2 11620 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 0 AARU54_J103 AARU54 Land adjacent to village hall 0.15 1546 0 10 0 0 EXRU79_J104 EXRU79 Croft Hill Farm 0.51 5097 0 0 0 0 EXRU142_J105 EXRU142 Land at Brigham 0.27 2745 0 0 0 0 EXRU136_J106 EXRU136 Land at West Curthwaite 0.69 6883 0 21 3 0 EXRU15_J107 EXRU15 Land at South Terrace 0.66 6641 0 0 0 0 EXRU42_J108 EXRU42 Field to rear of 18 Greenbank Close, Prospect 1.64 16500 0 0 0 0 AARU81_J109 AARU81 Land at the Fothergills 0.1 1027 1 fire service flooding incident 1 99 92 6 AARU134_J110 AARU134 Broughton Moor Allotments 0.1 1392 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 EXRU145_J111 EXRU145 Former Brickworks 0.27 2665 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 AARU36_J112 AARU36 Land at Bothel Parks 0.8 8030 2 highway flooding incidents 0 0 0 0 AAWG22_J113 AAWG22 Land off Highmoor Gardens 0.1 1011 0 0 0 0 EXWG08_J114 EXWG08 Land at Wigton 3.98 39918 0 15 11 0 AAWG01_J115 AAWG01 Land at Orchard Garth 0.72 12439 0 0 0 0 EXWG25_J116 EXWG25 Land off West Road 8.35 83782 0 19 9 4 EXWG21_J117 EXWG21 Land at Wigton 0.19 1882 0 0 0 0 EXWK06_J118 EXWK06 Land at High Harrington 3.1 31027 0 8 2 0 AAAS02_J119 AAAS02 Land at Aspatria 0.85 8346 0 0 0 0 AAAS11_J120 AAAS11 Land off Pringle 0.36 3597 0 0 0 0 AAMP04_J121 AAMP04 Maryport Harbour (a) 1.53 15903 0 16 1 0 AAMP24_J122 AAMP24 Land at The Arches 0.81 8162 2 fire service flooding incidents 2 100 64 7 EXMP06_J123 EXMP06 Land at Rose Vale 12.23 106317 1 UU surface water flooding incident0 14 7 1 AARU27_J124 AARU27 43-70 Bow Flatts 0.81 7928 0 0 0 0 AARU83_J125 AARU83 Flimby Lodge 1.87 18852 0 77 0 0 AAWK05_J126 AAWK05 Site between Town Quay & Stanley Street 0.36 3607 0 37 3 0 EXRU127_J127 EXRU127 Rose Farm 3.77 37694 1 highway flooding incident and 3 historic0 sewer flooding incidents1 0 0 EXRU206_J128 EXRU206 Land at The Hill 2.18 21847 0 0 0 0 EXRU19_J129 EXRU19 Land at Whitestiles, Seaton 2.69 27040 0 0 0 0 EXRU211_J130 EXRU211 Newlands Park 3.74 37117 1 15 2 0 AAWK02_J131 AAWK02 Land at Stanley Street 1.02 10310 0 0 0 0 EXRU146_J132 EXRU146 Land at Thursby 12.6 126232 0 30 17 1 AARU93_J133 AARU93 Mid Town Farm 1.82 18301 3 LA flooding hotspots and 1 DG5 sewer0 flooding incident0 0 0 EXRU47_J134 EXRU47 Land at Dearham 1.71 17190 0 0 0 0 EXWK17_J135 EXWK17 Land at Main Road 3.3 33087 0 0 0 0 EXWK21_J136 EXWK21 Land at Stainburn 1.68 22650 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 4 3 0 EXWK31_J137 EXWK31 Land near Coachman Inn 3.73 37389 0 4 0 0 EXMP04_J138 EXMP04 Land at Kirkborough Farm 1.66 16625 0 3 0 0 EXRU71_J139 EXRU71 Land at Great Clifton 0.59 5907 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 0001 Build_J140 0001 Build 1E+15 Buildi 21 0 0 0 0

SHLAA - 5 Year_region AAWK21_J141 AAWK21 Land off Solway Rd 0.8 7896 0 6 4 0 EXWG31_J142 EXWG31 Land at Scholars Green 1.32 12219 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 AAMP05_J143 AAMP05 Maryport Harbour (b) 0.9 9426 0 3 0 0 AAWK44_J144 AAWK44 Land at Grey Street 0.11 1126 0 0 0 0 EXWG27_J145 EXWG27 Park Square 1.51 15162 1 highway flooding incident 0 21 9 0 AAWK06_J146 AAWK06 Land adjacent to Northside Post Office 0.13 1313 0 0 0 0 EXRU198_J147 EXRU198 Ellerbeck Brow 1.64 16492 0 4 3 1 EXRU37_J148 EXRU37 Land at The Beeches, Waverton 1.7 17043 0 3 0 0 AAMP19_J149 AAMP19 Land at Mulgrew Close 0.62 6350 0 0 0 0 AARU34_J150 AARU34 Land to read of Bryn Awel 0.39 4086 0 0 0 0 AASL03_J151 AASL03 Former Fisons Factory 6.26 82872 0 1 0 0 EXWK20_J152 EXWK20 Land at Main Road 4.77 47888 0 0 0 0 AAMP33_J153 AAMP33 Land at Loweswater Road 0.29 2802 0 0 0 0 AAWG06_J154 AAWG06 Land rear of Supermarket 0.84 8421 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 AAWK07_J155 AAWK07 Land off New South Watt St 0.1 534 0 0 0 0 EXWK33_J156 EXWK33 Land adjoining Coronation Ave 7.28 72926 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 13 5 0 AAWG03_J157 AAWG03 Land off Grange Gardens 0.8 8069 0 0 0 0 EXRU158_J158 EXRU158 Land at Papcastle 0.15 1479 0 0 0 0 EXRU221_J159 EXRU221 Land at Abbey Farm, Abbeytown 2.93 29443 0 6 0 0 AASL16_J160 AASL16 Land off Skinburness Road 1.35 13262 0 0 0 0 AASL15_J161 AASL15 Land off Ryehill Road (b) 1.7 16645 0 0 0 0 AASL14_J162 AASL14 Land adjacant to Ryhills Road (a) 1.23 13125 0 0 0 0 AAWG05_J163 AAWG05 To rear of Bog Cottage 0.19 1973 1 fires service flooding incident 1 87 14 0 EXWG33_J164 EXWG33 Highmoor Park 9 89984 0 12 6 0 AAWG04_J165 AAWG04 Butchers Field 1.64 16467 0 0 0 0 EXWK32_J166 EXWK32 Land at Moor Road 5.66 55133 1 historic sewer flooding incident 0 0 0 0 EXMP05_J167 EXMP05 Land at Maryport 9.3 93387 0 0 0 0 AAWG23_J168 AAWG23 Land at Wigton 0.54 5452 0 0 0 0 EXWK05_J169 EXWK05 Land accessed off Seaton Road 3.75 37658 0 1 0 0 AAMP09_J170 AAMP09 Land at the beeches 0.21 2101 0 0 0 0 EXRU160_J171 EXRU160 Land at Birkby Lodge 2.7 26681 0 0 0 0 EXAS03_J172 EXAS03 Land adj. Aspatria RUFC 2.61 26205 0 0 0 0 EXAS06_J173 EXAS06 Land at Aspatria 9.05 90877 0 28 17 7 EXWG16_J174 EXWG16 Land at Wigton 2.07 20782 0 0 0 0 AACK01_J175 AACK01 Land off Brigham Rd 0.91 9092 0 64 39 4 EXWG07_J176 EXWG07 Land at Wigton 3.11 31225 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 0 EXWG28_J177 EXWG28 Land adjoining auction mart 5.22 52397 0 9 1 0 EXAS09_J178 EXAS09 Land off Brayton Road 0.7 7177 0 0 0 0 AAWG01_J179 AAWG01 Land at Orchard Garth 1.24 12439 0 0 0 0 AAWK23_J180 AAWK23 Former Corus Steel Works 25.14 253576 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 46 28 8 EXRU220_J181 EXRU220 Glebe Land 0.5 5191 0 40 8 0 EXRU84_J182 EXRU84 Land at Brigham 0.86 8672 0 4 0 0 EXRU76_J183 EXRU76 Land at Torpenhow 0.12 1241 0 0 0 0 EXRU50_J184 EXRU50 Site at Kirkbride 0.67 6701 0 0 0 0 EXRU181_J185 EXRU181 Land at Dearham 0.29 2983 1 fires service flooding incident 1 0 0 0 AAWK32_J186 AAWK32 Millburn Croft, Low Seaton (b) 0.69 6884 2 UU surface water flooding and 1 historic0 sewer flooding10 incidents 0 0 EXRU24_J187 EXRU24 Land at Flimby 3.16 31685 0 4 1 0 AARU123_J188 AARU123 Land at Manildra, Abbeytown 0.25 2643 0 0 0 0 EXRU78_J189 EXRU78 Land at School Brow 0.8 8065 0 10 7 0 EXWK11_J190 EXWK11 Field 2686 Stainburn 1 10491 0 6 0 0 EXRU38_J191 EXRU38 Land at Heatherfields 2.24 22485 0 4 1 0 EXRU212_J192 EXRU212 Chruch Meadows 1.72 17167 3 historic sewer flooding incidents 0 0 0 0 EXRU93_J193 EXRU93 Land at Bolton Low Houses 0.92 9211 0 10 5 0 EXWK29_J194 EXWK29 Land at Moor Road 1.4 14042 0 0 0 0 EXRU85_J195 EXRU85 Land at Crosby 0.16 1625 0 0 0 0 0030 Obstr_J196 0030 Obstr 1E+15 Land 57 0 0 0 0

Employment land_region 2/010D_J197 2/010D LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM2) BRANTHWAITE ROAD17.33 173299 0 3 0 0 2/010C_J198 2/010C LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM3) JUBILEE ROAD 25.08 250755 0 4 0 0 2/010A_J199 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 1.43 14272 0 51 0 0 2/010A_J200 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 1.73 17307 0 9 0 0 2/010E_J201 2/010E LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM4) 7.48 74821 0 8 2 0 2/010E_J202 2/010E LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM4) 0.70 6953 0 1 0 0 2/010A_J203 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 0.80 7975 0 0 0 0 2/010A_J204 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 1.22 12246 0 0 0 0 2/010A_J205 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 0.84 8366 0 10 0 0 2/010A_J206 2/010A LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM6) WORKINGTON 0.89 8913 0 38 2 0 2/010B_J207 2/010B LILLYHALL IND. ESTATE (WKEM5) 0.84 8352 0 4 0 0 2/017_J208 2/017 OLDSIDE WORKINGTON 9.72 97199 0 38 12 0 2/016_J209 2/016 PORT OF WORKINGTON WORKINGTON 3.44 34364 0 5 0 0 2/016_J210 2/016 PORT OF WORKINGTON WORKINGTON 1.83 18254 0 16 0 0 2/154_J211 2/154 LAND AT DOCK ROAD (WKEM8) WORKINGTON 1.86 18557 1 fire service flooding incident 1 3 0 0 2/124_J212 2/124 JUNCTION OF A596 AND DOCK ROAD WORKINGTON 0.77 7686 2 fire service flooding incidents 2 52 27 0 2/018_J213 2/018 ST HELENS BUSINESS PARK WORKINGTON 0.51 5077 0 0 0 0 2/126_J214 2/126 STATION GOODS YARD WORKINGTON 1.47 14715 0 34 6 0 2/172_J215 2/172 ADJ 16 LOWTHER ROAD WORKINGTON 0.08 760 1 UU surface water flooding incident0 0 0 0 2/171_J216 2/171 SNAPE ROAD WORKINGTON 0.06 639 0 41 11 0 2/164_J217 2/164 REEDLANDS ROAD WORKINGTON 0.17 1666 0 0 0 0 2/011_J218 2/011 DERWENT HOWE INDUSTRIAL WORKINGTON 0.68 6810 0 99 79 7 2/011_J219 2/011 DERWENT HOWE INDUSTRIAL WORKINGTON 0.96 9587 0 0 0 0 2/170_J220 2/170 LAND AT DERWENT ROAD WORKINGTON 0.30 3027 0 100 99 89 2/152_J221 2/152 PRINCES WAY (WKEM7) WORKINGTON 3.67 36741 0 17 1 0 2/167_J222 2/167 GRAY STREET WORKINGTON 0.11 1122 0 0 0 0 2/019B_J223 2/019B ST HELENS FLIMBY 1.83 18272 0 97 93 8 2/020_J224 2/020 RISEHOW INDUSTRIAL ESTATE FLIMBY 0.54 5391 0 8 0 0 2/022_J225 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.76 7618 0 20 5 0 2/022_J226 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.93 9336 0 1 0 0 2/022_J227 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 2.97 29681 0 3 0 0 2/022_J228 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.17 1702 0 8 0 0 2/102_J229 2/102 DERWENT MILLS COCKERMOUTH 1.24 12402 0 29 3 0 2/077_J230 2/077 LOW ROAD COCKERMOUTH 0.82 8198 0 46 24 0 2/026_J231 2/026 LAKELAND BUSINESS PARK COCKERMOUTH 0.61 6109 0 0 0 0 2/099_J232 2/099 MOOR ROAD GREAT CLIFTON 1.06 10642 1 LA hotspot and 1 highway flooding0 incidents 0 0 0 2/084_J233 2/084 ASPATRIA BUSINESS PARK ASPATRIA 2.54 25427 0 60 18 0 2/138_J234 2/138 LEEGATE FARM HOUSE WIGTON 0.12 1156 0 0 0 0 2/125_J235 2/125 SYKE ROAD NURSERIES WIGTON 0.35 3538 0 0 0 0 2/123_J236 2/123 EAST CAUSEWAYHEAD SILLOTH 1.63 16292 0 10 2 0 2/005_J237 2/005 STATION YARD SILLOTH 0.16 1616 0 0 0 0 2/155_J238 2/155 ABBEY ROAD ABBEYTOWN 0.29 2924 0 0 0 0 2/157_J239 2/157 SOUTH OF CARLISLE ROAD KIRKBRIDE 0.30 3009 0 0 0 0 2/022_J240 2/022 GLASSON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE MARYPORT 0.38 3809 0 32 23 4

5 year supply 2010_rw_region WKD01_J241 WKD01 Workington Infirmary 2.91 29140 0 0 0 0 RUD01_J242 RUD01 Rhy Hill Farm 1.33 13325 0 46 11 0 RUD2_J243 RUD2 The Brick Yard 1.13 11319 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 0 5 0 0 MPD1_J244 MPD1 Victory Crescent 2.11 21104 0 28 11 0 RUD3_J245 RUD3 Craika Close 0.82 8194 1 LA flooding hotspot, 5 DG5, 1 highway5 flooding and 5 fire0 service flooding incidents0 0 SLD1_J246 SLD1 Acre Bank Close 1.31 13140 0 0 0 0 RUA1_J247 RUA1 Abbot Wood 2.30 22982 1 LA and 1 highway flooding incidents0 0 0 0 WKA1_J248 WKA1 Ashfield Road 10.56 105635 0 4 0 0 WGA1_J249 WGA1 Kirkland Road 1.62 16155 0 2 0 0 WKA2_J250 WKA2 Barncroft Avenue 3.09 30949 1 fire service flooding incident 1 0 0 0 2/2010/003_J251 2/2010/003 89805 0 1 0 0 RUD2_J252 RUD2 The Brick Yard 1.13 11319 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 0 5 0 0 WGA2_J253 WGA2 Howrigg Bank 0.81 8144 0 0 0 0

5 year supply 2010_rw_planningapps_region 2748_J254 2748 2/2010/0078 0.14 1406 0 0 0 0 2751_J255 2751 2/2010/0089 0.02 155 0 0 0 0 2749_J256 2749 2/2010/0079 0.05 531 0 0 0 0 2742_J257 2742 2/2010/0039 0.07 719 0 0 0 0 2616_J258 2616 2/2009/0775 0.06 584 0 0 0 0 2597_J259 2597 2/2009/0625 0.15 1545 0 0 0 0 1626_J260 1626 2/2008/00898 2.67 26667 0 15 3 0 1611_J261 1611 2/2008/0806 0.01 99 0 41 0 0 2543_J262 2543 2/2008/0901 0.12 1159 1 fire service flooding incident 1 14 0 0 2353_J263 2353 2/2009/0317 0.02 170 0 0 0 0 1657_J264 1657 2/2009/0030 0.22 2208 0 0 0 0 1659_J265 1659 2.2009/0040 0.07 666 1 LA flooding hotspot and 1 fire service1 incident. 0 0 0 1623_J266 1623 2/2008/0885 0.03 330 0 100 97 0 1640_J267 1640 2/2008/0962 0.05 514 0 0 0 0 1629_J268 1629 2/2008/0909 0.01 81 0 100 0 0 1624_J269 1624 2/2008/0888 0.02 236 0 0 0 0 559_J270 559 2/2008/0517 0.05 465 0 0 0 0 2730_J271 2730 2/2010/0013 0.18 1754 1 DG5 sewer flooding incident 0 23 20 11 64_J272 64 2/2007/0686 0.16 1646 0 13 10 2 161_J273 161 2/2007/1103 0.13 1318 0 0 0 0 117_J274 117 2/2007/0900 0.03 254 0 0 0 0 33_J275 33 2/2007/0527 0.22 2223 0 0 0 0 432_J276 432 2/2006/0332 2.93 29276 1 highway and 4 fire service flooding4 incidents 9 8 5 1621_J277 1621 2/2008/0879 31.01 310127 1 UU surface water flooding incident0 39 24 7 422_J278 422 2/2007/0606 0.04 410 0 84 70 0 421_J279 421 2/2005/0918 0.05 527 0 0 0 0 419_J280 419 2/2007/0619 0.09 851 0 0 0 0 2698_J281 2698 2/2009/0855 0.20 2004 0 1 0 0 2492_J282 2492 2/2009/0453 0.32 3180 1 highway flooding incident 0 7 2 0 1647_J283 1647 2/2008/0976 0.01 146 0 0 0 0 2679_J284 2679 2/2009/0799 0.04 416 0 0 0 0 2302_J285 2302 2/2009/0210 0.03 321 0 28 0 0 1668_J286 1668 2/2009/0082 0.03 326 0 0 0 0 1650_J287 1650 2/2008/0988 0.07 748 0 0 0 0 551_J288 551 2/2008/0479 0.09 950 0 13 0 0 409_J289 409 2/2007/0685 0.13 1317 0 2 0 0 2695_J290 2695 2/2009/0859 0.04 371 0 0 0 0 2599_J291 2599 2/2009/0715 0.04 366 0 2 0 0 2434_J292 2434 2/2009/0357 0.05 504 0 0 0 0 2569_J293 2569 2/2009/0657 0.03 281 0 0 0 0 214_J294 214 2/2010/0282 0.23 2330 1 LA flooding hotspot 0 0 0 0 2566_J295 2566 2/2009/0650 0.05 476 0 0 0 0 2526_J296 2526 2/2009/0564 0.04 386 0 0 0 0 1510_J297 1510 2/2009/0518 0.26 2596 1 fire service flooding incident 1 21 12 0 2466_J298 2466 2/2009/0391 0.04 433 0 2 0 0 2333_J299 2333 2/2009/0232 0.09 879 0 0 0 0 1618_J300 1618 2/2008/0728 0.51 5077 0 0 0 0 1678_J301 1678 2/2009/0103 0.07 723 0 0 0 0 1635_J302 1635 2/2008/0937 0.44 4414 0 0 0 0 29_J303 29 2/2007/0456 0.46 4619 0 45 6 0 600_J304 600 2/2008/0631 0.09 867 0 0 0 0 65_J305 65 2/2010/0057 0.02 212 0 0 0 0 395_J306 395 2/2007/0275 0.11 1095 1 highway flooding incident 0 0 0 0 81_J307 81 2/2007/0740 0.03 321 2 DG5 sewer flooding incidents 0 0 0 0 2607_J308 2607 2/2009/0746 0.18 1754 1 fire service flooding incident 1 0 0 0 2556_J309 2556 2/2009/0618 0.04 427 1 highway and 1 histroic sewer flooding0 incidents 0 0 0 2499_J310 2499 2/2009/0491 0.13 1340 0 0 0 0 1604_J311 1604 2/2008/0777 0.70 6952 0 3 0 0 2469_J312 2469 2/2009/0424 0.02 174 1 historic sewer flooding and 13 fire13 service flooding incidents27 8 0 2470_J313 2470 2/2009/0427 0.05 526 0 0 0 0 2336_J314 2336 2/2009/0250 0.03 255 1 historic sewer flooding incidents 0 100 100 0 1639_J315 1639 2/2008/0956 0.02 197 0 0 0 0 454_J316 454 2/2008/0128 0.07 675 0 0 0 0 453_J317 453 2/2008/0126 0.06 564 0 0 0 0 152_J318 152 2/2007/1045 0.37 3744 0 1 0 0 136_J319 136 2/2007/0983 0.39 3950 0 4 0 0 118_J320 118 2/2007/0906 0.23 2260 0 21 0 0 2367_J321 2367 2/2006/0333 0.20 1965 0 0 0 0 2560_J322 2560 2/2009/0633 0.03 281 0 100 100 0 2348_J323 2348 2/2009/0286 0.05 478 0 0 0 0 1617_J324 1617 2/2008/0838 0.33 3313 0 0 0 0 1563_J325 1563 2/2009/0064 0.32 3250 0 0 0 0 1570_J326 1570 2/2008/0663 0.07 705 0 7 0 0 146_J327 146 2/2007/1017 0.01 123 0 0 0 0 1596_J328 1596 2/2008/0732 0.04 433 2 LA flooding hotspots 0 0 0 0 1582_J329 1582 2/2008/0682 0.03 306 0 0 0 0 401_J330 401 2/2007/0620 0.17 1737 0 0 0 0 190_J331 190 2/2007/1244 0.11 1105 0 10 2 0 76_J332 76 2/2007/0730 0.05 454 0 0 0 0 2727_J333 2727 2/2009/0895 0.08 759 0 0 0 0 2606_J334 2606 2/2009/0737 0.06 624 0 1 0 0 96_J335 96 2/2010/0165 0.08 825 0 0 0 0 455_J336 455 2/2008/0135 0.32 3228 0 0 0 0 WK101_J337 WK101 2/2010/0020 0.06 643 0 0 0 0 RU1010_J338 RU1010 2/2010/0214 0.10 979 0 0 0 0 WK102_J339 WK102 2/2010/0257 0.02 153 0 100 23 0 WK103_J340 WK103 2/2010/0348 0.03 311 0 0 0 0 RU102_J341 RU102 2/2010/0272 0.89 8928 4 DG5 sewer flooding, 1 highway flooding1 and 1 fire service0 flooding incidents. 0 0

No risk of surface water flooding Low risk and % cover Medium risk and medium % cover Medium/high risk and high % cover

C. 2007 SFRA Site Assessments

C.1 Introduction The region has been divided up into the following areas, and the flood risk (to potential developm ents) will be exam ined in each: • River Derwent catchm ent • River Ellen catchm ent • River W aver catchm ent • River W am pool catchm ent • Coastal stream s 1 – south of Derwent • Coastal stream s 2 – Derwent to Ellen • Coastal stream s 3 –Ellen to W aver • Coastal stream s 4 – W am pool area The regions do not follow any specific boundaries, politically or hydrologically, they are simply sub-divisions to aid presentation in the SFRA report. The boundaries are shown in Figure 7-1.

Wampool coastal

Wampool

Ellen to Waver Waver

Ellen

Derwent to Ellen

Derwent

south of Derwent

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx V

C.2 Sources of information The Allerdale area is susceptible to tidal flooding from the Irish Sea as well as fluvial flooding from the River Derwent and tributaries, River Ellen, River W aver and River W am pool. Four m aps show the locations of the allocations considered in the following assessment. These are appended to this report. The information on flood risks used in this SFRA is drawn from data held by the Environm ent Agancy. For som e of the primary watercourses, e.g. River Derwent, River Ellen, W igton area, detailed studies have been carried out to assess flood risks for different return periods. W here this detailed information is available it has been used to define the areas at risk as Zone 3b – Functional Floodplain (area within the 4% AEP flood outline (1 in 25 year) or recorded as flooding historically by the Environm ent Agency), Zone 3a – High Probability (> 1 in 100 (>1%) for river flooding and > 1 in 200 (>0.5%) for flooding from the sea) and Zone 2 – Medium Probability (Between 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) and 1 in 100 (1%) for river flooding, 1 in 200 (0.5%) for flooding from the sea). In these detailed studies the influence of formal flood defences is incorporated, e.g. at Cockermouth. For the rem aining areas within the SFRA where there are no detailed studies the Environm ent Agency Flood Map data has been used. This has been derived nationally to provide indicative 1% and 0.1% flood outlines. The Flood Map data does not take into account flood defences or structures such as culverts. The Flood Map outlines have been used to derive the risk Zones as required in PPS25. In this case the 1% Flood Map outline m ust be considered as Zone 3b – Functional Floodplain as the PPS25 Practice Guide states (para 3.17): “All areas within Zone 3 should be considered as Zone 3b (Functional Floodplain) unless, or until, an appropriate FRA shows to the satisfaction of the EA that it can be considered as falling within Zone 3A (High Probability)”. Effectively this is advocating a precautionary approach by applying the highest protection standard where there is uncertainty between Zones 3a and 3b, i.e. with the 1% Flood Map outline. Further work would have to be carried out on a site specific basis to determine this division between 3a and 3b to the satisfaction of the Environm ent Agency. This is only likely to be necessary on More Vulnerable and Less Vulnerable developm ent proposals. For other developm ent types the 3a or 3b division is not significant (see Error! Reference source not found.). Again Zone 2 – Medium Probability corresponds with the area between the 1% AEP (1 in 100 year) outline and 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) outline. W here risk is purely tidal, Flood Zone 3 are assum ed 3a as tidal floodplain is generally not considered functional, i.e. it can be lost without affecting water levels elsewhere. The following assessment considers both allocations from the Allerdale Local Plan (1999) and additional sites identified by the Council as Areas of Search for future allocations. The areas of search present a m ore uncertain assessment as the outline provided for areas of search are approximate and the type of developm ent is not always available. One point to note is that a large proportion of the sites assessed within Flood Zones 2 and 3 are Greenfield sites. This will m ake the Exception Test m ore difficult to pass for these sites – see criteria b of the Exception Test. In m any cases adjustem ent of the site boundary m ay rem ove the need for the Exception Test to be applied, i.e. rem ove that part of the site in the Flood Zone. Alternatively it m ay be possible to allow for water com patible use, public open space or a m aintenance easem ent (typically 8m adjacent to the watercourse) within the Flood Zone area.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx VI

C.3 Derwent catchment The River Derwent catchm ent encom passes the River Derwent and tributaries including River Marron, River Cocker. The town of Cockermouth is entirely within this area and part of W orkington. Villages at known flood risk are primarily those on the River Marron, nam ely Bridgefoot, Branthwaite and Ullock. Cockermouth is at significant flood risk from both the River Derwent and River Cocker. Cockermouth is protected by flood defences from both rivers. Although constructed to 1% AEP standard the defences were overtopped on the Derwent in January 2005 flooding part of the town centre. The standard of protection of these defences is currently under review by the Environm ent Agency. The other m ain flood risk areas are the villages of Bridgefoot, Branthwaite and Ullock situated on the River Marron. Parts of these villages flooded in October 2005, including som e areas of deep, fast flowing water particularly in Bridgefoot. No other urban areas are at known risk of flooding from the m ain watercourses in this area. Developm ent pressures are m ainly around Cockermouth, Broughton, Brigham and Great Clifton. Derwent catchment: Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues issues Derwent Park, Broughton 0.38 River None None (H8) Derwent Low Road, Cockermouth (E5) 0.29 River Culverted None Derwent watercourse nearby. Moor Road, Great Clifton 2.29 River None None (H12) Derwent W illiam Street, Great Clifton 0.28 River Possible issue None (H13) Derwent with near suface minewater seepage Moor Road, Great Clifton 0.91 River None None (E12) Derwent Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream Issues issues Field on the corner of Isel River Derwent None None Road snd Castlegate Drive, Cockermouth (SA12) School Fields, Castlegate River Derwent None None Drive, Cockermouth(SA13) Fields at boundary of Tom Rudd Beck/ River None Centre of Cockermouth town along Derwent Cockermouth is Tom Rudd Beck (SA14) downstream Fields at south boundary River Cocker/ River None Centre of of Cockermouth town Derwent Cockermouth is (SA15) downstream

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx VII

Brigham Hall Farm (SA32) Elller Beck/ River None None Derwent Fields on Hotchberry Eller Beck/ River None None Road, Brigham (SA33) Derwent Fields, Brigham (SA34) Eller Beck/ River None None Derwent Cam erton Road Area, River Derwent Surface W ater None Broughton (SA35) runoff problem s associated with a culvert Fields nr. Fletcher Close, River Derwent None None Great Broughton (SA36) Fields at Meeting House River Derwent Surface W ater None Lane/ Graggs Road (SA37) runoff Field in Broughton Cross River Derwent Nearby culvert None area, Brigham (SA38) problem s Harpers Lane, River Marron Surface water Bridgefoot is Greysouthern (SA49) downstream . Overcroft, Greysouthen River Marron Partially at Bridgefoot is (SA50) flood risk from downstream . Rigging Gill Field, Branthwaite (SA30) River Marron None Bridgefoot is downstream . Low Lodge Farm, Great River Derwent Low lying and None Clifton (SA48) easily waterlogged

Derwent catchment: Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP Site: W akefield Road, Cockerm outh (E4) Size (ha): 1.27 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: River Derwent Flood Zones: 1 (20% ) 2 (80% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over (Geology / Map clayey and clayey soils. symbol and subgroup Could also have: / Soil and site • River alluvium (561c) – Deep stoneless permeable coarse loam y soils. Som e fine loam y soils variably affected by groundwater. characteristics): Over gravel in places. Flat land. Risk of flooding. Indicative suitability Low/Medium for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: Central Cockermouth.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx VIII

Exception Test No applicable: Likelihood of passing N/A Exception Test:

Recommendations: An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 developm ent. The Council w ill expect the developer to assess the need for the developm ent and alternative sites.

Areas of Search Site: N ew Bridge Road/ Riverside area, W orkington (SA3) Size (ha): 80 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Derwent Flood Zones: 1 (15% ) 2 (15% ) 3a (50% ) 3b (20% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal and Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. / Map symbol and Likely to be: subgroup / Soil and site • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over characteristics): clayey and clayey soils. • River alluvium (561c) – Deep stoneless permeable coarse loam y soils. Som e fine loam y soils variably affected by groundwater. Over gravel in places. Flat land. Risk of flooding. Indicative suitability for Low/Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Partly greenfield/partly brownfield. Known local issues: Partly in River Derwent floodplain – tidal fllooding. Drainage problem s on Church Street. Launddry Fields site is within this area – see detailed assessment in Seciton 4. Potential contam ination from tipping across this area. Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – m ixed brownfireld and Greenfield site. Site too large Exception Test: for simple assessment. Many areas should be acceptable, residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Areas w ithin 3a and 3b should be considered for w ater com patible use.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx IX

Site: Land around both sides of the River M arron, Branthw aite (SA31) Size (ha): 7 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Marron Flood Zones: 1 (65% ) 2 (5% ) 3b (30% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : >1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: Only small part by 66m Left bank private floodwall US bridge Soil m ap data • Glaciofluvial drift (541u) – Very stony well drained loam y soils locally on hum m ocky ground. Som e similar but less stony soils. (Geology / Map symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability High for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Mainly greenfield. Som e brownfield (e.g. fish farm, buildings) Known local issues: Serious flooding near River Marron – e.g. Oct 2005. Downstream issues: Bridgefoot is downstream where serious flooding occurred in 2005. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Greenfield site 30% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Site: Fields both sides of the River M arron adjacent to Clifton, Little Clifton & Bridgefoot (SA54) Size (ha): 30 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Marron & Lostrigg Beck Flood Zones: 1 (83% ) 2 (2% ) 3b (15% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : >1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx X

Soil m ap data (Geology • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over / Map symbol and clayey and clayey soils. subgroup / Soil and site • Glaciofluvial Drift (541u) – Very stony well drained loam y soils locally on hum m ocky ground. Som e similar but less stony soils. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known local issues: Serious flooding near River Marron – e.g. October 2005 Downstream issues: None. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Greenfield site but only 15% in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Site: Land surrounding confluence of Snary Beck and River M arron, Ullock (SA61) Size (ha): 5 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Marron Flood Zones: 1 (65% ) 3b (35% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : >1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology • Glaciofluvial Drift (541u) – Very stony well drained loam y soils locally on hum m ocky ground. Som e similar but less stony soils. / Map symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability for High SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known local issues: Known flooding in October 2005 Downstream issues: Branthwaite and Bridgefoot are downstream . Exception Test Yes applicable:

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XI

Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield site 35% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

C.4 Ellen catchment: The River Ellen flows through m ainly rural parts of Allerdale to its outfall into the Irish Sea at Maryport. Areas where property is at flood risk are few but include parts of Maryport and the villages of Blennerhasset and Baggrow where property flooded in January 2005. The town of Aspatria is within this area but is not at risk of flooding from a m ajor watercourse. Developm ent pressures are m ainly around Maryport, Aspatira and Dearham .

Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues Issues Land east of Station Road, 0.94 River Ellen None Maryport is Aspatria (E8) downstream Land west of Station Road, 0.60 River Ellen None Maryport is Aspatria (E9) downstream Arkleby Road Industrial Sites, 7.91 River Ellen None Maryport is Aspatria (E10) downstream

Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream Issues Issues Field next to A596, NE of River Ellen None Other parts of Maryport (SA11) Maryport are further downstream . Fields on Station road, River Ellen None Maryport is Aspatria (SA26) downstream Midtown Farm Buildings & River Ellen None Maryport is nearby residences (SA27) downstream Fields on Harriston Road, River Ellen None Maryport is Aspatria (SA28) downstream Field/ Residential area in River Ellen Surface Maryport is

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XII

Gilcrux (SA47) Drainage downstream problem Field, Oughterside (SA55) River Ellen W aterlogged Maryport is site downstream Field parallel with Greenbank River Ellen None Maryport is Close, Prospect (SA56) downstream Fields along road called ‘The Row Beck/ River Standing water Maryport is W ent’, Dearham (SA42) Ellen in winter downstream along River Ellen. Field near Rowm oor Farm, Row Beck/ River Localised Maryport is Dearham (SA44) Ellen flooding in downstream along som e of area River Ellen. Field in Heatherfields area, Furnace Gill None None Broughton Moor (SA39)

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP Site Glasson Industrial Estate, M aryport(E1) Size (ha): 10.8 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: Eel Sike Flood Zones: 1 (70% ) 2 (25% ) 3b (5% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : >1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. / Map symbol and Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged subgroup / Soil and site reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight characteristics): seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally affected by groundwater. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Eel Syke has been known to flood in this area due to culvert blockage. Downstream issues: None Exception Test No applicable: Likelihood of passing N/A Exception Test: Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 developm ent. The Council w ill expect the developer to assess the need for the developm ent and alternative sites.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XIII

Areas of Search Site: Land alongside Tow nhead Farm , Dearham (SA43) Size (ha): 10 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Row Beck Flood Zones: 1 (87% ) 2 (1% ) 3b (12% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <2 Average: <1.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over (Geology / Map clayey and clayey soils. symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability Low for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: Beck through the site can flood but none away from that. Downstream issues: Maryport is downstream ,after Row Beck joins River Ellen. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Greenfield site but only 12% in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

C.5 Waver catchment The River W aver flows through m ainly rural parts of Allerdale to its outfall into the Irish Sea at Moricam be Bay. Areas where property is at flood risk are very few. The largest settlem ent is Abbeytown which is no m ore than a small village itself. There is very little developm ent pressure in this catchem ent.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XIV

Waver catchment: Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues Issues Silloth Road, Abbeytown (H7) 0.55 Stank Beck None None / River W aver Abbey Road, Abbeytown 0.37 Stank Beck None None (E11) / River W aver

Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream Issues Issues Land opposite W ar Mem orial, River W aver Local highway None W averton (SA62) flooding at edge of site

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP There are no Allocations to which this applies. Areas of Search Site: Field surrounding Stank Beck, Abbeytow n (SA29) Size (ha): 5 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Stank Beck (runs into River W aver) Flood Zones: 1 (60% ) 2 (10% ) 3a(30% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :<1.5 Average: <1.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial Map symbol and drainage. Flat land. subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability for Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 30% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XV

easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

C.6 Wampool catchment The W am pool and its tributaries flow through m ainly rural parts of Allerdale to its outfall into the Irish Sea at Moricam be Bay. The m ain area of flood risk is at W igton where flooding has been recorded in January 2005. The m ain developm ent pressures are also in W igton. Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues Issues Land adjacent to 0.78 Speet Gill / None None Howriggbank, W igton (H4) W iza Beck Kirkland Road, W igton (H5) 1.53 Speet Gill None None Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream Issues Issues Fields on North side of W iza Beck None None railway line, W igton (SA17) Fields near Cross Lane, W iza Beck None None W igton (SA19) Highm oor Park, W igton Speet Gill/ W iza None Other parts of W igton (SA21) Beck are further downstream . Syke Business Park and W iza Beck None Other parts of W igton surrounding fields, W igton are further (SA22) downstream . Field North of Thursby (SA58) Matty Beck/ None None W am pool River Field SE of Thursby (SA59) Matty Beck/ None None W am pool River Field SW of Thursby (SA60) Matty Beck/ None None W am pool River

Flood Zone 2 & 3 Allocations from LDP There are no Allocations to which this applies.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XVI

Areas of Search Site: Caravan Site/ Fields, W igton (SA16) Size (ha): 10 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): W iza Beck, Speet Gill Flood Zones: 1(23% ) 2(2% ) 3a(25% ) 3b(50% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <2 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight (Geology / Map seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally symbol and subgroup affected by groundwater. / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability Low for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: W igton has a history of flooding Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 50% in FZ3b; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider not allocating this site or adjusting developm ent outline.

Site: Fields on South side of railway line, W igton (SA18) Size (ha): 9 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Black Beck, W iza Beck Flood Zones: 1(40% ) 2(0% ) 3a(20% ) 3b(40% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: <1.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology Unknown / Map symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics):

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XVII

Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: W igton has a history of flooding Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 40% in FZ3b; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 3 areas.

Consider not allocating this site or adjusting developm ent outline.

Site: Field and houses on W est Road, W igton (SA20) Size (ha): 13 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Black Beck, W iza Beck Flood Zones: 1(95% ) 2(0% ) 3a(2% ) 3b(3% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: <0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / Unknown Map symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: W igton has a history of flooding Downstream issues: Other parts of W igton are further downstream . Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing High – Greenfield site but only 5% in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XVIII

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 3 areas.

C.7 Coastal Streams 1 – south of Derwent This area incorporates m uch of W orkington and Harrington. There is known flood risk from the River W yre at Harrington and coastal areas of W orkington. Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues Issues Derwent Road, W orkington 1.74 (drains None None (H1) direct to) Irish Sea

Areas of Search There are no Allocations to which this applies.

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP Site: Ashfield Road South, M oorclose, W orkington (H2) Size (ha): 10.25 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: Eller Beck Flood Zones: 1(96% ) 2(1% ) 3b (3% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / • Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly subgroup / Soil and site permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over characteristics): clayey and clayey soils. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known local issues: Very wet site, waterlogging. Possible issues with contam inated m inewater. Downstream issues: Eller Beck joins River W yre at Harrington where there are known flooding issues. Exception Test No

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XIX

applicable: Likelihood of passing N/A Exception Test: Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas. The Council w ill expect the developer to assess the need for the developm ent and alternative sites.

Areas of Search Site: The How e/ Derw ent H ow e Industrial Estate, W orkington (SA1) Size (ha): 300 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Derwent, Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (60% ) 2 (12% ) 3a (28% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Som e Coastal Defences Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and Likely to be: subgroup / Soil and site • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over characteristics): clayey and clayey soils. • River alluvium (561c) – Deep stoneless permeable coarse loam y soils. Som e fine loam y soils variably affected by groundwater. Over gravel in places. Flat land. Risk of flooding. Indicative suitability for Low/Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known local issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Brownfireld site but 28% in FZ3. Site too large for Exception Test: simple assessment. Many areas should be acceptable, residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XX

Site: Bellaport M arina, Harrington (SA2) Size (ha): 10 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Direct to Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (75% ) 2 (1% ) 3a (14% ) 3b (10% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal & Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and Likely to be: subgroup / Soil and site • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over characteristics): clayey and clayey soils. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known local issues: River W yre at Harrington is a known flood risk area. Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield site, 24% in FZ3; indicative depth of flooding Exception Test: <1m . need to consider residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and the fluvial is assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

C.8 Coastal Streams 2 – Derwent to Ellen This incorporates the area from W orkington through Flimby and Seaton to the south side of Maryport. There are considerable developm ent pressures along this coastal strip and several known flooding issues at Seaton, Flimby and Maryport. Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXI

(ha) Issues Issues Croftfield Road, W orkington 3.08 Ling Beck None None & Seaton (H3) Land adjacent to Miners 1.24 Furnace Possible culvert None Arms, Broughton Moor (H9) Gill capacity issue Rye Hill Road, Flimby (H11) 1.10 Penny Gill Severe None waterlogging

Areas of Search There are no Allocations to which this applies.

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP There are no Allocations to which this applies. Areas of Search Site: Area around Siddick junction (disused), next to Siddick Ponds N ature Reserve, W orkington (SA4) Size (ha): 7 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): (drains direct to) Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (80% ) 2 (5% ) 3a (15% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. (Geology / Map Likely to be: symbol and subgroup • Drift from Palaeozoic sandstone and shale (713g) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged fine loam y, fine loam y over / Soil and site clayey and clayey soils. characteristics): • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally affected by groundwater. Indicative suitability Low for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known local issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield and 15% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXII

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

Site: Form er Industrial land between Sew age w orks and Saw M ill, Siddick, W orkington (SA5) Size (ha): 40 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Direct to Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (25% ) 2 (10% ) 3a (65% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: <1.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Partly <100 yr SoP Soil m ap data (Geology / • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight Map symbol and seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils subgroup / Soil and site seasonally affected by groundwater. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known local issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 65% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Site: Iggesund M ill and area around it, W orkington (SA66) Size (ha): 45.0 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): LingBeck, W ythegill Sike, Totter Gill Flood Zones: 1(55% ) 2(5% ) 3a (40% ) Indicative depth of Inundation (m ) Maximum : <1 Average: < 0.5 Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Partly <100 yr SoP Soil m ap data (Geology / Map Unknown symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability for SUDs: Low Brown / greenfield: Brownfield

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXIII

Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing Exception M edium – Brownfield site 40% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessment of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Site: Coastguard station and M arina, M aryport (SA6) Size (ha): 7 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Ellen/ Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (40% ) 2 (7% ) 3a (53% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Yes – Maryport harbour schem e is 75 year SoP Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight subgroup / Soil and site seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils characteristics): seasonally affected by groundwater. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Maryport harbour area has had a history of flooding prior to schem e construction. Most of this area is above likely tide level. Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing Exception M edium – Brownfield site but 53% is in FZ3; need to consider Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recommendations: This area is behind M aryport Harbour defences but residual risk is likely to be low due to ground levels suggesting only shallow w ater.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Site: Old Car Park between Dock and South Quay Road, M aryport (SA7) Size (ha): 2 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Ellen

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXIV

Flood Zones: 1 (13% ) 2 (2% ) 3a (85% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : < 0.5 Average:< 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Yes – Maryport harbour schem e is 75 year SoP Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight subgroup / Soil and site seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils characteristics): seasonally affected by groundwater. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Maryport harbour area has had a history of flooding prior to schem e construction Downstream Issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing Low – Brownfield site but 85% is in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: This area is behind M aryport Harbour defences but residual risk is likely to be low due to ground levels suggesting only shallow w ater.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 developm ent.

Site: South Quay Road area, M aryport (SA8) Size (ha): 3 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Ellen Flood Zones: 1(20% ) 2(25% ) 3a (55% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Yes – Maryport harbour schem e is 75 year SoP Soil m ap data (Geology Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. / Map symbol and • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight subgroup / Soil and seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally site characteristics): affected by groundwater Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Maryport harbour area has had a history of flooding prior to schem e construction

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXV

Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Brownfield site but 55% is in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: This area is behind M aryport Harbour defences but residual risk is likely to be low due to ground levels suggesting only shallow w ater.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 developm ent.

Site: Land along River Ellen near N etherton area, M aryport (SA9) Size (ha): 30 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River Ellen Flood Zones: 1(5% ) 2(50% ) 3b(45% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <3 Average:<2 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal and Fluvial Defended: No Soil m ap data Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. (Geology / Map • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight symbol and subgroup seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally / Soil and site affected by groundwater. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Partiallly Brownfield. Partially Greenfield, including recreation ground and a wood. Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: East side of site is upstream of som e residential housing in Maryport . W est side is m ostly downstream of all the housing. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Mainly Brownfield site but 45% is in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Com plex flood risks from fluvial, tidal and com bined sources.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXVI

Zone 3 area is assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Consider w ater com patible uses for Flood Zone 3 areas.

Site: Hutton Place, M aryport (SA10) Size (ha): 20 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): (drains direct to) Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (75% ) 2(0% ) 3a (25% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <2 Average:<1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No. Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight subgroup / Soil and site seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils characteristics): seasonally affected by groundwater. Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield site 25% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3 (Maintenance easem ent (8m ) along the river m ay achieve this).

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

Site: Part of Risehow Industrial Estate, Flim by (SA45) Size (ha): 5 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Furnace Gill

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXVII

Flood Zones: 1 (85% ) 2 (5% ) 3a (10% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : < 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight Map symbol and seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils subgroup / Soil and site seasonally affected by groundwater. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Has been local flooding from Furness Gill due to culvert problem but should now be alleviated. Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield and 85% in FZ1; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

Site: Field on W est Lane, Flim by (SA46) Size (ha): 6 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): (drains directly into) Irish Sea Flood Zones: 1 (70% ) 2 (7% ) 3a (23% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : < 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Yes, Sea W all along som e of frontage Soil m ap data (Geology / • Reddish till (711n) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine and coarse loam y soils, and similar soils with slight Map symbol and seasonal waterlogging. Som e deep coarse loam y soils seasonally subgroup / Soil and site affected by groundwater. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXVIII

Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 23% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

C.9 Coastal Streams 3 – Ellen to Waver This is very rural stretch of coastline north from Maryport which includes the settlem ents of Allonby, Silloth and Skinburness. There are som e know flooding areas, for exam ple at W estnewton and Silloth. The only developm ent pressure is in the area around Silloth.

Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP Site Area Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream (ha) Issues Issues Park Road, Aspatria (E7) 3.15 Crookhurst None None Beck

Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream issues Issues Holiday Centre/ Greenrow Sneckyeat Beck None None Farm, Silloth (SA24) Crofton Hall Farm, Crofton River W am pool Possible None (SA63) flooding from culvert blockage on part of site Moor Park, Crosby (SA40) River Ellen None Maryport is downstream along River Ellen. Residential area near ‘The River Ellen None Maryport is Green’, Crosby (SA41) downstream along River Ellen.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXIX

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP Site: Solway Village, Silloth (H6) Size (ha): 4.56 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: Sneckyeat Beck/ East Cote Sough Flood Zones: 1(98% ) 2(2% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Coastal defences Soil m ap data (Geology / Unsurveyed, m ainly urban and industrial areas. Map symbol and • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial subgroup / Soil and site drainage. Flat land. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: Very wet site, frequently waterlogged. Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: No Likelihood of passing N/A Exception Test: Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 2.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 areas. The Council w ill expect the developer to assess the need for the developm ent and alternative sites.

Site: M oricom be Park, Skinburness (H14) Size (ha): 3.59 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: Sneckyeat Beck Flood Zones: 1 (50% ) 2(30% ) 3a (20% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Coastal defences, Sea Dyke – SoP 100 years Soil m ap data (Geology / • Glaciofluvial drift (551d) – Deep well drained sandy and coarse loam y soils. Som e sandy soils affected by groundwater. Risk of Map symbol and wind and water erosion. subgroup / Soil and site • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial characteristics): drainage. Flat land. Indicative suitability for High/Medium

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXX

SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Brownfield site 20% in FZ3; need to consider residual Exception Test: risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

Site: Harvest Industrial Estate, Silloth (E6) Size (ha): 16.5 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent: Sneckyeat Beck Flood Zones: 1 (20% ) 2 (30% ) 3a (50% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : < 1 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Coastal defences, Sea Dyke – SoP 100 years Soil m ap data (Geology / Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils Map symbol and variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial subgroup / Soil and site drainage. Flat land. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: No Likelihood of passing N/A Exception Test: Recom m endations: An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas. The Council w ill expect the developer to assess the need for the developm ent and alternative sites.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXI

Areas of Search Site: Fields South of and East of Silloth, B5302 (SA23) Size (ha): 90 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Sneckyeat Beck Flood Zones: 1 (60% ) 2 (20% ) 3a (20% ) Indicative depth of Maximum : <1.5 Average:< 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: Coastal defences, Sea Dyke – SoP 100 years Soil m ap data • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial drainage. (Geology / Map Flat land symbol and subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability Medium for SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Mainly greenfield, som e brownfield. Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 40% in FZ2; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas – see Section 4.

Site: Silloth Airfield (SA25) Size (ha): 200 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Sneckyeat Beck, Causewayhead Beck Flood Zones: 1 (25% ) 2 (10% ) 3a (65% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :<1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal and som e Fluvial Defended: Coastal defences, Sea Dyke – SoP 100 years Soil m ap data (Geology / • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial Map symbol and drainage. Flat land subgroup / Soil and site

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXII

characteristics): Indicative suitability for Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Brownfield site but 65% is in FZ3; need to consider Exception Test: residual risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 developm ent. Residuak risk behind defences w ith potentially large w ater depths - see Section 4.

Site: M arsh Farm / Tow ers Lodge Area, Skinburness (SA57) Size (ha): 10 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Sneckyeat Beck Flood Zones: 1 (65% ) 2 (15% ) 3a (20% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :<1.5 Average: <1 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology • Glaciofluvial drift (551d) – Deep well drained sandy and coarse loam y soils. Som e sandy soils affected by groundwater. Risk of / Map symbol and wind and water erosion. subgroup / Soil and site characteristics): Indicative suitability for High SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Brownfield Known Local Issues: Low lying land behind coastal erosion protection Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing High – Brownfield and 65% in FZ1; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXIII

Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

C.10 Coastal Streams 4 – Wampool area This is very rural area incorporating villages including Kirkbride and Bowness on Solway. There are som e know flooding areas at Kirkbride which is where the current developm ent pressure is also located. .

Flood Zone 1

Allocations from LDP There are no Allocations to which this applies.

Areas of Search Site Catchm ent Know n Local Dow nstream Issues Issues Birch Hill, Kirkbride (SA64) River W am pool Local drainage None problem s

Flood Zone 2 & 3

Allocations from LDP There are no Allocations to which this applies. Areas of Search Site: Field in Kirkbride (SA51) Size (ha): 7 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Monks’ Dyke/ River W am pool Flood Zones: 1 (10% ) 2 (0% ) 3a (90% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :< 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology • Reddish Till (711m ) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine loam y over clayey, fine loam y and clayey soils / Map symbol and associated with fine loam y over clayey soils with slowly subgroup / Soil and site permeable subsoils and slight seasonal waterlogging. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: Problem s close to Monks’ Dike Downstream issues: None Exception Test Yes

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXIV

applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 90% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas.

Consider not allocating this site.

Site: Fields in Kirkbride opposite Kirkbride House (SA52) Size (ha): 3 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Monks’ Dyke/ River W am pool Flood Zones: 1 (80% ) 2 (0% ) 3a (20% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :< 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / • Reddish Till (711m ) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine loam y over clayey, fine loam y and clayey soils Map symbol and associated with fine loam y over clayey soils with slowly subgroup / Soil and site permeable subsoils and slight seasonal waterlogging. characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None Exception Test applicable: Yes Likelihood of passing M edium – Greenfield site 20% in FZ3; need to consider residual Exception Test: risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXV

Site: Agricultural land south of Kirkbride village and Kirkbride Airfield (SA53) Size (ha): 200 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): River W am pool Flood Zones: 1 (75% ) 2 (5% ) 3a (5% ) 3b (15% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :< 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal, NW corner. Fluvial, eastern edge. Defended: Raised defences- em bankm ent on left bank of River W am pool Soil m ap data (Geology • Reddish Till (711m ) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine loam y over clayey, fine loam y and clayey soils / Map symbol and associated with fine loam y over clayey soils with slowly subgroup / Soil and site permeable subsoils and slight seasonal waterlogging. • Marine alluvium (811d) – Deep stoneless silty and fine sandy characteristics): soils variably affected by groundwater depending on artificial drainage. Flat land. Indicative suitability for Low/Medium SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing M edium – Greenfield site 20% in FZ3; need to consider residual Exception Test: risk (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The m ajority of this site is located in Flood Zone 1 and is therefore available for developm ent. Allocation outline could be adjusted to lim it that in Flood Zone 3.

The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

Zone 3 area is Flood m ap and the fluvial is assum ed 3b. An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 2 and 3 areas, to include definition of 3a and 3b areas.

Consider w ater com patible use for Flood Zone 3 area.

Site: Angerton Bridge, Kirkbride (SA65) Size (ha): 1.1 Reference: Allerdale Local Plan and Proposal Maps Catchm ent(s): Monks’ Dike Flood Zones: 1 (0% ) 2 (0% ) 3a (100% ) Indicative depth of Maximum :< 0.5 Average: < 0.5 Inundation (m ) Tidal or Fluvial: Tidal

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXVI

Defended: No Soil m ap data (Geology / • Reddish Till (711m ) – Slowly permeable seasonally waterlogged reddish fine loam y over clayey, fine loam y and clayey soils Map symbol and associated with fine loam y over clayey soils with slowly subgroup / Soil and site permeable subsoils and slight seasonal waterlogging characteristics): Indicative suitability for Low SUDs: Brown / greenfield: Greenfield Known Local Issues: None Downstream issues: None. Exception Test Yes applicable: Likelihood of passing Low – Greenfield site 100% in FZ3; need to consider residual risk Exception Test: (m itigation m easures), sustainable developm ent objectives, access etc. Recom m endations: The Council should asses land allocations as part of the LDF spatial planning process, against criteria a) and b) of the Exceptions Test.

An assessm ent of flood risk w ill be required for Flood Zone 3 areas.

Consider not allocating this site.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXVII

D. Glossary

Attenuation Reduction of peak flow and increased duration of a flow event. Catchment Flood Management Plans (CFMP) A strategic planning tool through which the Environment Agency will seek to work with other key decision-makers within a river catchment to identify and agree policies for sustainable flood risk management. Climate change Long-term variations in global temperatures and weather patterns, both natural and as a result of human activity. Compensation storage A floodplain area introduced to compensate for the loss of storage as a result of land raising for development purposes. Design event A historic or notional flood event of a given annual flood probability, against which the suitability of a proposed development is assessed and mitigation measures, if any, are designed. Design flood level The maximum estimated water level during the design event. DG5 register Register held by water companies on the location of properties at risk of sewage related flooding problems Extreme Flood Outline Flood ‘zone’ maps released by the Environment Agency to depict anticipated 0.1% (1 in 1000 year) flood extents in a consistent manner throughout the UK Flood defence Flood defence infrastructure, such as flood walls and embankments, intended to protect an area against flooding to a specified standard of protection. Flood and coastal defence The Environment Agency, local authorities and Internal Drainage Boards Operating Authorities with legislative powers to undertake flood and coastal defence works. Flood Hazard Flood hazard = d (v+0.5) +DF Where: d is depth m v is velocity ms-1 DF is the debris factor with a value of 0-1

Floodmap A map produced by the Environment Agency providing an indication of the likelihood of flooding within all areas of England and Wales, assuming there are no flood defences. Only

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXVIII

covers river and sea flooding.

Floodplain Area of land that borders a watercourse, an estuary or the sea, over which water flows in time of flood, or would flow but for the presence of flood defences where they exist. Flood Estimation Handbook (FEH) Provides current methodologies for estimation of flood flows for the UK. Flood Risk Management (FRM) The introduction of mitigation measures (or options) to reduce the risk posed to property and life as a result of flooding. It is not just the application of physical flood defence measures. Flood risk management strategy A long-term approach setting out the objectives and options for managing flood risk, taking into account a broad range of technical, social, environmental and economic issues. Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) A study to assess the risk to an area or site from flooding, now and in the future, and to assess the impact that any changes or development on the site or area will have on flood risk to the site and elsewhere. It may also identify, particularly at more local levels, how to manage those changes to ensure that flood risk is not increased. PPS25 differentiates between regional, sub- regional/strategic and site- specific flood risk assessments. Flood risk management measure Any measure which reduces flood risk such as flood defences. Flood Zone A geographic area within which the flood risk is in a particular range, as defined within PPS25. Fluvial Flooding caused by overtopping of rivers or stream banks. Freeboard The difference between the flood defence level and the design flood level, which includes a safety margin for residual uncertainties. Greenfield land Land that has not been previously developed. ISIS ISIS is a software package used for 1-Dimensional river modelling. It is used as an analysis tool for flood risk mapping, flood forecasting and other aspects of flood risk management analysis. Local Development Framework (LDF) A non-statutory term used to describe a folder of documents which includes all the local planning authority’s Local Development Documents (LDDs). The local development framework will also comprise the statement of community involvement, the local development scheme and the annual monitoring report. Local Development Documents (LDD) All development plan documents which will form part of the statutory (LDDs) development plan, as well as supplementary planning documents which do not form part of the statutory development plan. Main River

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XXXIX

A watercourse designated on a statutory map of Main Rivers, maintained by Defra, on which the Environment Agency has permissive powers to construct and maintain flood defences. Major development A major development is: a) where the number of dwellings to be provided is ten or more, or the site area is 0.5 Ha or more or b) non-residential development, where the floorspace to be provided is 1,000 m2 or more, or the site area is 1 ha or more. NFCDD The Environment Agency's National Flood and Coastal Defence Database (NFCDD). Ordinary watercourse All rivers, streams, ditches, drains, cuts, dykes, sluices, sewers (other than public sewer) and passages through which water flows which do not form part of a Main River. Local authorities and, where relevant, Internal Drainage Boards have similar permissive powers on ordinary watercourses, as the Environment Agency has on Main Rivers. Permitted development rights Qualified rights to carry out certain limited forms of development without the need to make an application for planning permission, as granted under the terms of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995. Planning Policy Statement (PPS) A statement of policy issued by central Government to replace Planning Policy Guidance notes. Previously-developed land Land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the (often referred to brownfield land) curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure (PPS3 annex B) Ramsar Site Sites identified or meeting criteria set out in The RAMSAR Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. This definition has no legal status, but such sites are designated as SSSIs under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Reservoir (large raised) A reservoir that holds at least 25,000 cubic metres of water above natural ground level, as defined by the Reservoirs Act, 1975. Residual risk The risk which remains after all risk avoidance, reduction and mitigation measures have been implemented. Resilience Constructing the building in such a way that although flood water may enter the building, its impact is minimised, structural integrity is maintained and repair, drying & cleaning are facilitated. Resistance Constructing a building in such a way as to prevent flood water entering the building or damaging its fabric. This has the same meaning as flood proof.

Return period

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XL

The long-term average period between events of a given magnitude which have the same annual exceedence probability of occurring. Risk The threat to property and life as a result of flooding, expressed as a function of probability (that an event will occur) and consequence (as a result of the event occurring). Run-off The flow of water from an area caused by rainfall. Section 106 Agreement Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) allowing local planning authorities to negotiate arrangements whereby the developer makes some undertaking if he/she obtains planning permission. These are known interchangeably as planning agreements, planning obligations or planning gain. Section 106 (Water Industry Act 1991) A key section of the Water Industry Act 1991, relating to the right of connection to a public sewer. Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) A plan providing a large-scale assessment of the risk to people and to the developed, historic and natural environment associated with coastal processes. It presents a policy framework to manage these risks in a sustainable manner. Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) Sites notified under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and the Countryside and Rights of Way (CRoW) Act 2000 for their flora, fauna, geological or physical features. Notification of a SSSI includes a list of operations that may be harmful to the special interest of the site. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) provides significantly enhanced protection for SSSIs. All cSACs, SPAs and Ramsar sites are designated as SSSIs. Standard of Protection (SOP) The design event or standard to which a building, asset or area is protected against flooding, generally expressed as an annual exceedence probability. Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) European Community Directive (2001/42/EC) on the assessment of the (SEA) Directive effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) The assessment of flood risk on a catchment-wide basis for proposed development in a District. Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) A sequence of management practices and control structures, often referred to as SUDS, designed to drain water in a more sustainable manner than some conventional techniques. Typically these are used to attenuate run-off from development sites. Sustainability Appraisal (SA) An integral part of the plan-making process which seeks to appraise the economic, social and environmental effects of a plan in order to inform decision-making that aligns with sustainable development principles. TUFLOW TUFLOW is a software package used for 2-Dimensional river modelling. It is used as an analysis tool for flood risk management analysis.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XLI

Vulnerability Classes PPS25 provides a vulnerability classification to assess which uses of land maybe appropriate in each flood risk zone. Washland An area of the floodplain that is allowed to flood or is deliberately flooded by a river or stream for flood management purposes. Water Framework Directive (WFD) A European Community Directive (2000/60/EC) of the European Parliament and Council designed to integrate the way water bodies are managed across Europe. It requires all inland and coastal waters to reach “good status” by 2015 through a catchment-based system of River Basin Management Plans, incorporating a programme of measures to improve the status of all natural water bodies. Windfall sites Sites which become available for development unexpectedly and are therefore not included as allocated land in a planning authority’s development plan.

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XLII

References

JBA Para Text

2010s4396_ABC_SFRA_Vol2_final.docx XLIII

Offices at

Atherstone Doncaster Edinburgh Haywards Heath Limerick Newcastle upon Tyne Newport Northallerton Northampton Saltaire Skipton Tadcaster Wallingford Warrington

Registered Office South Barn Broughton Hall SKIPTON North Yorkshire BD23 3AE

t:+44(0)1756 799919 e:[email protected]

Jeremy Benn Associates Ltd Registered in England 3246693

Visit our website www.jbaconsulting.co.uk