DOCSLIB.ORG

Havering Flood Risk Management Strategy 2015

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Havering Flood Risk Management Strategy 2015 Havering Local Flood Risk Management Strategy 2015 Contents Contents ........................................................................................ 2 Foreword ....................................................................................... 5 Introduction .................................................................................... 6 Structure of Strategy................................................................................ 6 Review of the Strategy............................................................................. 7 Annual Plans ........................................................................................... 7 Guiding principles .................................................................................... 7 Objectives of Strategy.............................................................................. 8 Legislative Context ......................................................................10 History of Flood Risk Management in Havering .................................... 10 Recent drivers and legislation ............................................................... 10 The National Strategy for Coastal and Erosion Risk Management ........ 14 Nature of Flood Risk in Havering ................................................17 Overview of Havering ............................................................................ 17 Types of Flood Risk .............................................................................. 18 Factors increasing flood risk .................................................................. 22 Information available on flood risk ......................................................... 22 Powers and Responsibilities of Stakeholders .............................24 Powers and responsibilities of Risk Management Authorities .................... 24 Powers and responsibilities of London Borough of Havering .................... 25 Lead Local Flood Authority .................................................................................25 SuDS Approval Body ..........................................................................................30 Emergency Planning ...........................................................................................31 Highways Authority .............................................................................................32 Historical Environment1 ......................................................................................33 Planning Authority ...............................................................................................34 Additional responsibilities of Borough Councils.......................................... 35 Responsibilities under the Land Drainage Act 1991 ...........................................35 Responsibilities as a Planning Authority .............................................................35 Responsibilities for maintenance of public spaces ..............................................36 Responsibilities as an Emergency Planning authority .........................................37 Powers and responsibilities of Water Companies…………………………..37 Water Supply Companies (Essex & Suffolk Water .............................................38 Water and Sewerage Companies (Thames and Anglian Water) ........................38 Powers and responsibilities of Environment Agency ..................................40 National Strategic Role .......................................................................................40 Local Operational Role .......................................................................................41 Main Rivers .........................................................................................................41 Coastal Flooding .................................................................................................41 Reservoirs ...........................................................................................................42 Coastal Erosion Risk Management Authority ......................................................42 Emergency Planning ...........................................................................................42 Planning process ................................................................................................42 Powers and responsibilities of Businesses and Household .......................42 Utility and Infrastructure Providers ............................................................ 42 Property owners and residents ...........................................................................43 Riparian Owners .................................................................................................44 Responsibilities of Communities ...............................................................44 Reporting flood incidents ........................................................................... 44 Helping residents to be aware of and manage the risk to their household 45 Community Emergency Self-Help Plans ................................................... 45 Actions to improve flood risk in Havering ....................................46 Borough-wide Strategic Actions ..................................................47 Improve understanding of local flood risk ..............................................47 Proactive measures ............................................................................................47 Recording and reporting flood incidents ..............................................................48 Adapt spatial planning policy to reflect local flood risk ...............................49 Introduction of a robust SuDS framework ...........................................................50 Inclusion of local flood risk concerns in SFRAs ..................................................51 Provision of new guidance via National Planning Policy Framework ................. 52 Raise community awareness .....................................................................53 Establish working framework between Risk Management Authorities .......55 Havering Partnership for Flood Management .....................................................56 Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee .................................................56 Regional Flood and Coastal Committees ............................................................57 Internal & External Flood Group Structure………………………………………….58 Site specific, flood risk management actions .............................. 61 Encourage implementation of flood resilience measures and property protection schemes ............................................................................... 61 Implement sustainable drainage and source control measures ...................... 61 Manage overland flow paths .................................................................... 62 Review land management methods.......................................................... 62 Review asset management and maintenance methods................................ 63 Achieve wider environmental benefits ……………………………………….63 Resource management ............................................................... 64 Public Funding...................................................................................... 65 Private Funding ..................................................................................... 69 Other Sources of Funding....................................................................... 71 Environmental Objectives............................................................ 73 Foreword Sir Michael Pitts’ review into the flooding of 2007 resulted into the introduction of the Flood & Water Management Act 2010 and the identification of Local Authorities within England and Wales as Lead Local Flood Authorities. The role of the LLFA’s was to formalise the flood management and mitigation measures as well as introduce a risk management approach across a number of differing disciplines within Local Authorities including, Development & Planning, Transportation, Response and Resilience. As part of this Flood Management process the introduction of the following elements ensured there was a standardised approach with milestones that could be auditable and managed so aiding the whole concept of Flood Risk Management. The elements included:- a) Flood Risk Strategy; b) Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment; c) Surface Water Management Plan; d) Multi Agency Flood Response Plan. e) Flood Risk regulations (consultation for implementation in Dec 2015) This foreword introduces the strategy of the London Borough of Havering as required by the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and the liaison that has been carried out as part of the Drain London Project and the Lead Local Flood Authority responsibilities for flood risk management. This page has been left blank intentionally. Introduction The Havering Local Flood Risk Strategy is an important new tool to help understand and manage flood risk within the Borough. It principally looks to tackle ‘local flood risk’, that is to say flooding from surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses such as ditches and streams. This type of flooding is responsible for most of the households flooded in England, but until now there has been little to address these forms of risk. The strategy will look to address this gap. However, for those who suffer from flooding, it doesn’t matter what type of flooding it is, so this strategy also provides information
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Iron Age Romford: Life Alongside the River During the Mid-First Millennium Bc
    IRON AGE ROMFORD: LIFE ALONGSIDE THE RIVER DURING THE MID-FIRST MILLENNIUM BC Barry Bishop With contributions by Philip Armitage and Damian Goodburn SUMMARY All written and artefactual material relating to the project, including the post-excavation Excavation alongside the River Rom in Romford assessment detailing the circumstances and revealed features of Early to Middle Iron Age date, methodology of the work, will be deposited including a hollow (possibly the remains of a structure), with the London Archaeological Archive and pits, ditches and an accumulation of worked wood. The Research Centre (LAARC) under the site hollow contained hearths and large quantities of burnt code NOT05. flint — such accumulations are usually referred to as ‘burnt mounds’. The date of the remains at Romford SITE LOCATION is significant since they substantially increase the evidence for settlement in this period in London. The site was centred on National Grid Refer- ence TQ 5075 8940, c.500m north of Romford INTRODUCTION town centre (see Fig 1), and was approximately 1 hectare in extent. Prior to the 1920s the site During October and December 2005 arch- was predominantly in agricultural use. Sub- aeological investigations were conducted at sequently a petrol garage was constructed on Romside Commercial Centre and 146—147 the North Street frontage and small industrial North Street, Romford in the London Borough units occupied other parts of the site. These of Havering (Fig 1). The investigations were were extended during the 1940s and 1950s undertaken as a requirement of a planning and continued in use until the recent redev- condition placed upon the proposed resident- elopment.
    [Show full text]
  • Chigwell Row to Havering-Atte-Bower, LSW Via the Summit of Redbridge, 53 and Ending at the Summit of Havering
    Chigwell Row to Havering-atte-Bower, LSW via the summit of Redbridge, 53 and ending at the summit of Havering Start Chigwell Row — IG7 4QD Finish The Green, Havering-att e-Bower — RM4 1PL Distance 6.12km Duration 1 hour 24 minutes Ascent 107.7m Access Buses at start of section. Occasional buses (not Sunday) at end of section. Facilities Pubs near end of section. 53.1 Park opposite church at bus stop. 0m 53.2 SE parallel to road; L just before houses; cross road and enter Hainault 2060m Forest; half-right (Loop) then half-right (SE) to broad ride; L on ride to summit. 53.3 L then R at Woodland Trust notice-board through kissing-gate; follow 2040m small track with golf course on R; continue E to ENE with golf course below R; SE on broad track at fi ngerpost; track swings E over low hill to horse-gate; R to corner of wood. 53.4 L; cross bridleway; rise past Bower Farm and up, through R bend, to 2020m Havering Park stables; L to road junction, R on green past war memorial; R at stocks to houses L of church. © 2017-21 IG Liddell London Summits Walk 53 – 1 This section begins in the sett lement called Chigwell 53.1 Row, on the east side of the park. The “King’s Well” which gave Chigwell its name was situated in the Chigwell Row area. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the population of the small village grew: you will have passed the nonconformist chapel of that era as you entered the park coming from Grange Hill.
    [Show full text]
  • Thames Chase, Beam & Ingrebourne Area Framework
    All Thames Chase, Beam & Ingrebourne London Area framework Green Grid 3 Contents 1 Foreword and Introduction 2 All London Green Grid Vision and Methodology 3 ALGG Framework Plan 4 ALGG Area Frameworks 5 ALGG Governance 6 Area Strategy 8 Area Description 9 Strategic Context 12 Vision 14 Objectives 18 Opportunities 20 Project Identification 22 Project update 24 Clusters 26 Projects Map 28 Rolling Projects List 32 Phase Two Delivery 34 Project Details 50 Forward Strategy 52 Gap Analysis 53 Recommendations 55 Appendices 56 Baseline Description 58 ALGG SPG Chapter 5 GG03 Links 60 Group Membership Note: This area framework should be read in tandem with All London Green Grid SPG Chapter 5 for GGA03 which contains statements in respect of Area Description, Strategic Corridors, Links and Opportunities. The ALGG SPG document is guidance that is supplementary to London Plan policies. While it does not have the same formal development plan status as these policies, it has been formally adopted by the Mayor as supplementary guidance under his powers under the Greater London Authority Act 1999 (as amended). Adoption followed a period of public consultation, and a summary of the comments received and the responses of the Mayor to those comments is available on the Greater London Authority website. It will therefore be a material consideration in drawing up development plan documents and in taking planning decisions. The All London Green Grid SPG was developed in parallel with the area frameworks it can be found at the following link: http://www.london.gov.uk/publication/all-london- green-grid-spg . Cover Image: The river Rom near Collier Row As a key partner, the Thames Chase Trust welcomes the opportunity to continue working with the All Foreword London Green Grid through the Area 3 Framework.
    [Show full text]
  • London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Archaeological Priority Areas Appraisal
    London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Archaeological Priority Areas Appraisal July 2016 DOCUMENT CONTROL Author(s): Isabelle Ryan, Adam Single, Sandy Kidd, Jane Sidell Derivation: Final version submitted to the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham Origination Date: 29 July 2016 Reviser(s): Date of last revision: Date Printed: 29 July 2016 Version: 1.2 Status: Final Summary of Changes: Circulation: London Borough of Barking and Dagenham and London APA Advisory Panel Required Action: File Name / S:\Glaas\Archaeological Priority Location: Areas\Barking & Dagenham\Appraisal Approval: (Signature) This document has been produced by Isabelle Ryan, Adam Single, Sandy Kidd and Jane Sidell (all Historic England). We are grateful for the advice and support of Naomi Pomfret (London Borough of Barking and Dagenham). 2 Contents Introduction page 4 Explanation of Archaeological Priority Areas page 5 Archaeological Priority Area Tiers page 7 Barking and Dagenham: Historical and Archaeological Interest page 10 Archaeological Priority Areas in Barking and Dagenham page 16 Map of Archaeological Priority Areas in Barking and Dagenham page 18 Map of Archaeological Priority Areas and former page 19 Archaeological Priority Zones in Barking and Dagenham Area descriptions and map extracts for Tier 1 page 21 Archaeological Priority Areas Area descriptions and map extracts for Tier 2 page 39 Archaeological Priority Areas Area descriptions and map extracts for Tier 3 page 101 Archaeological Priority Areas Glossary page 114 3 Introduction This document has been produced by the Greater London Archaeology Advisory Service (GLAAS), part of the London office of Historic England. The Barking and Dagenham Archaeological Priority Area Appraisal is part of a long term commitment to review and update London’s Archaeological Priority Areas (APA).
    [Show full text]
  • University of London Boat Club Boathouse, Chiswick
    Played in London a directory of historic sporting assets in London compiled for English Heritage by Played in Britain 2014 Played in London a directory of historic sporting assets in London This document has been compiled from research carried out as part of the Played in London project, funded by English Heritage from 2010-14 Contacts: Played in Britain Malavan Media Ltd PO Box 50730 NW6 1YU 020 7794 5509 [email protected] www.playedinbritain.co.uk Project author: Simon Inglis Project manager: Jackie Spreckley English Heritage 1 Waterhouse Square, 138-142 Holborn, London EC1N 2ST 0207 973 3000 www.english-heritage.org.uk Project Assurance Officer: Tim Cromack If you require an alternative accessible version of this document (for instance in audio, Braille or large print) please contact English Heritage’s Customer Services Department: telephone: 0870 333 1181 fax: 01793 414926 textphone: 0800 015 0516 e-mail: [email protected] © Malavan Media Ltd. January 2015 malavan media Contents Introduction .................................................................................4 � 1 Barking and Dagenham.................................................................7 � 2 Barnet ........................................................................................8 � 3 Bexley ......................................................................................10 � 4 Brent ......................................................................................11 � 5 Bromley ....................................................................................13
    [Show full text]
  • Harrow Lodge Park Management Plan
    CONTENTS Introduction 1 1. Site Overview 1.1 Havering 2 1.2 Strategic Framework 3 1.3 Site Description 3 1.4 History 4 1.5 Location and Transport Links 7 2. A Welcoming Place 2.1 Entrance Points 10 2.2 Entrance Signs 11 2.3 Equal Access 12 3. Heathy, Safe and Secure 3.1 Health and Safety Systems 14 3.2 Parks Protection Service 16 3.3 Parks Locking 19 3.4 Infrastructure 19 3.5 Parks Monitoring 20 2018/19 Update 21 4. Maintenance of Equipment, Buildings and Landscape 4.1 Grounds Maintenance 23 4.2 Sports Areas 26 4.3 Vehicles and Plant Maintenance 29 4.4 Parks Furniture 29 4.5 Play Areas 30 4.6 Parks Buildings 32 2018/19 Update 33 5. Litter, Cleanliness and Vandalism 5.1 Litter Management 39 5.2 Sweeping 39 5.3 Graffiti 39 5.4 Flytipping 40 5.5 Reporting 40 5.6 Dog Fouling 40 6. Environmental Sustainability 6.1 Energy Sustainability 41 6.2 Peat Use 41 6.3 Waste Minimisation 42 6.4 Pesticide Use 44 6.5 Tree management 44 2018/19 Update 45 7. Conservation and Heritage 7.1 Conservation of natural features, wild fauna and flora 47 7.2 Biodiversity 51 7.3 Conservation of buildings and structures 56 2018/19 Update 58 8. Community Involvement 8.1 Council Surveys 59 8.2 User Groups 59 2018/19 Update 9. Marketing and Promotions 9.1 Parks Brochure 68 9.2 Social Media 68 9.3 Website 68 9.4 Interpretation Boards 68 9.5 Events 69 2018/19 Update 72 10.
    [Show full text]
  • Roding, Beam and Ingrebourne Catchment Plan
    Roding, Beam & Ingrebourne Catchment Plan A strategic plan which seeks to bring positive change to people, wildlife and the environment through better management of land and water , 2015 - 2018 Executive Summary The Water Framework Directive (WFD) is a wide- The Roding, Beam & Ingrebourne Catchment Partnership ranging piece of European legislation that has become (RBICP) is working at both a catchment and local scale, seeking to liaise with landowners to reduce pollution, and part of UK law. It aims to improve all water bodies in encourage works directly within the river corridor to improve Europe in respect of their water chemistry, wildlife and its habitats. The RBICP is co-chaired by Thames21 and the morphology by setting measurable objectives. Great Thames Chase Trust and current membership includes: steps have been made over recent decades to improve water quality in the Roding, Beam & Ingrebourne area, > Brentwood Borough Council and now the WFD aims to raise the standard even > Environment Agency higher. > Epping Forest District Council > Essex Wildlife Trust There is currently variation across the catchment as to how > Forestry Commission many WFD objectives are being met, but in all areas there > Friends of Ingrebourne Valley is significant potential for improvement. Parts of the Roding, > London Borough of Barking & Dagenham Beam & Ingrebourne catchment currently falls below the > London Borough of Havering required standards. A range of factors are contributing to this, > London Wildlife Trust the most significant for the catchment being high phosphate levels, low water flows, sediment levels and man-made > Royal Society for the Protection of Birds alterations to river corridors such as weirs.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossrail Assessment of Archaeology Impacts, Technical Report
    CROSSRAIL ASSESSMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY IMPACTS, TECHNICAL REPORT. PART 3 OF 6, NORTH-EAST ROUTE SECTION 1E0318-E1E00-00001 CONFIDENTIALITY This document contains proprietary information which shall not be reproduced without the permission of the CLRL Chief Executive Cross London Rail Links Limited 1, Butler Place LONDON SW1H 0PT Tel: 020 7941 7600 Fax: 020 7941 7703 www.crossrail.co.uk CROSSRAIL ASSESSMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY IMPACTS TECHNICAL REPORT PART 3 OF 6, NORTH-EAST ROUTE SECTION: STRATFORD TO SHENFIELD February 2005 Project Manager: George Dennis Project Officer: Nicholas J Elsden Authors: Jon Chandler, Robert Cowie, James Drummond-Murray, Antony Francis, Pat Miller, Heather Knight, Kieron Tyler, Robin Wroe-Brown Museum of London Archaeology Service © Museum of London Mortimer Wheeler House, 46 Eagle Wharf Road, London N1 7ED tel 0207 410 2200 fax 0207 410 2201 email [email protected] Archaeology Service 16/02/2005 Crossrail Archaeological Impact Assessment: Shenfield Route Section © MoLAS List of Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Route overview 2 2.1 Zone E: The Lea Valley (north) 2 2.1.1 Boundaries and layout 2 2.1.2 Topography and geology 2 2.1.3 Archaeological and historical background 3 2.1.4 Selected research themes 7 2.2 Zone A: East of Stratford to Goodmayes 8 2.2.1 Boundaries and layout 8 2.2.2 Topography and geology 8 2.2.3 Archaeological and historical background 8 2.2.4 Selected research themes 13 2.3 Zone B: Romford and Gidea Park 14 2.3.1 Boundaries and layout 14 2.3.2 Topography and geology 14 2.3.3 Archaeological and historical
    [Show full text]
  • CIL-SD14 Representation from Portland Capital
    Our ref: Your ref: Q70042 Email: [email protected] Date: 1st October 2018 The Development Planning Team London Borough of Havering Floor 5 Mercury House Mercury Gardens Romford Essex RM1 3SL By email Dear Sir/Madam HAVERING CIL DRAFT CHARGING SCHEDULE CONSULTATION Quod is instructed by Portland Capital, to prepare and submit planning representations in response to the Community Infrastructure Levy Draft Charging Schedule Consultation. Portland Capital hold several assets in Havering, comprising the Rom Valley Way Retail Park, Romford, RM7 0AE and The Seedbed Centre, Romford, RM7 0AE. These sites are located within the Romford Housing Zone. Portland Capital do not support the proposed Draft Charging Schedule for the reasons set out below: Havering’s Housing Target/Delivery The adopted London Plan (2016) sets a minimum housing delivery target between 2015 and 2025 of 11,701 new homes, equating to 1,170 new homes per annum within the borough. The housing delivery target increased with the adoption of the 2016 London Plan from the previous borough target (970 units per annum) and is set to increase further through the emerging New London Plan (draft published December 2017) to 1,875 units per annum. Using the figures contained within the borough’s Final Submission Local Plan Housing Position Statement (2018), housing delivery is well below the requisite minimum levels set in the London Plan as demonstrated in the table below: Housing Housing Net Private Net Affordable Net Year Target Target Completions Completions Completions Variance 2012/13 970 154 144 298 -672 2013/14 970 645 272 917 -53 2014/15 970 409 329 738 -232 2015/16 1,170 758 205 963 -207 2016/17 1,170 518 67 585 -585 In the previous five years 2012/13 to 2016/17, a net total of 3,501 dwellings were completed, equating to an average of 700 dwellings per year.
    [Show full text]
  • Dagenham Parks, Rivers and Ponds
    Dagenham Parks, Rivers and Ponds 1st walk check 2nd walk check 3rd walk check 02nd April 2018 Current status Document last updated Wednesday, 15th July 2020 This document and information herein are copyrighted to Saturday Walkers’ Club. If you are interested in printing or displaying any of this material, Saturday Walkers’ Club grants permission to use, copy, and distribute this document delivered from this World Wide Web server with the following conditions: • The document will not be edited or abridged, and the material will be produced exactly as it appears. Modification of the material or use of it for any other purpose is a violation of our copyright and other proprietary rights. • Reproduction of this document is for free distribution and will not be sold. • This permission is granted for a one-time distribution. • All copies, links, or pages of the documents must carry the following copyright notice and this permission notice: Saturday Walkers’ Club, Copyright © 2018-2020, used with permission. All rights reserved. www.walkingclub.org.uk This walk has been checked as noted above, however the publisher cannot accept responsibility for any problems encountered by readers. Dagenham Parks, Rivers and Ponds Start & Finish: Dagenham East Underground Station Length: 10.1 km/6.3 mi Ascent: negligible. Time: 2 ¼ hours Transport: Dagenham East Underground Station is in Zone 5, on the District Line to Upminster. Journey time from Aldgate East is 32 minutes, from Victoria 49 minutes. You can shave off a few minutes by taking mainline trains from Fenchurch Street (or from Limehouse or West Ham) to Barking for part of the journey.
    [Show full text]
  • Brewery History Society Brewery History (2016) 167, 2-12
    BREWERY The Journal is © 2016 HISTORY The Brewery History Society Brewery History (2016) 167, 2-12 CALLING TIME ON THE STAR INN: A REASSESSMENT OF THE ORIGINS OF ROMFORD BREWERY MATTHEW ABEL Numerous histories of Romford Brewery describe how to name a few - the Star is poorly documented in the the business began in 1799, when Edward Ind and John historical record. There are no contemporary images of Grosvenor purchased the Star Inn in the High Street.1 it, and it is not marked on any maps. Considering that Although Ind and his successive partners eventually the inn was described by Barnard as the ‘most famous’ built a large brewery on the site, the business was found- in Romford, and was supposedly the genesis of an ed on the Star’s existing reputation as a high quality international brewing empire, this is unusual. ‘home’ or proto-industrial brewery. In the earliest pub- lished account of the Brewery’s origins, written in 1889, The only depiction of the Star (fig. 1) is a drawing made Alfred Barnard recorded that 100 years after the inn’s supposed purchase in 1799. However, the Star had been demolished half a century About the middle of the eighteenth century, there lived at the before the drawing was made so its accuracy is doubt- Star Inn - the most famous hostelry in the town, a landlord ful. The image was first published in the Brewery’s who, as was the custom in those days, brewed his own beer, Centenary Souvenir in 1899, where its function seems and was so famous for the good tipple he supplied to his to be more decorative than illustrative.3 It is possible customers, that, in time, it acquired such a reputation, that he that the artist sketched the Star from memory, but it is began to sell it in casks to customers outside the boundaries equally likely that it is just an impression, rendered of [the Liberty of] Havering-atte-Bower, and kept a horse and deliberately quaint and rustic in order to emphasise how dray to deliver it at a distance.2 far the modern industrial Brewery had developed in the intervening 100 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Land of the Fanns Landscape Partnership Scheme
    LAND OF THE FANNS LANDSCAPE PARTNERSHIP SCHEME HLF AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT PLAN JANUARY 2016 LAND OF THE FANNS 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 VISION AND PRIORITIES .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 GEOGRAPHIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WITH THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 11 DEMOGRAPHIC CONTEXT ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]