EVIDENCE PAPER: STRATEGIC FLOOD RISK SEQUENTIAL TEST January 2020

EVIDENCE BASE DOCUMENT CONSULTATION DRAFT LOCAL PLAN 2018-2033 (Regulation 18) All maps reproduced by permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright & Database Right 2019. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings.1 All Rights Reserved. 100021846. Contents

Introduction ...... 3 Local Flood Risk Context ...... 3 Policy Background...... 3 Methodology ...... 6 The Sequential Test ...... 6 The Exception Test ...... 8 Conclusions ...... 9 Appendix 1: Sequential Test for all SHELAA sites ...... 11 Appendix 2: Sites remaining for consideration ...... 95 Appendix 3 ...... 127

2 Introduction

1. Mole Valley District Council is currently in the process of drawing up its emerging Local Plan (Future Mole Valley) which will cover the period 2018-2033. This will replace the current Core Strategy 2009 and saved policies in the 2000 Mole Valley Local Plan.

2. In accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF) Mole Valley District has applied a sequential approach to the location of site allocations in order to steer development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding. This has taken into account the current and future impacts of climate change.

3. The District has acknowledged flooding risks of various types (fluvial, surface water and ground water), the Council has used the Joint Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment 2017 (SFRA) to apply the Sequential Test as set out in the Planning Practice Guidance (Flood risk and Costal Change) to appropriately locate site allocations and, where necessary, have carried out a Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (2019) to enable further assessment of whether the site can be appropriately flood resistant, safe for the development’s lifetime and will not increase flood risk overall. The Level 2 SFRA will assist developers in carrying out the Exception Test, where relevant, at the planning application stage.

Local Flood Risk Context 4. The River Mole and its tributaries are the main source of fluvial flooding in the District, although the west of the District is also within the catchment areas of the River Wey (Tillingbourne) and the River Arun. Fluvial Flooding from the River Mole is perhaps the most likely source of flooding that could occur within the District.

5. The catchment of the River Mole covers all of Mole Valley District with the exception of a narrow sliver in the North East of the District (draining into the Hogsmill) and the very South West of the District (draining into the Wey and Arun).

6. Surface water flooding is shown to correlate with small watercourses and urban areas and is prevalent throughout the District. A number of rural villages and parts of built up areas such as Bookham, Fetcham, Dorking and Leatherhead are also susceptible to surface water flooding. Groundwater flood risk is shown to vary across the area with areas of increased groundwater risk around Leatherhead.

Policy Background 7. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019 advocates a sequential approach to directing development away from areas of highest flood risk from all sources and taking into account the current and future impacts of climate change. Development should not be permitted in high risk areas if there are reasonably available sites for the appropriate level of development with a lower probability of flooding. Paragraph 156 of the NPPF states that:

‘Strategic policies should be informed by a strategic flood risk assessment, and should manage flood risk from all sources. They should consider cumulative impacts in, or affecting, local areas susceptible to flooding, and take account of advice from the Environment Agency and other risk management authorities and internal drainage boards.’

3 8. The Planning Practice Guidance Flood risk and costal change (PPG) provides a diagram shown below that sets out the role of Flood Risk Assessment in the preparation of Local Plans.

Taking flood risk into account in the preparation of a Local Plan (PPG Paragraph: 004 Reference ID: 7-004-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014)

9. The main objectives of the Mole Valley District Council Level 1 SFRA are to provide flood information:  As the evidence base for application of the Sequential Test to support planning decisions, in line with the NPPF  That is strategic, i.e., covers a wide spatial area and considers present and future flood risk  That supports and informs sustainability appraisals of the draft Local Plan, and  That broadly identifies what further investigations may be required for specific development proposals.

10. A Level 2 SFRA is prepared if the Level 1 SFRA and the sequential test shows that land outside flood risk areas cannot appropriately accommodate all of the district’s development needs.

11. As demonstrated in the Level 1 SFRA and this sequential test, land outside of medium and high flood risk areas cannot appropriately accommodate all the development necessary to meet identified needs in Mole Valley, therefore a Level 2 SFRA has been prepared.

Application of the Sequential Test for the Local Plan preparation (PPG Paragraph: 021 Reference ID: 7-021-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014)

Methodology 13. The emerging Local Plan includes a range of allocated sites, including strategic sites and smaller sites. The Council’s Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA) identified land available for housing and employment development. In line with the Sequential Test, flood risk was considered as part of the assessment of available SHELAA sites. The Sustainability Appraisal has been used to help inform the Sequential Test by assessing the sustainability of sites. This document supports the Local Plan by sequentially testing the preferred housing and employment allocations.

The Sequential Test

14. The PPG (Paragraph: 020 Reference ID: 7-020-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014) sets out that the Sequential Test should be applied to the whole local planning authority area to increase the possibilities of accommodating development at locations not exposed to flood risk.

15. Step 1 - The Council’s first step was to identify sites which are suitable and available for housing and economic development, and have come forward through the Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA), (including Gypsy and Traveller sites). These sites are included in Appendix 1. The Sequential Test looked at all sources of flooding, not just fluvial.

16. Paragraph 5.3.1 of the Level 1 SFRA sets out what is considered to be a low risk of flooding from other surface and ground water:

• Sites in Flood Zone 1 and not identified as being at risk from fluvial flooding with climate change, Ordinary Watercourses, reservoirs, sewer flooding or critical drainage issues.

• Sites with less than 10% of their area within the RoFSW 1 in 1000-year extent.

• Sites where 1 in 100-year groundwater levels are estimated to reach the ground surface.

17. Those sites where only a part of the area is within Flood Zones 2 or 3 or where there was a low to medium risk of surface water flooding, were carried forward into Appendix 2, as they were considered to offer some potential for development subject to further assessment. At this stage sites that were not suitable for development for other reasons, for example their contribution to the Green Belt or location within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty were also discounted.

18. Where permissions have been granted on submitted sites these have not been taken forward to Appendix 2, as flood risk issues have already been addressed through the planning application process. Where permissions or appeals are outstanding these sites will continue to be considered.

19. Step 2 – As mentioned above surface water and fluvial flooding is prevalent thoughout the District and avoiding sites at medium/high risk of flooding (particularly surface water flooding) is not always practical. As a result of this, in some instances, not withstanding the definition of low risk set out in the Joint Level 1 SFRA, MVDC has taken a sequential approach to the location of development within the site to avoid areas at risk of surface water and ground water flooding. In these instances it was 6 decided that a Level 2 SFRA would not be required for that site as there was enough information available to demonstrate that the Exception Test could be passed.

20. A total of 73 sites have been taken forward to Appendix 2 and these informed the Regulation 18 Consultation Local Plan.This table was shared with officers at the Lead Local Flood Authority, Surrey County Council (SCC) who performed a sense check to ensure information regarding ground water and surface water was up to date.

21. Sites that were the subject of a planning application or planning appeal, where a site specific flood risk assessment had recently been carried out where not considered for a Level 2 SFRA as there was considered to be sufficient information available for an Exception Test to be carried out.

22. Step 3 –Taking into account feedback from SCC, 15 sites were identified which triggered the Exception Test (Level 2 SFRA) or where flood risk from any source could be a particular site constraint. The vast majority of these sites are susceptible to surface water flooding. These have been listed in Appendix 3: Level 2 SFRA sites.

23. It is important to note that detailed Site-Specific Flood Risk Assessments (FRA) will still be required to accompany individual planning applications for all developments in 7

Flood Zones 2 and 3. In Flood Zone 1, assessments should accompany all development involving sites of 1ha and over, land which has been identified by the Environment Agency as having critical drainage problems, land identified in a SFRA Level 1 as being at increased flood risk in the future, or land that may be subject to other sources of flooding, where its development would introduce a more vulnerable use.

The Exception Test

24. The NPPF (paragraph 159) states that:

“If it is not possible for development to be located in zones with a lower risk of flooding (taking into account wider sustainable development objectives), the exception test may have to be applied. The need for the exception test will depend on the potential vulnerability of the site and the development proposed, in line with the Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification set out in national planning guidance”’

25. The PPG (Paragraph: 023 Reference ID: 7-023-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014) advises that the Exception Test “is a method to demonstrate and help ensure that flood risk to people and property will be managed satisfactorily, whilst allowing necessary development to go ahead in situations where suitable sites at lower risk of flooding are not available.”

26. The Exception Test comprises two parts, as detailed below. Both parts have to be satisfied before a site can be allocated or permitted. To pass the Exception Test it should be demonstrated that:

• the development provides wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh the flood risk; and

• site-specific flood risk assessment must demonstrate that the development will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users, without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and, where possible, will reduce flood risk overall.

27. Not all sites are required to pass the Exception Test. The requirement for the Exception Test depends upon the proposed use of the site, its vulnerability classification and thus its compatibility with the Flood Zone within which it would be located. The PPG (Paragraph: 066 Reference ID: 7-066-20140306; Revision date: 06 03 2014) sets out the vulnerability classifications of different types of development.

Flood Risk Essential Highly More Less Water Vulnerability Infrastructure Vulnerable Vulnerable Vulnerable Compatible Classification:

Flood Zone 1 Development Development Development Development Development is appropriate is appropriate is appropriate is appropriate is appropriate

Flood Zone 2 Development Exception Development Development Development is appropriate Test Required is appropriate is appropriate is appropriate

Flood Zone 3a Exception Development Exception Development Development Test Required should not be Test is appropriate is appropriate permitted Required

Flood Zone 3b Exception Development Development Development Development Test Required should not be should not be should not be is appropriate permitted permitted permitted

Flood risk vulnerability and flood zone ‘compatability’ (PPG Paragraph: 067 Reference ID: 7-067-20140306 Revision date: 06 03 2014)

28. Where development contains different elements of vulnerability, the highest vulnerability category should be used, unless considered in its component parts.

29. In line with Table 3 of the PPG, the Exception Test is clearly not required for those sites which are in Flood Zone 1 and which are at a low risk from other sources of flooding. However, some of the sites within Flood Zone 1 are at risk of flooding from other sources, as are sites within Flood Zones 2 and 3.

30. In Appendix 2, where a site is in flood zone 1, but is considered to be at medium-high risk from other sources of flooding these sites have been included in the Level 2 SFRA so that the risk can be fully considered.

31. The Level 2 SFRA can assist with evaluating a site allocation against the second part of the Exception Test in principle, by showing that it is possible to mitigate flood risk and make the development safe for its lifetime. The detailed proposals for how mitigation will be designed are for the site-specific FRA to demonstrate.

32. Where sites have been the subject of a recent planning application or appeal decision which has included a site specific flood risk assessment is was considered that sufficient information was available to carry out the Exception Test. Therefore these sites were not included in the Level 2 SFRA.

Conclusions 33. In accordance with the NPPF / PPG, the Council has sought to understand the flood risks to the District in detail by undertaking a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment at 9

Levels 1 and 2 and by updating it at various stages of the planmaking process. Using the information derived from the SFRA, the Council has applied the standard Sequential Test. This has ensured that the Local Plan development allocation – site selection process has identified and considered the most suitable and reasonably available sites located in the areas which are at no, or a low risk, of flooding.

34. Given the scale of the District’s identified development needs, and taking account of other constraints that affect development potential, it has become evident that the amount of development needed can only be secured by accepting that sites with some low to medium risk of flooding will need to be allocated. This mainly applies to sites at risk of surface water flooding. Therefore when applying the sequential test to submitted sites, Mole Valley District Council has taken a proportionate and pragmatic approach. This considers whether a sequential approach to the location of development within a site at low to medium flood risk of flooding can be taken to avoid areas of highest risk.

35. However, in each case, the Exception Test is passed. Development on all allocated sites can be made safe for its lifetime and will deliver wider sustainability benefits through securing planned development to meet the District’s objectively assessed needs in locations which relate well to existing settlements and are consistent with other planning objectives.

Appendix 1: Sequential Test for all SHELAA sites Site Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Use Flood Risk Sequential Exception Comments/Justific SHELAA address Zone Surface Change Vulnerability Test Test ations reference Water Allowance Classification Flooding

18-AB-001 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The Little change vulnerable required site does not Meadow, accord with the Hammerfi proposed spatial eld Drive. strategy of the Local Plan.

18-AS-001 Marsden FZ1 A large No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Consider: Limited Nurseries, proportion of change vulnerable SFRA potential for ground Ashtead the site is at required. water flooding. Park risk from Garden surface water Centre flooding, although this is concentrated in the northern end of the site.

18-AS-002 Land at FZ1 The site is No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: the Pines, subject to change vulnerable required Suitability Farm surface water concerns: Impact Lane flooding. on heritage assets.

Site Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Use Flood Risk Sequential Exception Comments/Justific SHELAA address Zone Surface Change Vulnerability Test Test ations reference Water Allowance Classification Flooding

18-AS-003 Ermyn FZ1 Small No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: The site House patches of change /mixed use vulnerable required. is in Flood Zone 1 the site are at and is at minimal risk from risk from surface RoFSW 1 in water flooding. 1000 extent.

18-AS-004 Land at FZ1 Some of the No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: Murreys eastern part change vulnerable required. Negligible-less Court of the site than 10% of site at around the RoFSW flooding. existing buildings are at risk of surface water flooding. In addition to the centre of the site.

18-AS-006 Chace FZ1 n/a No notable Residential/ More Yes Not Discounted: Farm change Mixed use vulnerable required Suitability Stud, The concerns: Impact Warren on Green Belt. Encroachment into attractive landscape setting of southern Ashtead.

18-AS-007 The Old FZ1 A small patch No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: Chalk Pit, is at risk of change vulnerable required Suitability Pleasure surface water concerns: Impact Pit Road. flooding. on Green Belt, merging of settlements. Erosion of mature tree cover.

18-AS-008 Warren FZ1 A small strip No notable Residential/mi More Yes Not Discounted: Field, The on the change xed use vulnerable required. Suitability Warren. eastern half concerns: Impact of the site is on Green Belt. at risk of Encroachment into surface water attractive setting of flooding. southern Ashtead.

18-AS-009 New FZ1 At risk of No notable Mixed use- More Yes Not Discounted: Fields, surface water change residential vulnerable required. Suitability Barnett flooding. and sports concerns: Impact Wood on the Green Belt, Lane. merging of settlements, loss of playing fields (further 2.25ha site area) to housing.

18-AS-010 Land off FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: Shepherd change vulnerable required Suitability s Walk concerns: Impact on Green Belt. Encroachment into attractive setting of southern Ashtead.

18-AS-011 Land FZ1 Small No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: The site South of patches of change vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 Ermyn the site are at and is at minimal Way risk from risk from any surface water surface water flooding. flooding.

18-AS-013 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: Falls Lime Tree change vulnerable required. below the threshold Lodge for consideration (delivering <5 Dwellings)

18-AS-014 Woodruffe FZ1 Two very No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: Stables small patches change vulnerable required Suitability of the site are Concerns: Impact liable to 1 in on Green Belt plus 100 and 1 in loss of equestrian 1000 year facility. surface water flooding.

Yes Consider: 18-BG- Land at FZ1 A stream runs No notable Residential More Negligible-less 001 Breakspea across the change vulnerable Not than 10% of site at r Farm site from a required RoFSW. pond in the west to the east. Towards the The site was eastern flagged up by boundary this County because a stream may water course ran give rise to through the site. Surface However on Water balance we did not Flooding. think this equated to medium to high level surface water risk.

Ordinary Water Course consent may be required for works to the stream. NB An internal drainage board where relevant, or lead local authority has permissive powers to carry out flood

defence works for ordinary watercourses at their discretion.

18-BG- Land FZ1 Surface water No notable Residential/ More Yes Level 2 Consider: The site 002 South of flooding in the change community vulnerable SFRA is at RoFSW 1 in Beare centre of the possibly required 1000 extent Green site and along primary however it is felt a the school sequential watercourse approach to which forms development may the northern be possible subject boundary to further investigation.

Historic flooding along Ockley Road. Two main rivers 1 through the site and 1 to the north

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BG- New FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not 003 Close change vulnerable accord with the Farm, proposed spatial

16 Site Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Use Flood Risk Sequential Exception Comments/Justific SHELAA address Zone Surface Change Vulnerability Test Test ations reference Water Allowance Classification Flooding

Horsham strategy of the Road Local Plan.

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BG- Rickwood FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not 004 Park, change vulnerable accord with the Horsham proposed spatial Road strategy of the Local Plan.

Yes Discounted: 18-BG- Land East FZ1 At risk of No notable Residential More Not Unsuitable: 005 of Copse surface water change vulnerable required. Located within Farm. flooding in AONB/AGLV within various which sites for patches strategic scale across the development will site. not be allocated.

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BG- Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not 006 Bregsells change vulnerable accord with the Farm, proposed spatial Bregsells strategy of the Lane. Local Plan.

More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BG- Land FZ1 At risk of No notable Residential vulnerable required. Unsuitable: 007 South of surface water change Located within flooding. AONB/AGLV within

Moorhurst which sites for Lane. strategic scale development will not be allocated.

Minimal More Yes Not Permission has 18-BG- Surrey FZ1 surface water No notable Residential vulnerable required been granted. 008 Hills Hotel, flooding in change Horsham southwest Road. corner.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: site 18-BG- Crackerba FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required. fails to accord with 009 rrel Farm, change the proposed Horsham spatial strategy of Road, the Local Plan. Beare Green

Yes 18-BK-001 Grove FZ1 1 in 1000 risk No notable Residential More Not Consider: The site Corner of surface change vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 water flooding and is at low risk on site from surface water around site flooding. entrance and along southern boundary

n/a More Yes Not Planning 18-BK-002 Preston FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required permission Farm, change granted. Lower Road

Small More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-003 Great FZ1 patches of No notable Residential vulnerable required. Unsuitable: Bookham the site are at change Located within Equestrian risk from AGLV within which Centre, surface sites for strategic Dorking flooding 30 scale development Road year shallow will not be and 200 year allocated. deep. Suitability Concerns: Green Belt and Heritage issues.

There is a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-006 Rolls FZ1 very small No notable Residential vulnerable required. Suitability Farm patch of land change concerns: Impact Eastern to the north of on Green Belt, Parcel, the site that is merging Bookham at risk of settlements surface water Bookham/Effingha flooding.

m and setting of Conservation Area.

The southern More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-007 Rolls FZ1 and western No notable Residential/ vulnerable required. Suitability Farm boundaries of change education Concerns: Impact Western the site is at on Green Belt Parcel, risk of surface Bookham water flooding

Level 2 Consider: It is 18-BK-008 Land FZ1 A stream No Notable Residential More Yes SFRA unclear whether North flows Change vulnerable required. the development West of (broadly) can go ahead Preston south to north without adverse Farm through the potential effects on centre of the the adjoining and farm but to local watercourses. the north and northwest of Would require the proposed detailed design and residential measures to allow site. (a drop development due of 100 to surface water metres) and rivers. Also pouring water potential for ground into little water flooding on Bookham the north tip of site Street and Fox Lane. 20

Extensive risk of surface water flooding across the north of the site.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BK-009 Land West FZ1 No notable Residential/ vulnerable required site does not of Rectory change elderly care accord with the Lane. apartments proposed spatial strategy of the Local Plan

More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BK-010 Land to FZ1 The southern No notable Residential/se vulnerable required. site falls below the the rear of boundary of change lf-build plots size threshold for Hunters the site is at consideration Moon, risk of surface (delivering <5 Maddox water dwellings) Park, flooding.

More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-011 Land at FZ1 Small No notable Residential vulnerable required. Suitability Long patches are change concerns: Impact Maddox at risk of on Green Belt. Farm, surface water Maddox flooding. Park,

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-012 Land FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability adjoining change concerns: Impact Bookham on Green Belt, Common proximity to SSSI, access.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BK-013 251 Lower FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required site falls below the Road, change size threshold for Bookham consideration (delivering < 5 Dwellings) The mature trees and relationship with adjoining dwellings restricts potential to below 5 units.

At risk of More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-014 Land to FZ1 surface water No notable Residential vulnerable required. Suitability the South flooding change concerns: Impact of mainly in the on Green Belt, loss Guildford northwest of rural economy Road part of the site. site.

18-BK-015 Land FZ1 Slight risk of No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Consider: The site North of surface water change vulnerable SFRA is in Flood Zone 1 Guildford to the north of required. and is at risk from Road the site. surface water flooding.

The majority of the site has potential for ground water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BK-016 Bookham FZ1 No notable Residential/ vulnerable required Suitability Youth change community concerns: loss of Centre, use community 164 Lower facilities. Road

n/a More Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BK-017 Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 Chalkpit change and is not liable to Lane any surface water flooding.

Issues with ground water flooding

Some surface More Yes Not Discounted: Site 18-BK-018 Land FZ1 water flooding No notable Residential vulnerable required. fails to accord with adjacent in the north change the proposed to east corner of spatial strategy of Bookham the site the Local Plan. Site Grange, The Approach, Bookham, KT23 3HS

Some surface More Yes Not Discounted: Site 18-BK-019 261 Lower FZ1 water flooding No notable Residential vulnerable required. fail to accord with Road, in the north change the proposed Bookham, west corner spatial strategy of KT23 4EE of the site. the Local Plan.

Yes Not Consider: A site 18-BR- Former FZ 2 &3 Western Both the Residential More required specific flood risk 001 Sewage portion of the 3a_Plus70C vulnerable assessment has Works site lies in C extents been carried out as Flood Zone 3, and part of a recent and the rest 3a_Plus35C planning of the site in C extents application. Flood Zone 2. show an (Planning increase on reference flood risk to MO/2016/2026 the west of refers) the site

should such events occur.

At risk of More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BR- Land FZ1 surface water No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability 002 adjacent flooding. change concerns: Impact to on Green Belt, Brockham, merging of Strood settlements and Green setting of historic village/heritage assets.

The majority Yes Not Consider: A site 18-BR- Tanners FZ1 of the site is No notable Residential More required specific flood risk 004 Meadow at risk from change vulnerable assessment has surface water been carried out as flooding. part of a recent planning Reports of application. historic (Planning internal and application external reference flooding to MO/2018/0700 properties on refers). Tanners Meadow, House Road

The whole Yes Level 2 Consider: Ordinary 18-BR- Land west FZ1 western part No notable Residential More SFRA watercourse to the 005 of of the site is change vulnerable required north and internal Wheelers at risk from flooding reported Lane surface water on Oakdene Road flooding. High surface water risk 1 in 30. Ordinary watercourse to the north and internal flooding reported on Oakdene Road

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BR- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required site does not 006 Lime Kilns change vulnerable accord with the Cottage, proposed spatial Chalkpit strategy of the Lane Local Plan.

n/a Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BR- 31 FZ1 No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 007 Wheelers change vulnerable and is not liable to Way any surface water flooding.

n/a Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BR- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 008 the change vulnerable and is not liable to Bungalow any surface water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BT-001 Betchwort FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required site does not h Quarry, change accord with the Station proposed spatial Road. strategy of the Local Plan. Loss of rural economy site.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BT-002 The FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required site falls below the Barley change size threshold for Mow, Old consideration Reigate (delivering <5 Road. dwellings)

n/a More Yes 18-BT-003 Reigate FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable Not Discounted: The Road change required site does not Quarry, accord with the Reigate proposed spatial Road strategy of the Local Plan. Loss of rural economy site

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BT-004 Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability Bovey change concerns: Site Cottage, access, setting of Betchwort listed buildings. h

Highly Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BT-005 The FZ1 n/a No notable Gypsy and vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 Evergreen change Traveller and is not liable to s pitches. any surface water flooding.

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BT-006 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not Christmas change vulnerable accord with the Cottage, proposed spatial Sandy strategy of the Lane Local Plan.

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BT-007 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not The change vulnerable accord with the Coombe, proposed spatial Betchwort strategy of the h Local Plan.

Yes Level 2 Discounted: Site 18-BT-008 Land at FZ2 &3 Wonham Mill No notable Residential More SFRA lies within flood Wonham is on the change vulnerable required. zones 2 and 3 and Lane, edge of a mill therefore is not Betchwort pond which suitable for h feeds into the development. River Mole but the The site does not proposed site accord with the is located on proposed spatial an elevation strategy of the to the west. Local Plan.

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BT-009 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required site does not Pebble Hill change vulnerable accord with the Road, proposed spatial Betchwort strategy of the h Local Plan.

A part of the More Yes Not Consider: 18-BT-012 Land r/o FZ1 western No notable Residential vulnerable required. Negligible-less Bumblebe boundary to changes than 10% of site at e Cottage The Firs is RoFSW . and The susceptible to Firs surface water flooding, as is 29

the access spur to Old Reigate Road, running along the eastern boundary of the tennis court. This is the same for land to the north

n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- The White FZ1 change vulnerable required Suitability 001 House, concerns: Impact Old Road, on Green Belt and Buckland Conservation Area.

n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Land at FZ1 change vulnerable required Unsuitable: Part 002 Tapwood Ancient Woodland Lane, Impact, Green Belt Buckland (encroachment), loss of trees.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Land to change vulnerable required Suitability 003 the South concerns: Loss of deciduous 30

of Reigate woodland and Road, priority habitat area plus impact on village setting.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Shagbroo change vulnerable required Suitability 004 k Field, concerns: Impact Buckland on Green Belt (encroachment)

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: Potential 18-BU- Hazel change vulnerable required to meet the 005 Cottage, emerging Local Reigate Plan Strategy of Road Modest Additions to Rural Villages.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BU- Land at change vulnerable required site does not 006 Old Road, accord with the Buckland proposed spatial strategy of the Local Plan.

n/a More Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BU- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 007 Buckland change and is not liable to

Court any surface water Drive flooding.

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Consider: The site 18-BU- 2 FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 008 Dungates change and is not liable to Lane any surface water flooding.

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

A small patch More Yes Not Consider: 18-BU- Land at FZ1 in the No notable Residential vulnerable required Negligible-less 009 Bromley northwest change than 10% of site at Barns corner is at RoFSW . The site Field risk of surface is in the Surrey water Mineral Plan 2011 flooding. Mineral Safeguarding Areas and Areas of Search.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Land to change vulnerable required Suitability 010 the North Concerns: Impact of Reigate on Green Belt and Road, AGLV.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Land to change vulnerable required Suitability 011 the East of Concerns: Impact Rectory on Green Belt and Lane AONB.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 18-BU- Land to change vulnerable required Suitability 012 the West concerns: Impact of Rectory on Green Belt and Lane AGLV.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BU- Disused change vulnerable required site does not 013 Sawmill, accord with the Lawrence proposed spatial Lane, strategy of the Local Plan.

n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BU- Kemps FZ1 change vulnerable required site does not 014 Farm, accord with the

Rectory proposed spatial Lane strategy of the Local Plan.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BU- Dowdes change vulnerable required site does not 015 Farm, accord with the Lawrence proposed spatial Lane strategy of the Local Plan.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BU- Cliftons change vulnerable required site does not 016 Barn, accord with the Cliftons proposed spatial Lane, strategy of the Local Plan.

FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Consider: 18-BU- Land change vulnerable Not Negligible-less 017 behind required than 10% of site at Tapwood RoFSW. Workshop

s, Reigate Road

FZ1 n/a More Yes Discounted: The 18-BU- Park No notable Residential vulnerable Not site does not 018 Beagle change required accord with the Kennels, proposed spatial Reigate strategy of the Road Local Plan.

The site falls below the size threshold for consideration (delivering <5 dwellings)

FZ1 n/a More Yes Consider: 18-BU- Land to No notable Residential Vulnerable Not Negligible-less 019 the East of change required than 10% of site at Pilgrim RoFSW. Cottage

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-BX-001 Chestnut FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required site does not Lodge change accord with the Farm, proposed spatial Boxhill strategy of the Road Local Plan. Loss

of rural economy site.

Yes 18-CH- Charlwood FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 001 Place change vulnerable required site does not Farm, accord with the Norwood proposed spatial Hill Road, strategy of the Charlwood Local Plan. Loss or rural economy site.

Yes 18-CH- Land at FZ1 Areas of the No notable Residential More Not Discounted: 002 Pudding site near change vulnerable required. Unsuitable: Falls Lane, Swan Street within Gatwick Charlwood are at risk of Noise Contours surface water within which no flooding, as is sites will be the northern allocated for most part of residential the site. development.

Yes 18-CH- Spicers FZ1,2,& The Both the Residential More Level 2 Discounted: The 003 Farm, 3 southeast 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA site is liable to Lowfield corner of the C extents required flooding, being in Heath site is in and Flood Zones 2 &3

Road, Flood Zones 3a_Plus35C and is therefore not Charlwood 2 and 3. C extents suitable for show an development. increase on flood risk to the site should such events occur

Yes 18-CH- Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 004 The change vulnerable required site does not Glade, accord with the Russ Hill, proposed spatial Charlwood strategy of the Local Plan.

Yes 18-CH- Land FZ1, 2 & The southern No notable Residential More Level 2 Discounted: The 005 North of 3 edge of the change vulnerable SFRA site is liable to Horley site is in required flooding, being in Road, Flood Zone 2, Flood Zone 3 and Charlwood with some Flood Zone 2, and small parts in therefore it’s not Flood Zone 3. suitable for development.

Yes 18-CH- Land West FZ1 Surface water No notable Residential More Not Discounted: 006 of Ifield flooding along change vulnerable required. Gatwick Noise Road, the northern Contours, does not Charlwood and eastern fit spatial strategy , RH6 sides of the (400m from village 0DR site boundary) No identified requirement for site allocation for Class B Uses

Yes 18-CP- Land to FZ1 The northern No notable Residential More Not Discounted: 001 the west part of the change vulnerable required Suitability of the site (in close concerns: Impact Street proximity to on Green Belt. the stream) is at risk of surface water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Consider: Potential 18-CP- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required to meet the 002 Brook change emerging Local Cottage, Plan Strategy of Wolves Modest Additions Hill, Capel to Rural Villages.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-CP- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required site does not 003 Grenehurs change accord with the t Park, proposed spatial Capel strategy of the Local Plan.

Yes 18-CP- Boxhill FZ1 The No notable Residential More Not Consider: 004 Caravans southwest change vulnerable required. Negligible-less corner and than 10% of site at the track in RoFSW . the northern part of the site are at risk of surface water flooding.

Yes Not Consider: The site 18-CP- Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 006 Capel change vulnerable and is not liable to House any surface water Farm flooding.

Yes Not Consider: The site 18-CP- Land r/o FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 007 Redlands change vulnerable and is not liable to House any surface water flooding.

Patches of More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-CP- Land at FZ1 the site are at No notable Residential vulnerable required site does not 008 Osbrooks risk of surface change accord with the Farm, water proposed spatial Horsham flooding. strategy of the Road, Local Plan. Capel

The northern More Yes Not Discounted: The 18-CP- Land at FZ1 and western No notable Residential vulnerable required site does not 009 Lower boundaries of change accord with the Gages the site are at proposed spatial Farm, risk of surface strategy of the Rusper water Local Plan. Road, flooding. Capel

The entirety Yes Discounted: Loss 18-DK- Station FZ3 of the site Both the Employment More Level 2 of Safeguarded 002 Road falls within 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA Employment Site Depot, Flood Zone 3. C extents required Station and The site is liable to 3a_Plus35C flooding, being in

Road, C extents Flood Zone 3 and Dorking show an Flood Zone 2, and increase on therefore its not flood risk to suitable for the north of development. the site should such events occur

18-DK- Land at FZ1 Some surface No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: 003 Milton water flooding change vulnerable required Negligible-less Court within the than 10% of site at Lane northern RoFSW . boundary of the site. Limited ground water issues in south, potential just below surface to the north of the site

18-DK- Former FZ1 There are No notable Education More Yes Not Consider: 004 Chalcraft surface water change (potential this vulnerable required. Negligible-less Nurseries fluvial drainage may include than 10% of site at flooding issues along facilities for RoFSW . of the site Punchbowl boarders) was Lane and the reported area around the junction at 41

in the north 2013/14. west corner of the site also appears susceptible to surface water flooding.

Not Consider: 18-DK- Chennells FZ1 There is a No notable Residential More Yes required. Negligible-less 005 Nursey small area in change vulnerable than 10% of site at the centre of RoFSW . the site which may be at risk of surface water flooding.

Risk of Yes Not Consider: 18-DK- Downs FZ1 surface water No notable Residential More required Groundwater 006 Meadow on access change vulnerable Protection Zone 2, Stables road. risk of (formerly contaminated land Dorking (low risk) across Equestrian the southern part of Centre), the site. Ranmore Road, Dorking

n/a More Not Discounted: 18-DK- Sondes FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Suitability 007 Place, change concerns: Impact Westcott on tree cover and Road, parkland setting of Dorking mansion house.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Sandells, FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability 008 Reigate change Concerns: Impact Road, on Green Belt, Dorking AONB/AGLV

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Northside FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability and 009 Works, change Viability concerns Ranmore Road, Dorking

Yes 18-DK- Pixham FZ2 &3 The site is No notable Gypsy and Highly Level 2 Consider: The rear 010 Lane immediately change Traveller vulnerable SFRA portion of the site is Depot adjacent to pitches. required vulnerable to fluvial the River flooding. However, Mole and part subject to further of the site is investigation it is within Zone 2 considered that a

with the rear sequential half of the site approach can be subject to taken to historic development so it flooding. is located in the Flood Zone 3 least at risk areas is on the of the site. northern edge of the site. The front part of the site is in flood zone 1. lying in Flood Zone 2..

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Unsuitable: 011 Redlands change Located within Farm, AONB/AGLV within South which sites for West of strategic scale Dorking development will not be allocated.

The western More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Land at FZ1 & 2 half of the site No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability 012 Dorking is in Flood change concerns: Impact Sewage Zone 2. on Green Belt, Treatment Landscape, loss of works, mature tree cover, Pixham possible odour Lane issues.

n/a More Yes Not Permission has 18-DK- Clears FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required been granted. 013 Yard, change South Street, Dorking, (Vincent Works)

More Yes Level 2 Discounted: 18-DK- Communic FZ1&3 The northern Both the Residential vulnerable SFRA Unsuitable: Loss of 014 ations part of the 3a_Plus70C required. Safeguarded House & site lies within C extents Employment Site Electricity Flood Zone 3 and Cottage, and is at risk 3a_Plus35C Curtis from surface C extents Road, flooding. show an Dorking increase on flood risk to the northen half of the 45

site should such events occur

Parts of the More Yes Level 2 Site specific Flood 18-DK- Land FZ1, 2 & site are in Both the Residential vulnerable SFRA Risk Assessment 016 Adjacent 3 Flood Zone 2 3a_Plus70C required. carried out. to and Flood C extents Planning Deepdene Zone 3. and application Station, Federated 3a_Plus35C MO/2018/0624 Dorking House itself C extents refused but not on in Flood Zone show an flooding grounds. 1. Much of increase on Appeal allowed 23 the site is flood risk to May 2019. also liable to the southern surface water boundary of flooding. the site should such events occur

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Land FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability 017 South of change Concerns: Impact Marleyme on Green Belt, ad, encroachment in Dorking prominent position in southern approach to

Dorking, within AONB & AGLV

Potential risk More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Carters FZ1 of surface No notable Residential vulnerable required. Suitability 018 Field and water change concerns: Impact Beldhams flooding. on Green Belt, Farm, encroaching into Inholms open countryside Lane, lying south of a Dorking clearly defined boundary.

18-DK- Sondes FZ1 There is an No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: 020 Place area in the change vulnerable required Negligible-less Farm centre of the than 10% of site at site which is RoFSW . at risk of surface water Potential for GW at flooding. the surface on the southern half of the site

The entire More Yes Level 2 Discounted: 18-DK- Pixham FZ2 &3 site is in Both the Residential vulnerable SFRA Unsuitable for built 022 End Flood Zone 2, 3a_Plus70C required. development: Northern with large C extents Located within Parcel, parts nearer and AONB/AGLV Pixham the River 3a_Plus35C 47

Lane, Mole in Flood C extents Dorking, Zone 3. show an Some parts increase on near the river flood risk to are also liable the eastern to surface boundary of water the site flooding. should such events occur

Level 2 Consider: Site is 18-DK- Pixham Parts of The site is Both the Residential Yes SFRA partially in flood 023 End- the susceptible to 3a_Plus70C Required zones 2 and 3 and Southern eastern surface water C extents susceptible to risk Parcel border of flooding along and of surface water the site is the eastern 3a_Plus35C flooding. in Flood boundary and C extents Zones 2 in the show an Potential for GW at and 3. southern increase on the surface. corner. flood risk to Internal flooding the southern reported just tip of the site outside on the east should such side of the site. events occur However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to 48

development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

Level 2 Consider: High 18-DK- Dorking FZ1 High surface No notable Residential More Yes SFRA surface water risk 024 Railway water risk change vulnerable Required through the middle Station through the of the site and on middle of the the tracks to the site and on northeast. the tracks to However, subject the northeast to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

Not Consider: The site 18-DK- East FZ1 Some No notable Residential More Yes required is in Flood Zone 1 025 Dorking patches at change vulnerable and is not at risk Regenerat risk of surface from any surface ion Site water water flooding. flooding. However would need to remain aware of surrounding risk when planning for development.

n/a More Yes Not Discounted: 18-DK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Suitability 026 Chart change concerns: Impact House on Green Belt and and to the landscape setting South of of Dorking, plus Chart setting of heritage Lane, assets. Dorking,

n/a Yes Not Permission 18-DK- Kuoni FZ1 No notable Residential More required granted. 027 House, change vulnerable Deepdene Avenue, Dorking

Entire site Yes Level 2 Discounted: falls 18-DK- Garage FZ 2 and susceptible to No notable Residential More SFRA below the size 028 block at 3 surface water change vulnerable required. threshold for Myrtle flooding. consideration Road, (delivering < 5 Dorking, Dwellings) Site RH4 1DQ Risk of fluvial and surface water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Consider: The site 18-DK- Conifer FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 029 Park change and is not liable to extension any surface water flooding.

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

Not Discounted: The 18-FG- Land at FZ1 Risk of 1 in No notable Residential More Yes required site does not 001 Collins 1000 along th change vulnerable accord with the Farm, west of the proposed spatial Forest site. strategy of the Green Local Plan.

Not Discounted: The 18-FG- Land at FZ1 Slight risk of No notable Residential More Yes required site does not 002 Bramble surface water change vulnerable accord with the Croft, on the edges proposed spatial Horsham of (but strategy of the Road, outside) the Local Plan. Forest site. Green

Not Consider: 18-FT-001 Elmer FZ1 A very small No notable Residential More Yes required. Negligible-less Works patch of the change vulnerable than 10% of site at site is at risk RoFSW . from surface water flooding.

Not Consider: Water 18-FT-002 Fetcham FZ 2 & 3 The northern Both the Formal and More Yes required. compatible Springs and eastern 3a_Plus70C informal vulnerable development as set parts of the C extents recreation. out in Planning site are and Practise Guidance. located in 3a_Plus35C Flood Zone 3, C extents and the large show an majority of increase on the rest of the flood risk on site is in the northern Flood Zone 2. boundary of the site 52

should such events occur

Not Discounted: 18-FT-003 Monks FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes required Suitability Green change vulnerable concerns: Impact Farm, on Green Belt, Cobham encroachment and Road, urban sprawl Fetcham beyond railway line.

Not Discounted: 18-FT-004 Monks FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes required Suitability Green, change vulnerable concerns: Impact Fetcham on Green Belt, encroachment and urban sprawl beyond railway line.

Level 2 Discounted: 18-FT-005 Land to FZ1,2 &3 The northeast Both the Residential More Yes SFRA Suitability the East of corner of the 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required concerns: Impact Mole site is in C extents on Green Belt. Road, Flood Zone 3, and the Loss of replanted Fetcham with Flood 3a_Plus35C tree cover in area Zone 2 C extents identified as

covering the show an deciduous northern increase in woodland Priority portion of the flood risk on Habitat. site as well as the eastern the entire part of the eastern site and boundary. across the northern boundary of the site should such events occur

Level 2 Discounted: 18-FT-007 Rentwood, FZ1 The majority No notable Residential More Yes SFRA Suitability School of the site is change vulnerable required. concerns: loss of Lane, at risk from community facility. Fetcham surface water flooding.

Not Application granted 18-FT-008 167 FZ1 Surface water No notable Residential More Yes required 17 June 2019. Cobham flooding change vulnerable Further application Road, around the submitted 30 July Fetcham boundaries of 2019 the site (MO/2019/1074) still being considered.

Not Consider: 18-HD- Headley FZ1 Risk of No notable Residential More Yes required. Negligible-less 001 Court surface water change vulnerable than 10% of site at flooding is RoFSW . present in the north east Potential for and south ground water west corners flooding in the of the site. north of the site.

Not Discounted: The 18-HD- Loretta FZ1 Risk of No notable Residential More Yes required site does not 002 Lodge, surface water change vulnerable accord with the Tilney flooding in the proposed spatial Lane, south west strategy of the Headley, corner of the Local Plan. Loss site of rural economy site.

Not Discounted: The 18-HD- Dobbes FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes required site does not 003 Nursery, change vulnerable accord with the Church proposed spatial

Lane, strategy of the Headley Local Plan.

Yes Level 2 Discounted: The 18-HK- Hookwood FZ2 &3 The northern Both the Residential Highly SFRA site does not 001 House, half of the site 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required accord with the Reigate is within C extents proposed spatial Road, Flood Zone 3. and strategy of the Hookwood There may 3a_Plus35C Local Plan. Loss also be a risk C extents of rural economy of surface show an site. water flooding increase in from the pond flood risk to adjacent to across the the western north of the boundary of site. the site.

Yes Not Consider: 18-HK- Land adj FZ1 &2 Some surface Both the Residential More required Negligible-less 002 Three water along 3a_Plus70C vulnerable than 10% of site at Acres the western C extents RoFSW and . Low boundary of and risk of fluvial A small the site and in 3a_Plus35C flooding. This will part of the the south C extents not significantly southwest western show a slight change when corner. increase on flood risk to

corner is the southern taking into account in FZ2 most tip of climate change. the site should such events occur.

18-HK- Land to FZ1, 2 Approximatel Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 Consider: Total site 003 the west and 3. y 3ha of land 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA area 22ha. 19ha of of Reigate on the C extents Required site lies within FZ1. Road northern and and The remaining 3ha southern 3a_Plus35C lies within Flood edges of the C extents Zone 2 and a small site is at risk show an area within Flood of surface increase on Zone 3. water flood risk to flooding. the northern The site is at risk and southern from surface water most flooding. boundaries of the site However, subject should such to further events occur. investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the

least at risk areas of the site.

Discounted: The 18-HK- Land FZ 2&3 The north and Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 site does not 004 North of southerly 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA accord with the Hookwood portions of C extents required proposed spatial . the site are in and strategy of the flood zones 2 3a_Plus35C Local Plan being and 3, and C extents promoted for within the EA show a employment uses. 20m buffer of substantial Suitability a River Bank. increase on concerns: Impact The north and flood risk to on Green Belt, south the north of Flood zones 2 and portions of the site 3. the site are should such also subject events occur to surface water flooding.

Discounted: 18-HK- Hookwood FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential More Yes Not Suitability 005 Nurseries, Flood Zone 1. change vulnerable required. concerns: Impact Nursery It is liable to 1 on Green Belt. in 1000 year The site is less suited to 58

Lane, surface water development than Hookwood flooding. other sequentially preferable sites.

Level 2 Discounted: The 18-HK- Land FZ2 &3 The majority Both the Residential Highly Yes SFRA site does not 006 adjacent of the site is 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required accord with the to in Flood Zone C extents proposed spatial Oakstead, 3, with only and strategy of the Mill Lane, the small 3a_Plus35C Local Plan. Hookwood northwest C extents corner not show an The majority of the covered by increase on site is in Flood either this or flood risk Zone 3. Flood Zone 2. across the The site is not site should liable to any such events surface water occur flooding.

More Yes Not Consider: 18-HK- Land FZ1 The southern No notable Residential vulnerable required. Negligible-less 007 South of corner of the change than 10% of site at Kennel site is at risk RoFSW . Lane of surface water flooding.

More Yes Level 2 Discounted: The 18-HK- Land FZ 1,2 Parts of the Both the Residential vulnerable SFRA site does not 008 North of &3 site are in 3a_Plus70C required accord with the Gatwick Flood Zones C extents proposed spatial Airport, 2 and 3. The and strategy of the Hookwood rest of the 3a_Plus35C Local Plan being site is in C extents promoted for Flood Zone 1. show an employment uses. Large parts of increase on Suitability the site are flood risk concerns: Impact liable to across the on Green Belt. surface water site should flooding. such events Flood zones 2 and occur 3.

n/a More Yes Not Consider: 18-HK- Land FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Negligible-less 009 North of change than 10% of site at Kennel RoFSW . Lane

Yes SFRA Discounted: The 18-LG-001 Brook FZ1, A narrow No notable Residential More Level 2 site does not Farm, however band of risk change vulnerable required. accord with the Clayhill FZs 2 of surface proposed spatial Road, and 3 water flooding strategy of the Leigh abut the runs through Local Plan. Loss south the middle of of rural economy west the site. site.

corner of the site.

Yes Not Discounted: 18-LG-002 Land West FZ1 Small No notable Residential More required Suitability of Leigh patches are change vulnerable concerns: Impact liable to some on Green Belt surface water flooding.

Yes SFRA Consider: Site less 18-LG-003 Land at FZ1 &2 Some No notable Residential More Level 2 than 1ha (0.85) The patches in the change vulnerable required however partially Priests centre of the within Flood Zone House site are liable 2 and at risk from to 1 in 1000 surface water year surface flooding. Subject water to further flooding. investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

Yes No Discounted: The 18-LG-004 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential/ More required. site does not Ashgrove change commercial vulnerable accord with the Farm, proposed spatial Irons strategy of the Bottom Local Plan. Road, Sidlow

Yes Not Discounted: The 18-LG-005 Junes FZ1 The site is in No notable Unspecified More required site does not Blooms, Flood Zone 1. change vulnerable accord with the Bunce However, proposed spatial Common large parts of strategy of the Road, the site are Local Plan. Leigh liable to surface water flooding.

Yes Not Discounted: 18-LG-006 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More required Suitability Orchard change vulnerable concerns: Impact Cottage, on Green Belt and Church Conservation Area Road, Leigh

Some Yes Not Consider: 18-LG-007 Land at FZ1 patches of No notable Residential More required Negligible-less Tapners the site are at change vulnerable than 10% of site at Road risk of surface RoFSW water flooding

The site is Yes Not Discounted: 18-LG-008 Land at FZ1 liable to 1 in No notable Residential More required. Suitability Meadowsi 30, 1 in 100 change vulnerable Concerns: Impact de, and 1 in 1000 on Green Belt. Clayhill year surface The site is less Road, water flooding suited to Leigh, around the development than RH2 8PD pond in the other sequentially southeast preferable sites corner and stream along the western boundary.

Discounted: The 18-LG-009 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not site does not Dawes change vulnerable required. accord with the Green proposed spatial Farm, strategy of the Clayhill Local Plan. Road, Suitability Leigh concerns: Impact on Green Belt.

Level 2 Consider: Ground 18-LH-001 Bull Hill FZ1 Surface water No notable Residential More Yes SFRA water risk on the Site flooding change. vulnerable required site. Internal across the flooding reported northern half just to the north of of the site, the site. A large predominantl portion of the site is y in the north susceptible to west. surface water flooding. However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

Not Consider: The site 18-LH-002 The Swan FZ1 There is a No notable Intensification Less Yes required lies within Shopping risk of surface change of use to vulnerable groundwater Centre, water flooding create larger protection zones 1 Leatherhe on the east retail units, and 2 and is at risk ad supporting leisure uses 64

side of the and a more from surface water site. user friendly flooding. car park.

The site is already built up, and any further development would not alter the existing situation/vulnerabili ty classification on site.

Not Permission has 18-LH-003 Former FZ1 n/a No notable Residential- More Yes required been granted on Leatherhe change led mixed use vulnerable this site. ad Food Internation al Site, Randalls Way.

Not Discounted: 18-LH-004 Westminst FZ1 n/a No notable Employment Less Yes required Unsuitable: Loss of er House change vulnerable Safeguarded (aka Employment Site Cassini Court),

Randalls Way

Not Discounted: The 18-LH-005 Pachesha FZ1 There is a No notable Residential – More Yes required site does not m Golf risk of surface change led, mixed use vulnerable accord with the Centre, water hotel and proposed spatial Oaklawn flooding, both leisure strategy of the Road, 30 year Local Plan. Not shallow and well integrated with 200 year urban form. deep, in Reliance on single some parts of traffic route into the site. town centre.

Yes 18-LH-006 Claire FZ 2 &3 James House Both the Residential More Not Permission House is in FZ3, and 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required Granted and Claire House C extents James is in FZ2. The and Site specific flood House majority of 3a_Plus35C risk assessment the site is C extents carried out as part also at risk show a slight of MO/2018/1983 from surface increase on water flooding flood risk across the site should

such events occur

Yes 18-LH-007 Kingston FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not The site is House change vulnerable required identified in the Gardens Transform Leatherhead Master Plan as an opportunity for new housing within the New Urban Quarter (which also includes Bull Hill).

The site is the subject of a current planning application.

Yes Discounted: 18-LH-008 Land East FZ1 small patches No notable Residential More Not Suitability of at risk of change vulnerable required concerns: Impact Leatherhe surface water on Green Belt ad By- flooding Pass

Yes The site is within 18-LH-010 Land to FZ1 Possible risk No notable Residential More Not the Leatherhead the rear of of surface change vulnerable required Business Area

Grantham flooding to boundary and is House, north east of adjacent to 11-15 site. Leatherhead North Shopping Area. Street Permission has been granted on the site. A further application is now under consideration.

Yes Discounted: The 18-LH-012 Land at FZ2 & 3 More than Both the B2/ B8 Highly Level 2 site is in the Green Leatherhe half of the site 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA Belt and is liable to ad lies in Flood C extents Required flooding, being part Sewage Zone 3, with and in Flood Zone 3 Treatment the remainder 3a_Plus35C and part in Flood works, in Flood Zone C extents Zone 2, and is Randalls 2. The site is show a slight therefore not Road also at risk of increase on suitable for surface flood risk to development. flooding 30 the north year shallow west corner of the site should such events occur

18-LH-013 Ash FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: The site House change vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 and and is not liable to Jonaki any surface water flooding.

18-LH-014 Leatherhe FZ2 and Small Both the Parking Less Yes Not Parking proposed ad Leisure 3 patches of 1 3a_Plus70C proposed on vulnerable required on former tennis Centre in 30 year C extents former tennis courts. Planning extent and courts permission granted throughout 3a_Plus35C for a temporary car the site C extents park (64 spaces) show an for a period of increase on three years flood risk (MO/2019/0222) across the site should such events occur

More Not Consider: 18-LH-015 Leatherhe FZ1 There is No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. Negligible-less ad Sorting some surface change than 10% of site at Office and water flooding RoFSW . at the north

Telephone west corner Some sections of Exchange of the site. the site at risk from ground water flooding.

More Not Discounted: 18-LH-016 ERA Site, FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Unsuitable: Loss of Leatherhe Flood Zone 1. change Safeguarded ad Some Employment Site scattered patches are susceptible to surface water flooding

More Not Consider: 18-LH-017 Land FZ1 There is No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. Negligible-less between some change than 10% of site at 36-69 potential for RoFSW . Randells surface water Road flooding along Randalls Road to the north of the site.

18-LH-018 Land off FZ1 50% of the No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: Clare site is at risk change vulnerable required Considered to be Crescent The of 1 in 1000 low risk. Negligible northern year surface 1 in 30 which is most tip water high risk. Worth of the site flooding. working out % of abuts medium risk which Flood is 1 in 100. Zone 2 and 3 due to the proximity of the Rye Brook

Discounted: 18-LH-019 Ashcombe FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Unsuitable: Loss of House, change vulnerable required. Employment Site The Crescent, Leatherhe ad

Consider: Site is 18-LH-020 Land rear FZ1, 2 Surface water Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 susceptible to of 5-33 and 3 flooding along 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA fluvial flooding and Randalls the southern C extents required surface water Road. boundary of and flooding. Potential the site and 3a_Plus35C for groundwater some in the C extents throughout the site. centre. show a slight The flooding increase on events occur to the flood risk southernmost along the boundary of the southern site and subject to boundaries of further the site investigation a should such sequential events occur. approach can locate development in areas of least risk.

Consider: The site 18-LH-021 Land to FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not is in Flood Zone 1 the North change vulnerable required and is not at risk & South of from any surface Barnett water flooding. Wood Lane

Discounted: The 18-LH-022 Land at FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential More Yes Not site does not Patsom Flood Zone 1 change vulnerable required accord with the Cottage, and only very proposed spatial Randalls small patches strategy of the Road. are liable to Local Plan. any surface water flooding.

More Not Consider: 18-LH-023 Land FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Negligible-less adjacent change than 10% of site at to RoFSW . Crestawoo d

Highly Yes Not Consider: 18-LH-024 Land at FZ1 At risk of No notable Gypsy and vulnerable required Negligible-less River surface water change Traveller than 10% of site at Lane flooding. pitches. RoFSW

Potential for ground water flooding.

More Not Consider: 18-LH-025 Land at FZ1 Minimal No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. Negligible-less and to the surface water change than 10% of site at rear of flooding to RoFSW . Two Ways the rear of House Two Ways. An ordinary watercourse runs through the site.

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-026 Highlands FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential/ vulnerable Yes required site does not Farm Flood Zone 1. change retirement accord with the Stables, Some village proposed spatial Headley patches are strategy of the Road. liable to Local Plan. surface water Suitability flooding. concerns: Impact on Green Belt

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-027 Land at FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. site does not Close Flood Zone 1. change accord with the End, Some proposed spatial 74

Garden patches are strategy of the Close, liable to Local Plan. Givons surface water Grove. flooding

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-028 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required site does not Crabtree change accord with the Drive, proposed spatial Givons strategy of the Grove, Local Plan. Leatherhe ad

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-029 Randalls FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required site does not Farmhous change accord with the e, proposed spatial Randalls strategy of the Road, Local Plan. Leatherhe Suitability ad concerns: Impact on Green Belt / conflict with legal agreement securing removal of buildings

More Not Discounted: 18-LH-030 Land FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. Suitability South of change concerns: Impact Leatherhe on Green Belt. ad, Impact on Leatherhe attractive ad landscape setting of southern Leatherhead.

More Level 2 Discounted: 18-LH-031 Vale FZ1 & 3 A small Both the Residential vulnerable Yes SFRA Suitability Lodge portion of the 3a_Plus70C required concerns: Impact Stables, western side C extents on Green Belt, Downs of the site is and access. Lane, within flood 3a_Plus35C Leatherhe zone 3. C extents ad show an increase on Flood zones 2 and flood risk 3. along the

eastern boundary of the site should such events occur

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-032 Queen FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. site does not Elizabeth’ change accord with the s proposed spatial Foundatio strategy of the n, Local Plan Dorincourt , Oaklawn Road, Leatherhe ad

More Not Discounted: The 18-LH-033 Land at FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. site does not Givons Flood Zone 1. change accord with the Grove, Patches are proposed spatial Leatherhe liable to some strategy of the ad surface water Local Plan. flooding.

More Not Discounted: 18-LH-034 Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Suitability Fortyfoot change concerns: Impact Road, on Green Belt, tree Leatherhe cover, access. ad

More Not Discounted: 18-LH-035 Land FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Suitability South of change concerns: Impact Leatherhe on Green Belt and ad, landscape setting adjacent of Leatherhead. to Crestawoo d, Reigate Road

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-LH-036 Land on FZ1 No notable Residential More required site does not the south change vulnerable accord with the west side proposed spatial of strategy of the Mickleham Local Plan. Drive, Leatherhe ad.

Surface water Yes Level 2 Discounted: The 18-LH-037 Pachesha FZ1, 2 flooding No notable Residential More SFRA site does not m Farm and 3 (2 across the change Vulnerable required accord with the and Golf and 3 middle of the proposed spatial Centre along the site strategy of the southern Local Plan. It is not boundary well integrated with the urban form with reliance on a single 78

of the traffic route into the site) town centre. Risk of surface water flooding.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: 18-MK- The FZ1 No notable Residential More required Suitability 001 Garden change vulnerable concerns: Impact House, on Green Belt. School The site is less Lane, suited to Mickleham development than other sequentially preferable sites.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: 18-MK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required Suitability 002 Eastfield change vulnerable concerns: Impact Cottage, on Green Belt. Mickleham The site is less suited to development than other sequentially preferable sites.

n/a Yes Not Consider: The site 18-MK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 003 Dell change vulnerable and is not liable to Close, any surface water Mickleham flooding. , RH5 6EF

n/a Yes Not Consider: The site 18-MK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 004 Hall Farm change vulnerable and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

Potential for ground water flooding across the site.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-MK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required site fails to accord 005 Fredley change vulnerable with the proposed Manor, spatial strategy of Mickleham the Local Plan. Site

n/a Yes Not Consider: The site 18-ND- Land r/o FZ1 No notable Residential More required is in Flood Zone 1 001 Six Bells change vulnerable and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: 18-ND- Car Park FZ1 No notable Residential More required Unsuitable: Loss 002 to the rear change vulnerable of parking which of The Six supports village Bells services Public House, Village Street, Newdigate , RH5 5DH

The site is in Yes Not Discounted: The 18-ND- Land off FZ1 Flood Zone 1. No notable Residential More required. site does not 003 Hogspuddi Northern change vulnerable accord with the ng Lane, boundary is proposed spatial Newdigate liable to some strategy of the small patches Local Plan. of surface water flooding of 1 in 1000.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-ND- Kiln Platt FZ1 No notable Residential More required. site does not 004 Yard, change vulnerable accord with the Parkgate proposed spatial Road, strategy of the Newdigate Local Plan.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: 18-ND- Land FZ1 No notable Residential More required. Suitability 005 fronting change vulnerable concerns: Impact Ruspers on Conservation Road, Area Newdigate

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-NH- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential in More required. site does not 001 Spartan change support of vulnerable accord with the Green rural workers. proposed spatial Farm, strategy of the Norwood Local Plan. Hill.

The south Yes Level 2 Discounted: The 18-OK- Market FZ1 & 3 west corner No notable Residential More SFRA site does not 001 Garden of the site is change vulnerable required accord with the Nursery, in Flood Zone proposed spatial Coles 3. strategy of the Lane, Local Plan. Ockley Suitability Concerns: Impact on heritage assets.

The site is in Yes Not Discounted: The 18-OK- Land East FZ1 Flood Zone 1. No notable Residential More required site does not 002 of Ockley Patches of it change vulnerable accord with the Station are at risk of proposed spatial 1 in 100 year strategy of the and 1 in 1000 Local Plan. year surface water flooding.

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-OK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential More required. site does not 003 Vann change vulnerable accord with the Cottage, proposed spatial Friday strategy of the Street, Local Plan. Ockley

n/a Yes Not Discounted: The 18-OK- Goods FZ1 No notable Residential More required. site does not 004 Yard at change vulnerable accord with the Ockley proposed spatial Station strategy of the Local Plan.

Medium risk Yes Not Discounted: The 18-OK- Wearewoo FZ1 of surface No notable Residential More required. site does not 005 d House, water through change vulnerable accord with the Weare the centre of proposed spatial Street, the site, and strategy of the Ockley some along Local Plan. the northern boundary.

Small Yes 18-OK- Land at FZ1 patches of No notable Residential More Not Consider: 006 Friday the southern change vulnerable required. Negligible-less Street half of the site than 10% of site at is at risk of RoFSW . surface water flooding. Elderslie lodge flooded internally during the 2013/14 winter floods. Ordinary watercourse runs the eastern side

n/a Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Land to FZ1 No notable Residential More Not site does not 007 the West change vulnerable required. accord with the of Stane proposed spatial Street, strategy of the Ockley Local Plan.

Yes 18-OK- Land at FZ1 &2 a small No notable Residential More Not Consider: 008 Cricketers section on the change vulnerable required Negligible-less Close northwest than 10% of site at border is in RoFSW . Flood Zone 2

Yes 18-OK- Land adj FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Consider: The site 009 Village change vulnerable required is in Flood Zone 1 Hall and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

Yes Discounted: 18-OK- Land FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential More Not Suitability 010 North of Flood Zone 1. change vulnerable required concerns: Impact the Inn on The majority on Conservation the Green, of the site is Area Stane liable to 1 in Street 1000 year surface water flooding.

Yes Discounted: 18-OK- Land East FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Suitability 011 of Stane change vulnerable required. concerns: Impact

Street, on Conservation Ockley Area

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Land at FZ1, 2 & In addition, No notable Mixed use Highly Level 2 site does not 012 Coles 3 large change vulnerable SFRA accord with the Lane, scattered required. proposed spatial Ockley parts of the strategy of the site are liable Local Plan. to some Suitability surface water Concerns: Impact flooding. on heritage assets.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Land at FZ1 Some risk of No notable Residential More Not site does not 013 Woodstoc surface water change vulnerable required accord with the k House, on the access proposed spatial Mole road to the strategy of the Lane, east of he Local Plan. Ockley site.

Yes Discounted: 18-OK- St. FZ1 It is liable to No notable Residential More Not Suitability 014 Aubyn’s surface water change vulnerable required. concerns: Impact flooding in its on Green Belt.

Field, western The site is less Ockley parts. suited to development than other sequentially preferable sites.

Yes Consider: The site 18-OK- Sanitorium FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not is in Flood Zone 1 015 Field change vulnerable required and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not site does not 016 the Weir, change vulnerable required. accord with the Coles proposed spatial Lane, strategy of the Ockley Local Plan. Suitability Concerns: Impact on heritage assets.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- St. FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not site does not 017 Margaret’s change vulnerable required. accord with the Church proposed spatial Meadow, strategy of the Coles Local Plan. Lane Suitability Concerns: Impact on heritage assets.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Weavers FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not site does not 018 Field, change vulnerable required. accord with the Coles proposed spatial Lane, strategy of the Ockley Local Plan.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Land to FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not site does not 019 the West change vulnerable required accord with the of Ockley proposed spatial Station, strategy of the Ockley Local Plan.

Yes Discounted: The 18-OK- Ockley FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not site does not 020 court sites change vulnerable required accord with the (Brickwork proposed spatial s Site), strategy of the Coles Local Plan. Lane, Ockley

Yes 18-OK- Figgs FZ1,2,3 Risk of No notable Residential More Level 2 Consider: A large 021 Field surface water change vulnerable SFRA percentage of the flooding along required site (over 30%) is the western suseptable to boundary of fluvial flooding. the site. Surface water Specifically 1 flooding is also a in 1000 risk. extent. However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the

least at risk areas of the site.

Yes 18-OK- Elderslie, FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 022 Stane change vulnerable required site fails to accord Street, with the proposed Ockley spatial strategy of the Local Plan.

Yes 18-SH- Grandon FZ1 The site is in No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 001 Lodge, Flood Zone 1. change vulnerable required . site does not Horsham The northern accord with the Road, part of the proposed spatial Holmwood site is liable strategy of the Corner to some Local Plan. surface water Suitability flooding. concerns: Impact on Green Belt & Ancient Woodland.

Yes 18-WA- Land to FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 001 the rear of change vulnerable required. site fails to accord Bramblety with the proposed e, spatial strategy of Horsham the Local Plan. Road, Walliswoo

d, RH5 5RL

Yes 18-WA- Land FZ1 The No notable Residential More Level 2 Discounted: The 002 adjacent boundaries of change vulnerable SFRA site is below the to The the site and Required size threshold and Scarlett the northern would not Arms section are contribute a Public susceptible to minimum 5 (net) House, surface water dwellings to the Walliswoo flooding (1 in housing stock. d Green 100 and 1 in Additionally the site Road, 1000 year does not accord Walliswoo extents) with the proposed d, RH5 spatial strategy of 5RD the Local Plan

The majority of the site is susceptible to surface water flooding

Yes 18-WA- Land to FZ1 Some surface No notable Residential More Not Discounted: The 003 the East of water flooding change vulnerable required. site fails to accord Trap along the with the proposed Lane, western spatial strategy of Walliswoo boundary the Local Plan.

d, RH5 5QX

Yes 18-WC- Land at FZ1, 2,3 The northern Both the Residential More Level 2 Consider: The site 001 Westcott part of the 3a_Plus70C Vulnerable SFRA is in Flood Zone 1 House site is at risk C extents required and is not liable to from surface and any surface water water flooding 3a_Plus35C flooding. across all C extents extents. show an Issues with ground increase on water flooding flood risk to the north east of the site should such events occur.

n/a More Yes 18-WC- Mill Way FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable Not Consider: The site 002,003 House, change required is in Flood Zone 1 &004 Bramley and is not liable to House any surface water and flooding. Heathcres t.

n/a More Yes 18-WC- Lake FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable Not Discounted: 005 House, change required. Suitability Deerleap concerns: The Road, site is less suited to Westcott, development than Surrey, other sequentially RH4 3LE preferable sites. Impact on Green Belt (encroachment).

A small Yes Not Consider: 18-WH- Land FZ1 patch on the No notable Residential More required Negligible-less 001 fronting west of the change vulnerable than 10% of site at Westhumb site is at risk RoFSW . le Street of surface water Risk of ground flooding. water flooding.

18-WH- Land at FZ1 Negligible No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: 002 The surface water change vulnerable required. Suitability Copse, along the concerns: Impact Pilgrims eastern on landscape Close, boundary of (AONB and AGLV) Westhumb the site and tree cover. le, RH5 6AR

18-WO- Surrey FZ1 Part of the No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The 001 Hills west of the change vulnerable required. site does not Business site is at risk accord with the Park, RH5 from surface proposed spatial 6QT & water strategy of the Coast Hill flooding. Local Plan. Loss of Farm, rural economy site. Sheephou se Lane, Wotton, RH5 6QH

Appendix 2: Sites remaining for consideration SHELA Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Flood Risk Sequenti Exceptio Comments/Justificati A Site address Zone surface Change use Vulnerabilit al Test n Test on referenc water Allowances y e flooding Classificatio n

A large Yes Level 2 Limited potential for 18-AS- Marsden FZ1 proportion of No notable Residential More SFRA ground water 001 Nurseries, the site is at change vulnerable required flooding. Ashtead risk from . Park surface High risk area from Garden water surface water Centre flooding, (including access to although this the site) is concentrated Pleasure Pit Road is in the a Surrey Count northern end Council wetspot. of the site.

18-AS- Ermyn FZ1 Small No Notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 003 House patches of Change /mixed use vulnerable required. Zone 1 and is at the site are minimal risk from at risk from surface water RoFSW 1 in flooding. 1000 extent. Limited potential for ground water flooding.

SHELA Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Flood Risk Sequenti Exceptio Comments/Justificati A Site address Zone surface Change use Vulnerabilit al Test n Test on referenc water Allowances y e flooding Classificatio n

18-AS- Land at FZ1 Some of the No Notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 004 Murreys eastern part Change vulnerable required. 10% of site at Court of the site RoFSW flooding. around the existing Surrey advice to buildings is develop the site with liable to 1 in drainage in mind. 1000 year surface water flooding.

18-AS- Land South FZ1 Small No Notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 011 of Ermyn patches of Change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is at Way the site are minimal risk from at risk from any surface water surface flooding. water flooding.

18-BG- Land at FZ1 A stream No Notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 001 Breakspear runs across Change vulnerable required 10% of site at Farm the site from RoFSW. a pond in the west. This can give rise to The site was flagged surface up by County water because a water 96

flooding in course ran through the east. the site. However on balance we did not think this equated to medium to high level surface water risk.

Ordinary Water Course consent may be required for works to the stream. NB An internal drainage board where relevant, or lead local authority has permissive powers to carry out flood defence works for ordinary watercourses at their discretion.

18-BG- Land South FZ1 Surface No Notable Residential/ More Yes Level 2 Majority of site at 002 of Beare water Change community vulnerable SFRA RoFSW 1 in 1000 Green flooding in possibly required extent. However it is the centre of primary . felt a sequential the site and school approach to along the development may be watercourse 97

which forms possible subject to the northern further investigation. boundary

Historic flooding along Ockley Road. Two main rivers 1 through the site and 1 to the north

18-BK- Grove FZ1 1 in 1000 No Notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 001 Corner risk of Change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is at risk surface from surface water water flooding. flooding on site around site entrance and along southern boundary.

A stream Level 2 It is unclear whether 18-BK- Land N/W FZ1 flows No Notable Residential More Yes SFRA the development can 008 of Preston (broadly) Change vulnerable required go ahead without Farm south to . adverse potential north effects on the through the adjoining and local centre of the watercourses.

farm but to Would require the north detailed design and and measures to allow northwest of development due to the surface water and proposed rivers. Also potential residential for ground water site. (a drop flooding on the north of 100 tip of site metres) pouring water into little Bookham Street and Fox Lane. Extensive risk of surface water flooding across the north of the site. 18-BK- Land North FZ1 Slight risk of No Notable Residential More Yes Level 2 The site is in Flood 015 of Guildford surface Change vulnerable SFRA Zone 1 and is at risk Road water to the required from surface water . flooding.

north of the The majority of the site. site has potential for ground water flooding.

n/a More Yes Level 2 The site is in Flood 18-BK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable SFRA Zone 1 and is not 017 Chalkpit change required liable to any surface Lane . water flooding.

Issues with ground water flooding across the entire site.

18-BR- Former FZ 2 &3 Western Both the Residential More Yes Not A site specific flood 001 Sewage portion of 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required. risk assessment has Works the site lies C extents been carried out as in Flood and part of a recent Zone 3 and 3a_Plus35C planning application. the rest of C extents (Planning reference the site in show an MO/2016/2026 Flood Zone increase on refers) 2. flood risk to the west of the site 100

should such events occur.

18-BR- Tanners FZ1 The majority No notable Residential More Yes Not A site specific flood 004 Meadow of the site is change vulnerable required risk assessment has at risk from been carried out as surface part of a recent water planning application. flooding. (Planning application reference Reports of MO/2018/0700 historic refers). internal and external flooding to properties on Tanners Meadow, House Road

18-BR- Land west FZ1 The whole No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Ordinary 005 of Wheelers western part change vulnerable SFRA watercourse to the Lane of the site is required north and internal at risk from flooding reported on surface Oakdene Road water flooding. High surface water risk 1 in 30. Ordinary

101

watercourse to the north and internal flooding reported on Oakdene Road

18-BR- 31 FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 007 Wheelers change vulnerable required. Zone 1 and is not Way liable to any surface water flooding.

18-BR- Land at the FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 008 Bungalow change vulnerable required. Zone 1 and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

18-BT- The FZ1 n/a No notable Gypsy and Highly Yes Not The site is in Flood 005 Evergreens change Traveller vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not pitches. liable to any surface water flooding.

18-BT- Land r/o FZ1 A part of the No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 012 Bumblebee western change vulnerable required 10% of site at Cottage and boundary to RoFSW. The Firs The Firs and the access Limited risk of spur to Old ground water Reigate flooding. Road, running

102

along the eastern boundary of the tennis court are susceptible to Surface Water Flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Negligible-less than 18-BU- Hazel FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required 10% of site at 005 Cottage, change RoFSW. Reigate Road

n/a More Yes Not The site is in Flood 18-BU- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not 007 Buckland change liable to any surface Court Drive water flooding.

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

n/a More Yes Not The site is in Flood 18-BU- 2 Dungates FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not 008 Lane change liable to any surface water flooding.

103

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

A small More Yes Not Negligible-less than 18-BU- Land at FZ1 patch in the No notable Residential vulnerable required. 10% of site at 009 Bromley northwest change RoFSW . The site is Barns Field corner is at in the Surrey Mineral risk of Plan 2011 Mineral surface Safeguarding Areas water and Areas of Search. flooding.

n/a More Yes Not Negligible-less than 18-BU- Land FZ1 No notable Light vulnerable required 10% of site at 017 behind change industrial RoFSW. Tapwood and Workshops, Residential Reigate Road

18-BU- Land to the FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 019 East of change Vulnerable required 10% of site at Pilgrim RoFSW. Cottage

18-CP- Land at FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 002 Brook change vulnerable required Zone 1 and Cottage, negligible risk from

104

Wolves Hill, surface water Capel flooding.

18-CP- Boxhill FZ1 It is liable to No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 004 Caravans 1 in 1000 change. vulnerable required 10% of site at surface RoFSW . water flooding in the southwest corner and on the track in the north of the site.

18-CP- Land at FZ1 N/A No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 006 Capel change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not House liable to any surface Farm water flooding.

18-CP- Land r/o FZ1 N/A No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 007 Redlands change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not House liable to any surface water flooding.

18-DK- Land at FZ1 Some No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 003 Milton Court surface change vulnerable required 10% of site at Lane water RoFSW . flooding

105

within the Limited ground water northern issues in south, boundary of potential just below the site. surface to the north of the site

Negligible-less than 18-DK- Former FZ1 – There are No notable Education More Yes Not 10% of site at 004 Chalcraft fluvial surface change (potential vulnerable required. RoFSW . Nurseries flooding water this will of the drainage include site was issues along facilities for reported Punchbowl boarders) in Lane and 2013/14. the area around the junction at the n/w corner of the site.

Not Negligible-less than 18-DK- Chennells FZ1 Small area No notable Residential More Yes required 10% of site at 005 Nursery in the centre change vulnerable RoFSW. of the site at risk of surface

106

water flooding.

Not Groundwater 18-DK- Downs FZ1 Risk of No notable Residential More Yes required Protection Zone 2, 006 Meadow surface change vulnerable risk of contaminated Stables water on land (low risk) across (formerly access road. the southern part of Dorking the site. Equestrian Centre), Ranmore Road, Dorking

18-DK- Pixham FZ 1, 2 The site is No notable Gypsy and Highly Yes Level 2 The rear portion of 10 Lane Depot &3 immediately change Traveller vulnerable SFRA the site is vulnerable adjacent to pitches. required to fluvial flooding. the River However, subject to Mole and further investigation part of the it is considered that site is within a sequential Zone 2 with approach can be the rear half taken to of the site development so it is subject to located in the least historic at risk areas of the flooding. site. Flood Zone 107

3 is on the northern edge of the site. The front part of the site is in flood zone 1. lying in Flood Zone 2.

18-DK- Sondes FZ1 There is an No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 020 Place Farm area in the change vulnerable required 10% of site at centre of the RoFSW . site which is at risk of Potential for GW at surface the surface on the water southern half of the flooding. site

Level 2 Site is partially in 18-DK- Pixham Parts of The site is Both the Residential More Yes SFRA flood zones 2 and 3 023 End- the susceptible 3a_Plus70C vulnerable Require and susceptible to Southern eastern to surface C extents d risk of surface water Parcel border of water and flooding. the site flooding 3a_Plus35C is in along the C extents Potential for GW at Flood eastern show an the surface. Internal boundary increase on flooding reported just 108

Zones 2 and in the flood risk to outside on the east and 3. southern the southern side of the site, due corner. tip of the to fluvial flooding. site should such events However, subject to occur. further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-DK- Dorking FZ1 High surface No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 High surface water 024 Railway water risk change vulnerable SFRA risk through the Station through the Require middle of the site middle of the d and on the tracks to site and on the northeast the tracks to the northeast However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to

109

development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

Not The site is in Flood 18-DK- East FZ1 Some No notable Residential More Yes required Zone 1 and is not at 025 Dorking patches at change vulnerable risk from any surface Regeneratio risk of water flooding. n Site- surface However would need Pippbrook water to remain aware of House flooding surrounding risk when planning for development.

18-DK- Conifer FZ1 n/a No notable Gypsy and Highly Yes Not The site is in Flood 029 Park change Traveller vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not extension pitches liable to any surface water flooding.

Limited risk of ground water flooding.

18-FT- Elmer FZ1 A very small No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 001 Works patch of the change vulnerable required 10% of site at site is at risk RoFSW . from surface 110

water flooding.

18-FT- Fetcham FZ 2 & 3 The northern Both the Formal and More Yes Not Water compatible 002 Springs and eastern 3a_Plus70C informal vulnerable required. development as set parts of the C extents recreation. out in Planning site are and Practise Guidance. located in 3a_Plus35C Flood Zone C extents 3, and the show an large increase on majority of flood risk on the rest of the northern the site is in boundary of Flood Zone the site 2. should such events occur

18-FT- 167 FZ1 Surface No notable Residential More Yes Not Application granted 008 Cobham water change vulnerable required 17 June 2019. Road, flooding Further application Fetcham around the submitted 30 July boundaries 2019 of the site (MO/2019/1074) still being considered.

111

18-HD- Headley FZ1 Surface No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 001 Court water change vulnerable required. 10% of site at flooding in RoFSW . the north east and Potentintial for south west ground water corners of flooding in the north the site. of the site.

18-HK- Land adj FZ1 &2 Some Both the Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 002 Three Acres surface 3a_Plus70C vulnerable required 10% of site at A small water along C extents RoFSW and . Low part of the western and risk of fluvial the boundary of 3a_Plus35C flooding. This will southwe the site and C extents not significantly st corner in the south show a change when taking is in FZ2 western slight into account climate corner. increase on change. flood risk to the southern most tip of the site should such events occur.

18-HK- Land to the FZ1, 2 Approximate Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 Total site area 22ha. 003 west of and 3 ly 3ha of 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA 19ha of site lies land on the C extents within FZ1. The 112

Reigate northern and and Require remaining 3ha lies Road southern 3a_Plus35C d within Flood Zone 2 edges of the C extents and a small area site is at risk show an within Flood Zone 3. of surface increase on water flood risk to The site is at risk flooding. the northern from surface water and flooding. southern most boundaries However, subject to of the site further investigation should such it is considered that events a sequential occur. approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

More Yes Not Negligible-less than 18-HK- Land South FZ1 Minimal risk No notable Residential vulnerable required. 10% of site at 007 of Kennel of surface change RoFSW Lane water flooding in the south

113

west corner of the site.

n/a More Yes Not Negligible-less than 18-HK- Land North FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable required. 10% of site at 009 of Kennel change RoFSW . Lane

18-LG- Land at The FZ1 &2 Some No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Site less than 1ha 003 Priests patches in change vulnerable SFRA (0.85) however House the centre of required partially within Flood the site are Zone 2 and at risk liable to 1 in from surface water 1000 year flooding. Subject to surface further investigation water it is considered that flooding. a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-LG- Land at FZ1 Some No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 007 Tapners patches of change vulnerable required. 10% of site at Road the site are RoFSW at risk of

114

surface water flooding.

18-LH- Bull Hill Site FZ1 Surface No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Ground water risk on 001 water change vulnerable SFRA the site. Internal flooding required flooding reported just across the to the north of the northern half site. A large portion of the site, of the site is predominantl susceptible to y in the north surface water west. flooding.

However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

115

18-LH- The Swan FZ1 Large risk of No notable Intensificatio Less Yes Not The site lies within 002 Shopping surface change. n of use to Vulnerable required groundwater Centre water include protection zones 1 flooding additional and 2 and is at risk through out leisure and from surface water the site. car parking flooding.

The site is already built up, and any further development would not alter the existing situation/vulnerability calssification on site.

18-LH- Kingston FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is identified 007 House change vulnerable required in the Transform Gardens Leatherhead Master Plan as an opportunity for new housing within the New Urban Quarter (which also includes Bull Hill).

18-LH- Land to the FZ1 Possible risk No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is within the 010 rear of of surface change vulnerable required Leatherhead

116

Grantham flooding to Business Area House, 11- north east of boundary and is 15 North site. adjacent to Street Leatherhead Shopping Area.

Permission has been granted on the site. A further application is now under consideration.

18-LH- Ash House FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 013 and Jonaki change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

18-LH- Leatherhea FZ1 Surface No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 015 d Sorting water change vulnerable required. 10% of site at Office & flooding at RoFSW . Telephone n/w corner. Exchange Some sections of the site at risk from ground water flooding.

18-LH- Land FZ1 There is No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 017 between some change vulnerable required 10% of site at 36-69 potential for RoFSW . surface 117

Randalls water Road flooding along part of Randalls Road to the north of the site.

18-LH- Land off FZ1 50% of the No notable Residential More Yes Not Consider: 018 Clare site is at risk change vulnerable required Considered to be low Crescent of 1 in 1000 risk. Negligible 1 in year surface 30 which is high risk. The water Worth working out % northern flooding. of medium risk which most tip is 1 in 100 of the site abuts Flood Zone 2 and 3 due to the proximity of the Rye Brook

118

18-LH- Land rear of Rear of Surface Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 Site is susceptible to 020 5-33 site lies water 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA fluvial flooding and Randalls within FZ flooding C extents required surface water Road. 2 and 3. along the and . flooding. Potential for southern 3a_Plus35C groundwater boundary of C extents throughout the site the site and show a some in the slight centre. increase on flood risk along the southern boundaries of the site should such events occur.

The site is in Flood 18-LH- Land to the FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Zone 1 and is not at 021 North & change vulnerable required risk from any surface South of water flooding. Barnett Wood Lane

119

More Not The site is in Flood 18-LH- Land FZ1 n/a No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required Zone 1 and is not 023 adjacent to change liable to any surface Crestawood water flooding.

Small risk of groundwater flooding across the whole site.

18-LH- Land at FZ1 The site is in No notable Gypsy and Highly Yes Not Negligible-less than 024 River Lane Flood Zone change Traveller vulnerable required 10% of site at 1 and is RoFSW liable to 1 in 1000 year Potential for ground surface water flooding. water flooding

More Not 18-LH- Land at and FZ1 Is only liable No notable Residential vulnerable Yes required. 025 to the rear to minimal change Negligible-less than of Two surface 10% of site at Ways water RoFSW . House, flooding to Oxshott the rear of Road Two Ways.

120

An ordinary watercourse runs through the site.

18-MK- Land at Dell FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 003 Close, change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not Mickleham, liable to any surface RH5 6EF water flooding.

Potential for ground water flooding across the site.

18-MK- Land at Hall FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 004 Farm change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

Potential for ground water flooding across the site.

18-ND- Land r/o Six FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 001 Bells change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

121

small Yes Negligible-less than 18-OK- Land at FZ1 patches of No notable Residential More Not 10% of site at 006 Friday the southern change vulnerable required. RoFSW . Street half of the site are at Elderslie lodge risk of flooded internally surface during the 2013/14 water winter floods. flooding. Ordinary watercourse runs the eastern side

Yes Negligible-less than 18-OK- Land at FZ1 &2 Minimal No notable Residential More Not 10% of site at 008 Cricketers surface change vulnerable required. RoFSW . Close water flooding to the south west of the site.

18-OK- Land adj FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 009 Village Hall change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not liable to any surface water flooding.

18-OK- Sanitorium FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 015 Field change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not

122

liable to any surface water flooding.

18-OK- Figgs Field FZ1,2,3 Risk of CC extents Residential More Yes SFRA A large percentage 021 surface match flood vulnerable Level 2 of the site (over water zone 3a required 30%) is suseptable flooding extents. to fluvial flooding. along the Surface water western flooding is also a boundary of risk. the site. Specifically 1 in 1000 extent. However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-WA- Land to the FZ1 The site is No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The site 001 rear of not identified change vulnerable required does not accord with Brambletye, as being at the proposed spatial Horsham risk from strategy of the Local fluvial or Plan.

123

Road, surface Walliswood water flooding. However, Brambletye “estate” itself is at risk from 30 year shallow and 200 year deep surface water flooding.

18-WA- Land FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not Discounted: The site 002 adjacent to change vulnerable required. is below the size the Scarlett threshold and would Arms Public not contribute a House, minimum 5 (net) Walliswood dwellings to the Green housing stock. Road, Additionally the site does not accord with the proposed spatial strategy of the Local Plan.

124

18-WC- Land at FZ1, 2,3 The northern Both the Residential More Yes SFRA The site is in Flood 001 Westcott part of the 3a_Plus70C vulnerable Level 2 Zone 1 and is not House site is at risk C extents required liable to any surface from surface and water flooding. water 3a_Plus35C flooding C extents Issues with ground across all show an water flooding extents. increase on flood risk to the north east of the site should such events occur.

18-WC- Mill Way FZ1 n/a No notable Residential More Yes Not The site is in Flood 002,003 House, change vulnerable required Zone 1 and is not &004 Bramley liable to any surface House and water flooding. Heathcrest.

Limited risk from ground water flooding

18-WH- Land FZ1 Small patch No notable Residential More Yes Not Negligible-less than 001 fronting on the change vulnerable required 10% of site at western part RoFSW .

125

Westhumbl of the site at e Street risk of surface water flooding.

126

Appendix 3: Level 2 SFRA sites. SHELAA Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Flood Risk Sequentia Exceptio Comments/Justificatio Site address Zone surface water Change use Vulnerability l Test n Test n referenc flooding Allowances Classificatio e n

A large Yes Level 2 Limited potential for 18-AS- Marsden FZ1 proportion of No notable Residential More SFRA ground water flooding. 001 Nurseries the site is at change vulnerable required , Ashtead risk from . High risk area from Park surface water surface water Garden flooding, (including access to Centre although this the site) is concentrated Pleasure Pit Road is a in the Surrey Count Council northern end wetspot. of the site.

18-BG- Land FZ1 Surface No Notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Majority of site at 002 South of water Change / vulnerable SFRA RoFSW 1 in 1000 Beare flooding in community required extent. However it is Green the centre of possibly . felt a sequential the site and primary approach to along the school development may be watercourse possible subject to which forms further investigation. the northern boundary Historic flooding along Ockley Road. Two main rivers 1 through

127

SHELAA Site Flood Risk of Climate Proposed Flood Risk Sequentia Exceptio Comments/Justificatio Site address Zone surface water Change use Vulnerability l Test n Test n referenc flooding Allowances Classificatio e n

the site and 1 to the north

A stream Level 2 It is unclear whether 18-BK- Land FZ1 flows No Notable Residential More Yes SFRA the development can 008 N/W of (broadly) Change vulnerable required go ahead without Preston south to north . adverse potential Farm through the effects on the centre of the adjoining and local farm but to watercourses. the north and northwest of Would require detailed the proposed design and measures residential to allow development site. (a drop due to surface water of 100 and rivers. Also metres) potential for ground pouring water water flooding on the into little north tip of site Bookham Street and Fox Lane. Extensive risk of surface water flooding across the north of the site.

128

18-BK- Land FZ1 Slight risk of No Notable Residential More Yes Level 2 The site is in Flood 015 North of surface water Change vulnerable SFRA Zone 1 and is at risk Guildford to the north required from surface water Road of the site. . flooding.

The majority of the site has potential for ground water flooding.

n/a More Yes Level 2 The site is in Flood 18-BK- Land at FZ1 No notable Residential vulnerable SFRA Zone 1 and is not 017 Chalkpit change required liable to any surface Lane . water flooding.

Issues with ground water flooding across the entire site.

18-BR- Land FZ1 The whole No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Ordinary watercourse 005 west of western part change vulnerable SFRA to the north and Wheelers of the site is required internal flooding Lane at risk from reported on Oakdene surface water Road flooding. High surface water risk 1 in 30. Ordinary watercourse to the 129

north and internal flooding reported on Oakdene Road

18-DK- Pixham FZ 1, 2 The site is No notable Gypsy and Highly Yes Level 2 The rear portion of the 10 Lane &3 immediately change Traveller vulnerable SFRA site is vulnerable to Depot adjacent to pitches. required fluvial flooding. the River However, subject to Mole and part further investigation it of the site is is considered that a within Zone 2 sequential approach with the rear can be taken to half of the development so it is site subject to located in the least at historic risk areas of the site. flooding. Flood Zone 3 is on the northern edge of the site. The front part of the site is in flood zone 1. lying in Flood Zone 2.

130

Level 2 Site is partially in flood 18-DK- Pixham Parts The site is Both the Residential More Yes SFRA zones 2 and 3 and 023 End- of the susceptible to 3a_Plus70C vulnerable Require susceptible to risk of Southern eastern surface water C extents d surface water Parcel border flooding and flooding. of the along the 3a_Plus35C site is eastern C extents Potential for GW at in boundary and show an the surface. Internal Flood in the increase on flooding reported just Zones southern flood risk to outside on the east 2 and corner. the southern side of the site, due to 3. tip of the site fluvial should such events occur.

18-DK- Dorking FZ1 High surface No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 High surface water 024 Railway water risk change vulnerable SFRA risk through the Station through the Require middle of the site and middle of the d on the tracks to the site and on northeast the tracks to the northeast However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is

131

located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-HK- Land to FZ1, 2 Approximatel Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 Total site area 22ha. 003 the west and 3 y 3ha of land 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA 19ha of site lies within of on the C extents Require FZ1. The remaining Reigate northern and and d 3ha lies within Flood Road southern 3a_Plus35C Zone 2 and a small edges of the C extents area within Flood site is at risk show an Zone 3. of surface increase on water flood risk to The site is at risk from flooding. the northern surface water and southern flooding. most boundaries of the site However, subject to should such further investigation it events occur. is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-LG- Land at FZ1 &2 Some No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Site less than 1ha 003 The patches in change vulnerable SFRA (0.85) however Priests the centre of required partially within Flood House the site are Zone 2 and at risk liable to 1 in 132

1000 year from surface water surface water flooding. flooding.

18-LH- Bull Hill FZ1 Surface No notable Residential More Yes Level 2 Ground water risk on 001 Site water change vulnerable SFRA the site. Internal flooding required flooding reported just across the to the north of the site. northern half A large portion of the of the site, site is susceptible to predominantl surface water y in the north flooding. west.

However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

18-LH- Land rear Rear of Surface Both the Residential More Yes Level 2 Site is susceptible to 020 of 5-33 site lies water 3a_Plus70C vulnerable SFRA fluvial flooding and Randalls within flooding C extents required surface water Road. FZ 2 along the and . flooding. Potential for and 3. southern 3a_Plus35C groundwater boundary of C extents throughout the site

133

the site and show a slight some in the increase on centre. flood risk along the southern boundaries of the site should such events occur.

18-OK- Figgs FZ1,2, Risk of CC extents Residential More Yes SFRA A large percentage of 021 Field 3 surface water match flood vulnerable Level 2 the site (over 30%) is flooding zone 3a required suseptable to fluvial along the extents. flooding. Surface western water flooding is also boundary of a risk. the site. Specifically 1 in 1000 extent. However, subject to further investigation it is considered that a sequential approach can be taken to development so it is located in the least at risk areas of the site.

134

18-WC- Land at FZ1, The northern Both the Residential More Yes SFRA The site is in Flood 001 Westcott 2,3 part of the 3a_Plus70C vulnerable Level 2 Zone 1 and is not House site is at risk C extents required liable to any surface from surface and water flooding. water 3a_Plus35C flooding C extents Issues with ground across all show an water flooding extents. increase on flood risk to the north east of the site should such events occur.

135