1. The right conditions for flooding? The Hatch Farm case study
Access to a development or functional flood plain?
The right conditions for flooding? The Hatch Farm case study

2. Who am I?
Founding member of Loddon Valley Residents Association ( Steering group member of The Loddon Catchment Partnership (CaBA)
PhD Reading University, ‘Get your water out of my lounge’
LinkedIn:
Tel: Skype: phialamehring

3. The site – Hatch Farm Dairies
Show where properties flood – pluvial, fluvial and ground water

4. Why are we worried?
In 2007 properties around this development flooded.
Many hundreds more missed flooding by cm’s.
Surface water flooding is a pre-existing problem locally.
The site is water logged for long periods of time, so water displacement is a grave concern.
There is evidence of subterranean flows which will be disrupted by the development. Where will the water go?
There is pre-existing unmapped land drainage on the site.
Other developments in the catchment impacting on the rivers.
Removal of a natural floodplain – really? In the face of the potential impacts of climate change and other anthropogenic changes?

5. Wokingham Development – near the River Loddon
Sandford Farm: remediation complete, building 541 houses continues.
Winnersh (Hatch Farm): 433 homes planned and a by-pass.
Shinfield: >1000 homes. By-pass crossing functional flood plain
Arborfield: >5000 homes. By- pass crosses the river
Two elements of catchment flooding: site – all the water that moves into and out of and the river catchment
Swallowfield: number of developments planned ~200
>7,100 properties and associated infrastructure

6. Hatch Farm - Timeline of events
Plans originally submitted in 2006 and rejected by the EA
EA removed objections in 2010 after developer worked on getting the flood modelling changed (generated local distrust)
Public meeting: Friday 11th March 2011 >100 residents attended
Outline granted in October 2011
Loddon Valley Residents Association held a series of internal and council damage limitation meetings in the years running up to the reserve matters
Developer/Residents liaison group set up March 2015: meetings held on Friday 10th April, Friday 5th June, Friday 11th September 2015
November 20th 2015 – public meeting to explain the types of questions which residents may want to submit to the reserve matters planning meeting. > 120 residents attended
Reserved matters granted March 2016
April 2016 Meeting with Stuart Michael & Associates, Residents review of Hatch Farm flood modelling – an highlight problems (10m scale, antecedent conditions)
Ticking the developers ‘community engagement’ box

7. Disconnection with the flood authorities
We’re are not consulted enough about what happens in our area
The flood maps change according to which developer pays the EA
I have no trust in the Environment Agency. I wouldn't bother with (their) household level protection it’s not worth it. It is the river which is the problem
'The EA and council don't talk to one another. When you write to them they simply refer you to the other one. You can try to talk to them but don't get anywhere
The EA are closing all the weirs and flood gates on the Loddon to protect the more expensive homes lower down the river
Get your water out of my lounge
I have lived here for 50+ years and know more about the ebbs and flows of the Loddon than the EA but they tell me they are not interested in my ‘anecdotal’ information
I have more faith in the elderly gentleman who lives at the corner of the close to tell me about flooding. He has lived there for 34 years
I am less important to the council than the cars in the park and ride
Lack of social cohesion between flood authorities and residents. Which then impacts social capacity: the ability to adapt, cope, be resilient, etc: societies social capacity as a whole. If we are to move to an integrated approach to FRM Social cohesion and capacity are KEY components.
We are less important than wildlife

8. The right conditions for flooding
Outline Planning – The Concerns
October 2011
The right conditions for flooding

9. Concerns residents raised at Outline - 1
Are the flood maps an accurate representation of flooding locally? Local knowledge would disagree – models look at depth and breath, not duration.
Interaction between pluvial and fluvial. Over and above ‘are we really going to develop a flood plain?’
How are ground water conditions quantified?
Are hydrological/hydrogeological studies going to be conducted over a sustained period of time?
Is the development being planned at a catchment level: joined up thinking

10. Concerns residents raised at Outline - 2
Have the SuDs been designed with the ideal location in mind?
or have the houses been put in first and the drainage squeezed in around them?
The development will go up in phases, how will WBC ensure that the drainage plan is not continually changed, phase by phase?
That would result in a much weaker system leading to flooding elsewhere.
Who will ultimately adopt the SuD’s once the development is complete?
This will determine who is best placed to oversee design and implementation.
How it is going to be funded?
How will maintenance be monitored and enforced?
Some very sophisticated questions

11. Knowledge Hierarchies
As far as we could establish, none of these concerns where addressed at Outline.
It felt like residents and communities' ‘knowledge’, questions and concerns where less important the than developers, planning authority and flood authorities ‘knowledge’.
Disengages people from the planning process.
Breaks down social cohesion.
Reduces social capacity.
Makes establishing an integrated approach to flood risk management even harder.
Some very sophisticated questions. Have to integrate all sources of knowledge.

12. The right conditions for flooding
Reserve Matters Granted: March 2016
The right conditions for flooding

13. One small step…. (in the conditions of reserve matters)
Condition 36: Prior to the commencement of development, details shall be submitted of any floodplain compensation scheme for the development. This will include an assessment of potential to increase floodplain storage on site to benefit the wider area, and achieve a potential opportunity in line with the Catchment Flood Management Plan.
Bigger ‘scrape’ – more flood compensation*.
Houses started to go up for sale before there was any sign of the flood compensation.
Nothing on paper to enforce this
* Not altruism it simply meant more site produced gravel for the road and elevating the houses

14. Drainage strategy (in the conditions……)
Conditions 30: Prior to the commencement of the development, details of the implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable drainage scheme shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority…...
Why is a drainage scheme a condition? Is it not a fundamental part of an application?
Residential knowledge is not valued yet is absolutely vital in the development of drainage strategies and flood mitigation schemes.
where the flood water first starts to collect, how it flows, where it pools in uneven ground, where it infiltrates easily and where it doesn’t. Is that not the basis of a drainage strategy?

15. Why is flooding in the conditions?
Condition 34: Development shall not begin until a surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development………………….
Digging a few ‘test’ holes one day next week, doesn’t get the info required.
Conduct over a longer period of time including the rainy season prior to Outline planning.
Results inform the outline application.
‘Not wishing to be cynical, but we all know what happens to conditions, don’t we?’

16. The Drainage Strategy – what happened?
Construction started before the drainage strategy was signed off (or it wasn’t signed off).
The access road went in before the road drainage.
Then some of the drainage went in but wasn’t connected up.
Surface water in a dry period – top of the site.

17. The right conditions for flooding
What should have happened.
The right conditions for flooding

18. Drainage strategy – What should have happened
Step 1: Pre-application - a participatory consultation (oxymoron?):
Local residents, local residents groups, the local CaBA group, other locally based NGO representatives (Rivers Trust, fisheries groups, etc), local authority, other flood authorities, local research expertise and EA expertise.
Step 2: detailed hydrological and hydrogeological study is commissioned at the pre-application stage with the results informing the outline application process.
Step 3: expand the FRA to include how the development interacts with the catchment and other developments in the catchment – to inform Outline.
Step 4: creation of an integrated drainage and flooding strategy to be ‘signed off’ at outline planning.

19. Development must be done WITH communities not TOO THEM
Let’s plan to NOT flood
Flooding MUST be addressed in pre-application discussions & signed off in the FULL body of the outline application
No conditional conditions please
Proper community engagement:
will not only HUGELY augment plans it will also help to rebuild trust and connectivity of residents to flood risk management assets and authorities.
Development must be done WITH communities not TOO THEM

20. Are we planning to flood?
Final thought: Why does current planning policy allow development in and around a flood plain?
Are we planning to flood?