Recent damage shows a growing need for flood awareness

The effects of climate change are now widely accepted as the main contributor to flooding and the results are clear and consistent to see as one looks back over the past ten years or so. What is less clear is the Government response to dealing with increased flood risk as a series of disjointed and sometimes ‘knee jerk’ reactions have left us, not surprisingly with a disjointed approach. It should also not be forgotten that flooding is only one symptom of climate change, overheating and water shortage also need to be properly addressed in an overall approach.

The Government has now accepted the recommendations of the Pitt Review but timescales still leave key areas with little or no action in the short/ medium term. This is particularly apparent in respect to Government support of BSI kitemarked systems and products, the use of property based protection systems as part of the toolkit, Building Regulations, flood level information, pluvial/drainage surcharge flooding data, use of SUDS (sustainable urban drainage systems) rainwater harvesting and many more.

The kitemark system was launched in March 2003 and several companies with the foresight to do so obtained a BSI kitemark for their products and systems, however, to date only £2-3m has been invested in such solutions. Last year £500,000 in grants was earmarked for property based solutions but the majority was not spent on BSI kitemarked products.

The £5m in grants earmarked for 2009/2011 again does not require the use of kitemarked products as a basis for grant approval. In my view the reason is lack of Government support for the Kitemark scheme and property based solutions. The new 2009 kitemark scheme, due for launch in the first half of 2009, has opened up the scheme to a wider range of products and the testing regime has been rationalised to be consistent across all types.

The inclusion of impact tests has been delayed until a future update which might risk undermining the whole scheme particularly in the light of EU and USA standards which are increasing test requirements. A missed opportunity for UK companies, some would say, who in 2003 were looming as potential world market leaders for flood products and now risk falling behind other countries who seem to be striving for increased standards. This at a time when we need jobs and new industries to help the UK out of what is looking to be the worst recession the modern world has yet experienced. Property values are already hard hit and flood risk just adds to the agony as insurers looking to limit their exposure to flood risk are increasing premiums and excess and in some extreme cases refusing to insure some high risk properties.

The introduction of PPG25 in July 2001 was reinforced significantly with the introduction of PPS25 in late 2006 and has continued to develop as the main tool to control development in flood prone areas. With increasing guidance, widespread SFRA’s (Strategic Flood Risk Assessments) undertaken by L.A’s and a growing number of case studies many of the complex issues not envisaged in the original documentation are being resolved. PPS25 puts food risk high on the agenda in planning decisions for sites not only within flood plains but for those which will affect future flood risk from run off and drain surcharge. However, we still have some way to go in establishing a more common sense approach to methodology, which given the likely risk, can provide an acceptable development solution at acceptable risk. After, all many areas have no alternative but to develop on flood plains.

The major void which still exists and should naturally link on from control at the planning stage is Building Regulations. Whereas we should be aiming to provide a framework for safe construction of developments, in zone 1, 2 and 3 flood plains, which limits flood risk. Currently there is no guidance whatsoever for Local Authorities and developers. This was mooted back in 2003/4 with plans to make suitable Building Regulation’s available in 2009 however little action has occurred to date and we are still a long way from plugging this important gap, which has been finally been recognised in the Pitt Review.

In my opinion we desperately need Building Regulations which properly augment Planning in providing a seamless link to ensure proper flood resistance and resilience is built in to the correct performance specification to limit flood risk to acceptable levels. To date there have been many cases where inadequate solutions have been incorporated in new developments to deal effectively with planning conditions designed to limit flood risk. These schemes have therefore exacerbating the problem, as witnessed in many areas in the 2007 floods with properties built on flood plains with inadequate protection.

Flood mapping and information is continuing to improve however, flood level information is limited and still lacking in many areas, which often leads to overdesign from the lack of better information. More work needs to be done in disseminating the information held by Local Authorities and Water Companies where Pluvial and Drain Surcharge causes flooding so a wider knowledge base is readily available to aid better design and limit future flood risk. Due to the unwillingness of many Local Authorities to adopt schemes incorporating SUDS designs these are still underutilised in dealing with flood risk from runoff and drain surcharge. Initiatives from central Government are needed to encourage such schemes if long term objectives are to be met.

The use of rainwater harvesting as a means to reduce flood risk and water shortage has also not been adequately promoted. As the introduction of water meters widens the cost of such systems will become more economic when judged against rising water costs. Flood risk management is a reasonable approach given the wide variety of what causes flooding along with innumerable variances in topography and construction and increasing future flood risk.

The Members of the Flood Protection Association offer a wide range of solutions which following a Flood Risk Assessment, by a suitably qualified professional, can form an effective solution to minimise flood consequences which are likely to be recognised by many insurers in reducing flood risk.

R.J. Whitehead
FPA Chairman – Technical Director Total Flood Solutions Limited.
Mob: +44 (0) 7785 501723
Tel: +44 (0) 1603 633 440
Fax: +44 (0) 1603 763256
10 Cavalry Ride, Norwich, NR3 1UA
floodprotectionassoc.co.uk