River derwent management strategies

River Derwent Strategy Scoping Report

6.0 FLOOD MANAGEMENT OPTIONS
This section sets out in tabular form a number of options for future flood management. It is
not intended to be exhaustive. Comments and further suggestions for options are welcome. It
is unlikely that any one option will present a stand alone solution and it should be noted that
the implementation of schemes is likely to be phased, depending on their priority.

Options will aim to modify flooding and flood risk by reducing the frequency of flooding, by
changing the extent and consequences of flooding or by reducing the vulnerability of those
exposed to flood hazards.

Options will in general fall under one of the following categories: -

• Upstream storage (online or offline);
• Localised flood defences (walls and banks);
• Improved flow along the river (conveyance);
• Floodplain management, including controlling development in floodplains;
• Flood proofing (reducing the susceptibility to damage through use of materials, building
techniques and protection);
• Flood warning, awareness and education about flooding; and
• Catchment wide land use and management.

For each option the broad brush impacts, opportunities and constraints are outlined and for
ease of reading have been colour coded in the table.

All options would be subject to a Strategic Environmental Assessment at strategy level and an
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) at project level in order to establish the range of
impacts which that would result and their significance.

Setting up of partnerships that could include Local Planning Authorities, Government
Agencies and other interest groups may be essential to implement many of the possible
solutions, especially those where flood benefit may be identified as minor compared to other
environmental gains.

6.1 Sustainability – Climate Change

Predictions for changes in climate over the next 50 years are still being reviewed and revised
by climatologists and meteorologists. However, it is anticipated that extreme weather events
(i.e. heavy downpours, strong winds) will be more frequent, and that winters will become
wetter. Current estimates are that winter days with rainfall of around 25mm will become 4 to
5 times more likely by 2050. The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) has reviewed
possible climate change scenarios and recommended using a 20% increase in peak flows
within any hydrological modelling to incorporate the anticipated changes in climate. As a
consequence, the strategy will aim to identify management strategies for a 50-year period
which are sustainable and robust under various climate change scenarios.

6.2 Sustainability – Development & Growth

The impact of development on runoff is generally small, particularly in comparison with
climate change predictions. The strategy would only consider this if a population explosion,
extensive development or a new town is expected.

September 2003 22


6.3 Sustainability – Land Use Change

The impacts of land use change on runoff generation have not been clearly established. The
difficulty in obtaining consistent evidence of the effects of land use change on downstream
flood response suggests that any effect is probably relatively moderate and dependent on the
exact nature of the previous land use and local conditions (climate, topography, soils, etc). In
general, the strategy would only consider major changes in land use, such as changes to
afforestation from arable farming over large areas of land.
Please comment on:

Flood alleviation options, including impacts and opportunities of each

Partnerships that could develop through mutual objectives

Funding availability for scheme enhancements and opportunities

September 2003 23


OPTION IMPACTS/OPPORTUNITIES/CONSTRAINTS
6.4 ‘Do Nothing’
'Do nothing' means that all expenditure would • Flood risk would not be reduced
cease. The maintenance of existing flood • Flood risk likely to increase due to the effects of climate change,
defences, the management of flooding along lack of maintenance and flood warning
the Derwent Corridor and all flood warning • Flooding would start to occur in defended areas as existing flood
would stop. 'Do Nothing' is considered as the defences deteriorate
baseline option for the comparison of flood • Negative impacts of flooding on safety, economy, communities
management options in terms of their would increase
effectiveness, benefits and costs. • Natural processes would gradually return bringing a return to a
more natural environment. This may have positive biodiversity
impacts
6.5 ‘Do Minimum’
'Do minimum' means that only the maintenance • Flood risk would not be reduced and negative impacts of flooding
of existing flood defences to the present on safety, economy, communities would continue
standard and operations efforts such as flood • Gradual reduction in standards of defence and increase in flood risk
warning would be continued. with increased peak flows due to climate change
• The integration of environmental benefits into flood management
options would not be possible
• Natural processes would gradually return bringing a return to a
more natural environment. This may have positive biodiversity
impacts
• Lack of funding may affect the Environment Agency’s ability to
undertake best practice standards of maintenance

Note photographs not of the Derwent catchment.

September 2003 24


6.6 Storage
6.6.1 Off-line Storage
These are generally embanked areas which • Very significant areas of flood storage may be required
unlike flood plain grassland, experience sudden • Possible adverse effects for the natural or built environment
inundation and remain flooded for a longer • Significant biodiversity benefits could be gained by extending off-
duration. Timing of filling is critical for line storage to the natural flood plain, where this would not
successful operation. The storage volume needs RIVER
compromise existing biodiversity interest
to be utilised at the peak of the flood, but this is • Compensation to landowners
difficult to predict and manage. It is important • Large enough areas in appropriate locations may not be available
to allow the storage volume to drain down as WEIR
soon as possible after the flood peak has passed
in order that storage can be available for
subsequent events. STORAGE
6.6.2 Use of Washlands and Natural Flood Plains
(flood plain storage)
Washlands and flood plains are terms often • As off-line storage.
used interchangeably to describe areas within
the natural flood plain which are generally
unprotected from flood events.


September 2003 25



6.6.3 On-line Storage
Involves the containment of flood water • Environmental impacts of permanent or temporary inundation
within the flood plain. No weir/control is • Possible use for irrigation
required for waters to enter the storage, • On-line storage, which is already filled with water at the start
instead a structure, or the natural capacity of a flood event, will not provide any further capacity for flood
of the channel limits the outflow of water storage.
and thereby impounds it. This can be • Compensation may be required for farmland/other land
achieved deliberately by the construction • Possible safety/cost implications to comply with the
of on-line reservoirs using sluices to retain Reservoirs Act if >25,000m3 of water to be contained.
water within the channel. It can also occur • Existence of appropriate locations
as a result of water building up behind
existing structures e.g. bridges.
There is some evidence to suggest that the
restoration of flood plain woodlands could
also achieve this. There would also be
significant benefits to increasing
biodiversity and linking to targets for wet
woodlands under the UK BAP.
6.6.4 On-line Storage (existing reservoirs)
Using the existing reservoirs to store water • Wider environmental impacts (eg. on recreational users)
during periods of heavy rainfall could • Hydroelectric power generation from water that would
provide an economic solution. There is an otherwise spill over the dam
existing agreement as part of the • Good weather forecasting /warning system essential
abstraction licence to operate the reservoirs • Agreement and management between utility company &
to provide flood alleviation. The reservoirs Agency.
may already be full when the storm arrives.
This option would therefore only be viable
if the reservoir levels were drawn down in
advance of a storm.


September 2003 26


6.6.5 Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
SuDS addresses the management of urban • Increased cost/savings to the developer
water that traditionally was routed as • Wildlife may be exposed to pollutants entering the ground
quickly as possible into drains and • Environmental benefits through habitat creation
transported to the nearest discharge point. • Water quality benefits
The Environment Agency, English Nature • Cannot be used on contaminated sites
and Local Planning Authorities promote • Use of SuDS may not be effective at a catchment scale, but
SuDS for new development where only suitable for small scale drainage problems
appropriate and it is often included as a
• Lack of availability of land for additional storage in
condition of planning permission. SuDS is
development areas
useful as a means of reducing run-off,
• Unlikely to be a stand-alone answer
limiting pollution, improving biodiversity
• Implications for future maintenance costs
and recharging of the aquifer. It may be
possible to increase the required
specification of SuDS at each site to
contribute to the overall flood defence
strategy.

6.6.6 Groundwater Recharge
Globally artificial recharge of groundwater • Potential contamination of aquifers by the introduction of
is a widespread technique used to increase floodwaters high in suspended solids and other contaminants.
groundwater reserves. In many areas of the • Particular benefits where water for abstraction is currently in
world there is also considerable interest in short supply
the feasibility of capturing flood waters for • Rate of recharge likely to have minimal impact on flood peak
groundwater recharge. However, there are • Cost of treating flood waters prior to diverting to groundwater
potential problems with poor water quality, • The large cost of the engineering works
in particular suspended solids. • Impacts of increased groundwater recharge on archaeology
would need to be assessed.


September 2003 27


6.6.7 Underground Tanks
In theory underground tanks could be • Disposal of the spoil
constructed to store flood waters. • Environmental impacts during construction
• Unlikely to be practical (size) or cost-effective
• Process required to empty tanks after flood events so available
for subsequent events

6.6.8 Tributary Storage
On large river systems like the Derwent • Secondary impacts may be difficult to predict, including
rainfall is often remote from the actual flooding on tributaries
areas that experience the flooding. In some • Extended catchment modelling may be required to assess
circumstances it may be possible to apply effectiveness of measures on tributaries.
one or more of the measures discussed
herein to retain or slow the passage of
water along the tributaries.


September 2003 28


6.6.9 Removal of Obstructions
Structures in the flood plain can take up • Adverse impacts in terms of landscape, aesthetic and
space or exclude areas that could otherwise recreational value
be used for storage. Obstructions may • Significant biodiversity benefits could be gained by extending
include existing infrastructure including off-line storage to the natural flood plain, where this would not
abandoned roads and railways (particularly compromise existing biodiversity interest
those on embankments), redundant flood • Possible use for irrigation
defences, and spoil heaps, tips etc. The • Possible aesthetic benefits
removal of obstructions may be extended • High on going costs
to the purchase of property for subsequent • Large areas required to be able to provide required volume
demolition. Even straw left on fields can
• Location and level relative to the river is critical
create blockages in hedges and fences.
• Some structures may provide informal flood defence
• Abandoned areas often have become important wildlife
habitat/corridors or can be important historical/archaeological
sites
6.7 Protection (walls and banks)
6.7.1 Defences (walls/banks)
Defences are most likely to be appropriate • Adverse impacts in terms of visual, aesthetic, archaeological,
in urban locations, and may be a recreational and ecological value
sustainable solution, particularly where • The consequences of over-topping or failure can be
enhancement or regeneration can be catastrophic.
incorporated. Defences include concrete, • Can provide a physical barrier within a community or
brick or stone-faced walls, earth severance of agricultural land
embankments (always with an impervious • Impacts associated with extended construction periods
core) and demountable barriers. Existing • Can assist in urban regeneration
defences could also be improved to • Provision of flood storage compensation mitigation for loss of
provide increased defence to areas already flood plain behind defences required
protected.


September 2003 29


6.8 Improved conveyance including
diversion
6.8.1 Weirs and Sluices
Weirs have generally been installed to • .Landscape and recreational impacts (eg. angling, watersports)
control water levels, for mills and to aid • Changing flow speeds and bed levels by removing weirs can
navigation. They can also be used to slow significantly affect the ecology of the river and the integrity of
river flows along a river. Adjustable weirs riverside structures
provide a flexible way of managing water • Navigability of river will need to be maintained
levels. Removal of weirs could improve • Existing weirs may be of historic significance
the conveyance of flood waters. • Weirs are not likely to provide a significant solution to flood
management

6.8.2 Dredging
The river channel could in theory be • Significant environmental consequences including changes to
dredged along its length to increase river channel and bank habitats, and water quality problems
capacity and improve flow in flood events. during dredging
Dredging options could either be a one-off • Disposal of dredged material and release of contaminants
lowering of the bed level along part or all • Bridges, weirs and other structures adjacent to river would be
of the Derwent or an on-going impacted
maintenance programme. • Crest of existing weirs may need to be lowered
• Loss of visual and recreational amenity (loss of channel
vegetation and water level falling significantly below bank
level during normal flows)
• May increase erosion of adjacent river banks
• Constraints include crest levels of existing weirs and stability
of existing riverside structures
• Unlikely to have a significant effect, the river is normally only
a small proportion of the flood plain cross-section
• Unsustainable and unlikely to be cost-effective. Long term
financial maintenance commitment required
• Further investigation on the degree and impact of siltation
downstream required


September 2003 30


6.8.3 River Re-profiling
Involves re-profiling the river channel to • Issues as dredging plus:
either speed up flows (primarily in the • Environmental impacts, particularly on biodiversity and
middle and lower reaches) or retard flows conservation could be negative during construction but
(primarily in the upper reaches) in order to positive following construction
de-synchronise flood peaks. This might be • Potential for negative impacts on archaeology
achieved by easing tight bends or by • Compensation required to landowners for land take and
introducing or re-introducing features such severance
as meanders and islands. • Constraints of existing infrastructure e.g. canals, railways

6.8.4 River Maintenance
River maintenance includes management • Impacts of spoil disposal
of riverbank trees, localised dredging of • Can have significant biodiversity and amenity impacts at a
shoals/silt at key points, and the removal of local scale and even national scale depending on length of
channel obstructions including debris and river affected
emergent vegetation where they contribute • Landscape and recreational user (eg. angling) impacts
to flooding. • Short and long term water quality impacts
• Difficult to model and therefore to quantify effects
• High maintenance costs

6.8.5 Flow Diversion
Diversion channels (or tunnel/culvert) • As river re-profiling plus:
could be cut to divert excess flood water • Potential for positive and negative environmental impacts
away from a vulnerable area or bottlenecks • If a constant base flow was maintained new channels could be
by constructing a bypass. used as fish passes
• Feasibility will depend on the gradient of the river and hence
the size of diversion
• New channels could be un-natural and unsustainable


September 2003 31


6.8.6 Flow Diversion (Cromford Canal)
The Cromford Canal runs from Cromford • Changes hydrology of adjacent catchment
and crosses the River Derwent towards • Restoration of canal
Whatstandwell and Ambergate. From here • Canal capacity may not be sufficient
the canal heads east and leaves the • Technical problems – inflow, velocities, locks etc
Derwent catchment at Ripley. The • SSSI status
Cromford Canal is linked with the Erewash
canal to the River Trent.

6.8.7 Flow Diversion (Rivelin Transfer)
Yorkshire Water currently abstract from • Impacts on hydrology of adjacent catchment
the Derwent catchment at Bamford to • Shared cost of infrastructure (water resources & flood relief)
Rivelin, west of Sheffield. It is possible • Working with Yorkshire Water
that the rate of abstraction could be
increased at times of flood to reduce the
flood risk.
6.9 Floodplain management, including
development control
6.9.1 Managed Retreat
In some areas long term flood defence may • Issues will be as those for off line storage (6.6.1)
not be sustainable and managed retreat will • May be conflicts with wildlife/archaeological/agricultural
be a solution. This will effectively involve interests
restoring part or whole of the flood plain at • Existence of appropriate locations
a location whilst continuing to provide
protection to the land behind.


September 2003 32


6.9.2 Development Control
Greater planning control is being used to • Restricted development opportunities and associated increase
prevent inappropriate development in flood in land costs
plain areas. Development elsewhere in the • Impacts on local economy if future development restricted
catchment may also affect flooding (e.g. • Reduction in insurance premiums in flood plains
through increased run-off etc.) and • Where development is permitted mitigation measures must be
therefore may need to be controlled. applied to ensure that there is no loss of flood storage, no
PPG25 provides guidance to Local increase in run-off and that the site can be safely evacuated in
Planning Authorities on the control of the event of flooding
development in flood risk areas. • Mitigation measures should enhance biodiversity, improve the
landscape, and increase the recreational value of the area
• Local Planning Authorities not the Environment Agency make
the final decisions on planning applications
• Accuracy of the indicative flood plain maps
• More modelling would be required to improve accuracy

6.9.3 Relocation
Involves demolition of undefended • Disruption to people’s lives, jobs
property, relocation of those affected. • Landscape impacts
• Disposal of materials
• Sustainable alternative outcome
• Only feasible at a small scale


September 2003 33


6.9.4 Changes in Land Management
It is thought (although not quantified) that • May result in changes to existing landscape character
reducing the intensity and nature of • Drains may be of historical interest
agricultural practices will reduce surface • Potential positive impacts for conservation and biodiversity
water run-off. Changes in the mechanisms • May have indirect recreational benefits
by which farming subsidies are made are • Option offers a high level of sustainability
seen as being influential in reducing this • Changing land use is likely to be a lengthy process.
intensity. Other measures include grip Opportunities may have to be utilised as they arise
blocking and generally reverting existing
• Research needed to quantify what effect the changes might
drainage improvements.
have on surface water run-off and flooding
• The cost to farming communities of, in particular, de-
intensifying upland farming
• Achievability/take up may be difficult to determine. Will need
political will and support from the farming community and
associated government departments
• Support of the expansion of existing agri-environmental grant
schemes to be provided by the Environment Agency and other
statutory and non-statutory organisations
6.9.5 Best Farming Practices
'Best Farming Practice' is synonymous • Reduction in flood flows are not likely to be significant
with good environmental care of air, soil • Unlikely to be significant adverse effects on agriculture from
and water. Good soil husbandry, cropping these potential solutions as most are already well accepted as
practices and general management will 'best practice'
reduce the risk of soil damage (loss of • Positive impacts on water quality
structure) and can result in reduced run-off • Opportunity to fulfil new farming policy of reducing
erosion. production and increasing sensitive environmental practice
(eg. reducing overgrazing to allow reversion of marginal land)
• Changing in tilling technology (deep) may conflict with the
minimum tillage strategies being developed by English
Heritage to reduce the risk to archaeological sites from
mechanical damage
• Achievability/take up may be difficult to determine. Will need
support from the farming community and associated
government departments


September 2003 34


6.9.6 Afforestation/flood plain woodlands
It is generally believed that the existence • Woodlands would catch debris being washed downstream but
of forests in upper catchments helps to would create additional debris (leaf fall, branches etc.)
alleviate flood problems. In most situations • Impacts of extensive afforestation on landscape, archaeology,
trees are known to increase interception historic sites
losses and hence reduce net rainfall, reduce • Impacts on water quality (reduced erosion)
soil water content, increase filtration rates • Uptake and locking up of contaminants
at the soil's surface, and affect snowmelt • Likely to benefit BAP targets
rates. • Subsidies/compensation for the planting of woodland on
agricultural land or other land use
• Likely that large areas of afforestation would be required
• May adversely affect water resource e.g. in the time of summer
low flows
• Possible conflicts with other conservation objectives e.g.
washlands
• Would need to be sited carefully as increased attenuation may
exacerbate flooding, see 6.3
6.10 Flood proofing
Involves making buildings less susceptible • Flood risks and environmental & economic impacts, if
to flood damage, and use of flood defences lowered. still remain
as an integral part of the building. Includes • Could be done in combination with post flood refitting
personal or local flood protection measures • Relies on good flood forecasting & warning
including portable flood barriers and • Implementation cannot be enforced
plastic door guards. Alternative, less • Who pays – residents or government
susceptible building material should be • Modification to listed buildings
used and costly elements placed above
flood level (electrical appliances &
sockets, heating boiler).


September 2003 35


6.11 Flood warning & awareness
6.11.1 Flood Warning
Flood warning may be suitable where good • Flood impacts (environmental and economic), if lowered, still
forecasting data is available and there is remain.
sufficient time lag between the storm and • Reliable and accurate forecasting & dissemination is necessary
flooding to assemble a warning. • A member of the individual household may not be available to
be warned
• Individuals may not be physically able to respond to the
warning
• Individuals may not know how to respond effectively
6.11.2 Flood Awareness
In some locations improved flood • Flood impacts (environmental and economic), if lowered, still
awareness may be an appropriate measure. remain
People may be more ready to respond if • Education on flooding issues
they are aware of the risks. This could • Disseminating the message
involve advertising locations and levels of • Avoid causing alarm
protection and measure that could be taken
to minimise risks.

Please comment on:

Flood alleviation options, including impacts and opportunities of each

Partnerships that could develop through mutual objectives

Funding availability for scheme enhancements and opportunities


September 2003 36


7.0 DATA COLLECTION

Data, including Geographical Information System (GIS) data, were provided through the
Environment Agency, preliminary consultation or the internet. The following represents a list
of key documents identified to date, which are of relevance to the strategy.

1) Autumn 1998 Flood Event 22nd October to 8th November 1998 – Midlands Region.
Environment Agency
2) A Strategy for Sustainable Land Management in England. Countryside Agency
Publications
3) Biodiversity Action Plan for the Peak District
4) Biodiversity Action Plan for Mid Derbyshire
5) Derby City Local Plan
6) Derbyshire County Council Structure Plan
7) Derbyshire County Council Minerals Plan
8) Derbyshire County Council Waste Plan
9) Derbyshire County Council Transport Plan
10) Derbyshire Derwent Local Environment Agency Plan – Consultation Report
February1998
11) Derwent Valley Mills Management Plan
12) Easter 1998 Flood Event 7th April to 13th April 1998 – Midlands Region. Environment
Agency
13) English Nature – Natural Areas in the East Midlands Region
14) Flood Report 28th October to 20th November 2000 – Midlands Region. Environment
Agency
15) Flood Survey (Midlands Region) – March 97 (Main and Ordinary watercourses)
16) Hydrometric Report – Midlands Region
17) Introduction to the History of Floods and Droughts of the Trent Basin. HR Potter
18) Local Authority Plans – Derbyshire City Council
19) Local Authority Plans – South Derbyshire District Council
20) Local Authority Plans – Borough of High Peak Council
21) Local Authority Plans – Chesterfield Borough Council
22) Local Authority Plans – Erewash Borough Council
23) Local Authority Plans – Derbyshire Dales District Council
24) Local Authority Plans – Amber Valley Borough Council
25) Local Authority Plans – North East Derbyshire District Council
26) Managing Water Abstraction – The Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy Process
July 2002. Environment Agency
27) Peak District National Park Management Plan (Strategy 2000 – 2005)
28) Regional Planning Guidance for the East Midlands (RPG8)
29) Report of The Floods of December 1965 – Trent River Authority
30) Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation in Derbyshire – Derbyshire Wildlife Trust
31) The State of the Countryside – East Midlands. Countryside Agency Publications

Please advise us if there are other key documents that may be of use

September 2003 37


8.0 COMMUNICATION PLAN

COMMUNICATION PLAN

Scheme Name: Derwent Strategy Client Manager: Malcolm Boardman EIA Officer: Mark Ross

Scheme No: 3036 Project Manager: Mark Jackson Environmental Claire Leather
Environment Agency Co-ordinator: Black & Veatch
Start Date: May 2003 Project Manager: Warwick Dale
Black & Veatch

Stage Aim of Communication Stakeholders Method of Dates Responsibility Expected outcome or
Consultation for action
undertaking
and preparing
consultation

Screening To establish internally Project team Project start-up 24th June The Agency Comment on data
within the Agency initial meeting brainstorm 2003 collection register,
comment on the proposed recommendations on
scope of the SEA and potential consultees,
extent of consultation

Scoping Introduce Scoping and Statutory Introductory letter 11th July– 30 B&V but issued Awareness among key
inform organisations of Consultees/ Key September by Agency consultees of Strategy
Derwent Strategy, obtain Stakeholders 2003 and early input into
preliminary comment and Scoping Report
data on existing conditions, Wider
potential impacts and organisations and
opportunities and propose public interest
date that Scoping Report groups
will be issued for comment.

September 2003 38


undertaking
and preparing
consultation
Follow up communication Statutory Telephone call/e- Ongoing B&V Provision of data and
to request data and Consultees/ Key mail during information to guide
information to guide the Stakeholders July & production of Scoping
production of the scoping August 2003 Report
report as necessary Wider
organisations and
public interest
groups

To request data and Internal Agency Letter/e- Ongoing B&V Provision of data and
information to guide the staff mail/telephone call during July & information to guide
production of the scoping August 2003 production of Scoping
report as necessary Report
To gain Agency feedback Internal Agency Draft Scoping 22 August B&V Revision of Scoping
and further input into staff (MJ/MR & Report 2003 Report to reflect
Scoping Study others as requested) Agency feedback

To gain further Agency Internal Agency Draft Scoping Issue w/c 1 B&V Revision of Scoping
feedback and further input staff Report September Report to reflect
into Scoping Study 2003 Agency feedback
To further communicate Statutory Issue Scoping Consultation B&V and Revision of Scoping
aim and objective of the Consultees/ Key Report responses Agency Report to reflect
Derwent Strategy, the Stakeholders requested by consultee feedback,
current understanding of 28 October provision of further
study area and to encourage Wider 2003 data and information
further responses with organisations and and recommendations
relevant information and public interest for additional
suggestions for flood groups and the consultees
management general public

September 2003 39


undertaking
and preparing
consultation

To provide a summary of Statutory Post Consultation Issue 15th B&V Update and
consultation responses. Consultees/ Key Report October 2003 communication of
Stakeholders, feedback on Scoping
Wider Report
organisations and
public interest
groups and the
general public

To provide background Agency staff (MJ & Summary Report Issue 17 B&V Summary of data and
information to Scoping Report MR) October 2003 information collected
and proposed scope of for Scoping Study and
Strategy to be used in Strategy.
Provide information on Agency staff Introductory letter TBA
Strategy production Statutory
Consultees/ Key
Stakeholders,
Wider
organisations and
public interest
groups and the
general public

Draft Strategy Report Agency staff Strategy Report

September 2003 40


undertaking
and preparing
consultation
Strategy Report Agency staff Strategy Report
Statutory
Consultees/ Key
Stakeholders,
Wider
organisations and
public interest
groups and the
general public

September 2003 41


9.0 LIST OF CONSULTEES 47) National Trust
48) Network Rail
1) Acordis UK Ltd 49) North East Derbyshire District
2) Aggregate Industries UK Council*
3) Amateur Rowing Association 50) Peak District National Park * +
4) Amber Valley Borough Council * 51) Peak Forest Parish Council
5) Association of Drainage Authorities* 52) Peak & Northern Footpath Society
6) Belper Town Council 53) Ramblers Association
7) British Canoe Union 54) Rowsley Parish Council
8) British Waterways 55) Royal Yachting Association*
9) Castleton Parish Council 56) RSPB *
10) Chesterfield Borough Council * 57) Salmon & Trout Association
11) Council for the Protection of Rural 58) Sheffield City Council
England (CPRE) 59) South Darley Parish Council
12) Country Land & Business Association 60) South Derbyshire District Council *
(East Midlands) 61) Seven Trent Water Ltd * +
13) Cromford Parish Council 62) South Derbyshire District Council *
14) The Countryside Agency (East 63) Town and Parish Councils
Midlands Region) * + 64) Trent & Peak Archaeological Trust
15) Darley Dale Town Council 65) Turnditch & Windley Parish Council
16) Derby City Council * 66) Woodland Trust
17) Derby & Sandiacre Canal Trust 67) Yorkshire Water
18) Derby Rowing Club
19) Derbyshire County Counci
20) Derbyshire Dales District Council * The general public have access to the
21) Derbyshire Wildlife Trust * + Scoping Report via the Environment
22) Derbyshire Valley Mills Partnership Agency website. The document is
23) Derwent Hydroelectric also available to view at a selection
24) Derwent Rowing Club of libraries in the catchment.
25) Derwent Valley Trust
26) Derwent Valley Mills Partnership
27) DEFRA (Environment Agency to
consult)
28) District of Bolsover
29) Duffield Parish Council
30) East Midlands Conservancy (Forestry)
31) East Midlands Development Agency
32) Elvaston Parish Council
33) English Heritage *
34) English Nature * +
35) Erewash Borough Council *
36) Farming and Wildlife Advisory Group
(FWAG)
37) Forestry Commission
38) Friends of Cromford Canal* +
39) Government Office for the East
Midlands Please advise us if there are any other organizations
40) High Peak Borough Council * + that should be consulted.
41) Inland Waterway Association
42) Little Eaton Parish Council
43) Matlock Canoe Club * Consultee contacted at pre-scoping stage
44) Matlock Parish Council + Consultee replied
45) National Farmers Union (NFU)
46) National Federation of Anglers (East
Midlands Regional Council)

September 2003 42


10.0 PRE PAID ADDRESS LABEL

September 2003 43

River Derwent Strategy Scoping Report River Derwent Strategy Scoping Report

11.0 SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION ISSUES Please use the space on this sheet to make notes and you may wish to return this to us.

The Environment Agency would value your comments on the following issues so far raised on the Derwent
Strategy Study.
• Your experience of flooding in the catchment and damage caused (Section 3.1)
• Relationship between flooding from land drainage and high river levels (Section 3.1)
• Benefits of flooding, for example, the enrichment of soils (Section 3.1)
• Flood defences that the Agency may not be aware of (Section 3.2)
• Any weaknesses/deficiencies in existing defences that you know of (Section 3.2)
• Do you know of any other flood impacts on the Derwent? (Section 3.3)
• Have you any experience of impacts as a result of the Derwent flooding, or know others who have? (Section 3.3)
• Can you comment on economic cost of impacts as a result of the Derwent flooding? (Section 3.3)
• Experience of these changes (Section 3.4)
• Impacts of these changes (Section 3.4)
• Any landscapes which have been or could be affected by flood management (Section 4.1)
• Key impacts of flood management options on the Derwent landscape (Section 4.1)
• Opportunities for landscape restoration, as part of flood management schemes (Section 4.1)
• Opportunities for enhancement and/or partnership (Section 4.1)
• The impacts of recent and historical flooding in the catchment on soils (Section 4.2)
• Flooding where the main source can be identified as being ground water (Section 4.2)
• Your knowledge of water quality problems resulting from flooding and how these could be avoided (Section 4.3)
• Opportunities and techniques to protect and improve water quality, as part of flood management activities
(Section 4.3)
• Highways which are affected by flooding (Section 4.4)
• Transport infrastructure that exacerbates flooding (eg. bridges) (Section 4.4)
• Plans for new transport infrastructure (Section 4.4)
• The location of potentially contaminated land in the catchment and the nature of the contamination (Section 4.5.1)
• History of contaminated land being disturbed by flood events (Section 4.5.1)
• Situations where industry has been affected by flood events (Section 4.5.1)
• Major events in agricultural and forestry which may have resulted in flooding problems (Section 4.5.2)
• Other schemes and initiatives in operation in the area which seek to improve land management, particularly where
this relates to the floodplain (Section 4.5.2)
• The impacts of flooding or flood management activities on recreational activities (Section 4.5.3)
• The impacts of recreational activities on flood management (Section 4.5.3)
• Other recreational initiatives, especially those which focus on the water environment (Section 4.5.3)
• Sites which are vulnerable to the effects of flooding and flood management activities (Section 4.6)
• Sites which have been affected by flooding or flood management activities (Section 4.6)
• Opportunities to protect and enhance sites (Section 4.6)
• Cases where species or habitats have been affected by flooding or flood management activities. Please state your
knowledge of both positive and negative effects (Section 4.7.1)
• Other initiatives seeking to restore floodplain and water-dependent habitats in the catchment
• Opportunities to integrate flood management with nature conservation (Section 4.7.1)
• Other legislation, policies, plans and strategies which you think may be relevant to the Derwent Strategy (Section
5.4)
• Flood alleviation options, including impacts and opportunities of each (Section 6.3)
• Partnerships that could develop through mutual objectives (Section 6.3)
• Funding availability for scheme enhancements and opportunities (Section 6.3)
• Please advise us if there are other key documents that may be of use (Section 7.0)

September 2003


Please use the space on this sheet to make notes and you may wish to return this to us.

Please include the following information with any response:

Name Position
Organisation
Address

Telephone number
Do you wish to be included in future consultation?
All formal comment or representation relating to this document should be submitted by 28th October 2003 to: -
Liz Galloway - Regional EIA Coordinator
Environment Agency, Olton Court, 10 Warwick Road, Olton, Solihull B92 7HX

September 2003

River derwent management strategies

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to River derwent management strategies

Similar to River derwent management strategies (20)

More from geographypods

More from geographypods (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

River derwent management strategies