In this chapter

• Introduction to development management policy
• Housing
• Climate change
• Nature and ecosystem services
  • Policy N/SHS: Sites, habitats and species
  • Policy N/BNG: Biodiversity net gain
  • Policy N/GI: Green infrastructure
  • Policy N/OS: Open spaces
  • Policy N/TWC: Trees and woodland conservation
  • Policy N/CELLC Landscape character and setting of settlements
  • Policy N/RFSD: Flood risk management and sustainable drainage
  • Policy N/ES: Ecosystem services
  • Policy N/EN: Ecological networks and nature recovery - local nature recovery strategies
• Green Belt
• Jobs and economy
• Healthy, vibrant and inclusive communities
• Heritage and design
• Sustainable transport
• Pollution, contamination and safety
• Minerals and waste
• Waste
• Infrastructure

Policy N/RFSD: Flood risk management and sustainable drainage

About this page

How this part of the Local Plan Options Document works

These Development Management policy option pages contain the following sections:

Policy background

• Relevant national policy or regulations
• National or regional trends
• Local situation and needs/li>
• How we have dealt with this issue in the past
• The thinking behind the policy

Policy options for the new Local Plan

We may suggest a variety of approaches:

• Keeping existing policy as it is
• Making small changes
• Replacing the policy with something that is substantially different
• Identifying factors or events which may affect this policy in the future

Policy option analysis

• A list of the advantages and disadvantages that we have identified for each of the policy options we are presenting.

More on this topic

Read the Natural Environment Topic Paper, for in-depth focus about this topic, and the evidence which informs our policy. Visit our library of Local Plan Options supporting documents to learn more.

Explore the policy

Select a section below to read more.

Policy background

9.226 The NPPF requires for new development to be in sustainable locations, at the least risk of flooding, taking into account vulnerability to flooding. Appropriate mitigation should be provided where necessary to ensure that development remains safe, resilient to the impacts of flooding, and does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.

9.227 Existing Policy CP5, in line with the NPPF, seeks to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding and directing development away from areas at highest risk.

9.228 Placemaking Plan Policy SU1 covers sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), which are a key component of managing surface water. SuDs re-create the benefits of natural drainage systems and collect, store, slow and treat the quality of surface water to mitigate the impacts of development on run-off rates, volumes and quality. SuDS can be implemented through natural/open water means which presents multiple benefits, such as enhancing biodiversity and creating amenity space with health and well-being benefits.

9.229  The detailed background and evidence relating to the following options is set out in the Natural Environment Topic Paper.

Policy options for the new Local Plan

9.230 National Guidance and associated Technical Guidance provides the national requirements in terms of the Sequential and Exception Test, the need for planning applications to be supported by a Flood Risk Assessment, and the priority given to utilising sustainable drainage techniques in new development.

9.232 As such, the following options are proposed:

Option A

Rely on the existing policy approach supplemented by national planning policy.

Advantages of Option A

The existing approach is well understood and implemented by Development Management in determining planning applications.

Disadvantages of Option A

• Increased local concern relating to surface water runoff presented by developments when using the existing policy.
• Regarding major schemes the up take in natural/open water SuDS is limited as it is often achieved in underground infrastructure with small ponds implemented.
• The management of rainwater has not been considered holistically due to the fragmented ownership of its management.

Option B

Requiring that SuDS are constructed for the disposal of surplus rainwater, regardless of the size of new developments, and that there should be no net increase in rainwater discharged to combined sewers.

Advantages of Option B

• Opportunity to link the implementation of SuDS with Green/ Blue Infrastructure and BNG within wider site design. Options for Urban Greening which are being explored can provide links to better SuDS design.
• The revised GI Strategy will evidence where new or enhanced GI is required to address water management. The GI Policy if revised will reference the NE Green Infrastructure Framework standards including the Urban Greening Factor that seeks to retain and ideally increase more permeable surfaces.
• Will ensure that developments are not worsening water quality and thereby not increasing pressure on in-river ecology.

Disadvantages of Option B

Whether there is sufficient evidence for justification regardless of the size of new developments.