Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester

Urban
Water
Management
Workshop

March
15th
2016

The
Mechanics
Ins;tute,
Manchester,
M1
6DD

Policy, Legislation and Governance
Peter Bide
peterbide@aol.com

The bigger picture in water
management
Ø  Why planning for water matters
Ø  How policy and plans join up
Ø  Who is involved
Ø  Opportunities to get multiple benefits
through partnerships and innovative
approaches

Planning for water: why does it
matter?
Too much, or too little water is bad
for business, the economy and
society:
Ø  lost production and sales
Ø  disrupted transport
Ø  waste of resources
Ø  poor quality environment and
social problems
Good planning and urban design
Ø  reduces flooding
Ø  increases water resilience
Ø  improves water quality
Ø  creates more liveable places

How integrated water management works in practice
Source:
WWT
and
RSPB
-‐
Sustainable
Drainage
Systems,
Maximising
the
Poten?al
for
People
and
Wildlife,

A
guide
for
Local
Authori?es
and
Developers

How policy and plans join up
Local
Plans

Surface
Water

Management

Plans

Water
Resource

Management

Plans

River
Basin

Management

Plans

NPPF
WFD

FWMA

Water

Acts

Who’s
involved?

Environment

Agency

Lead
Local
Flood

Authori@es

Local
Planning

Authori@es

Water
and

Sewerage

Companies

Highway

Authori@es

Local
wildlife
and

conserva@on

groups

Local

Communi@es

Catchment

partnerships

Natural

England

Farmers
and

land
managers

Local

Enterprise

Partnerships

Local
businesses

and
developers

Understand

issues

Develop

collabora?on

Build

capacity

Catchment

partnership

L
P
A

IDB

LLFA

N
E

Business

BeMer

Water

quality

Sustainable

drainage

Water

eﬃciency

Local

environment

Biodiversity

How
the
Catchment
–based
approach
works:

Partnerships,
process
and
outcomes

Sustainable

development

Ø  Reduce flood risk
Ø  Improve and regenerate urban areas
Ø  Enhance biodiversity
Ø  Improve water availability and quality
Ø  Enable new housing
Ø  Facilitate business growth

Opportunities from integrating
water management
Mul@ple
beneﬁts!

Mul@ple
beneﬁts

Partnership
working
Flood risk
managed &
reduced
Better access
and green
space
urban areas
regenerated
Housing
and
business
growth
More
effective
use of
resources
With good
partnerships you
can have it all!
Biodiversity
enhanced
Improved
water
quality

Funding:
geLng
more
for
less

The risks from inaction:
Ø  Poorly planned
development reducing
water and environmental
quality and increasing
flood risk
Ø  Water supply and waste
water disposal constraints
on development
Ø  Missed opportunities for
cost-saving
Ø  Poorer quality urban
environments
Urban water management
is important
The benefits of getting it right:
Ø  Regenerated towns and cities
Ø  Enhanced biodiversity
Ø  Improved water availability and
quality
Ø  More green space
Ø  Improved public realm and
people’s access to it
Ø  Enabling new housing
Ø  Facilitating business growth

New South Quarter
and Wandle Park
Croydon

http://www.ciwem.org/planningadvice

LOCAL ACTION PROJECT
Leicester | Manchester | Thames Estuary | Newton Abbot

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
Barriers to SuDS/GI delivery & evidence gaps. CaBA Urban Workshop – Birmingham, Oct 2015

LOCAL ACTION PROJECT
STRATEGIC DATA, EVIDENCE
+ INFORMATION
Present robust evidence in a clear way to
help build consensus,facilitate local
decision-making & secure funding
VALUINGTHE BENEFITS FROM
NATURAL CAPITAL
Develop a clear understanding of the social,
cultural, environmental and economic
benefits provided by natural capital in urban
landscapes and estimating potential
improvements
LOCAL CHOICES, PRIORITIES
+ AMBITIONS
Talk to the local community and civil
society groups to discover their future
vision and ambition for where they live
FUNDING + RESOURCES
FOR ACTION
Support the formation of effective
stakeholder-led partnerships by increasing
engagement, mobilising local delivery
organisations and tapping into funding
sources
Working with local communities to enhance the value of natural capital in our
towns, cities and other urban spaces to improve people’s lives, the environment &
economic prosperity…
LOCALACTIONPROJECT

LOCAL COMMUNITY
Action
Practical implementation of
environmental measures
www
Place making
GOVERNMENT BODIES
Enabling
Conditions
LOCALACTIONPROJECT

TARGETED
STRATEGIC
STRATEGIC
MANDATE
POLICY/LEGISLATION
MONETISED?
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL
CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS
NATURAL CAPITAL
FUNCTION
VALUE
MULTI-FUNCTIONS
GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE
NATURAL ASSETS
HABITATSFUNCTIONAL AREAS
SuDSOPEN SPACES
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
SYNERGIES
PROTECT
CONSERVE
MANAGE
ENHANCE
NO DETERIORATION
STOCK
ACTION
INTERVENTIONS
DELIVER
FUNDING
TOOLBOX
OPPORTUNITY
NEED
PRIORITIES
DRIVERS
STATUTORY
AMBITION
VISION
BUY-IN
HUMAN IMPACTS
HIGH DEMAND
 FUNCTION
SUITABILITY
PARTNERSHIP
CAPACITY SYNERGY
DESIGN
MEASURES
OPTIONEERING
 PROVISION
POLICY
CAPABILITY

POLICY/LEGISLATION
PROTECT
CONSERVE
MANAGE
ENHANCE
NO DETERIORATION
STOCK
TARGETED
STRATEGIC
STRATEGIC
MANDATE
ACTION
INTERVENTIONS
DELIVER
FUNDING
TOOLBOX
OPPORTUNITY
NEED
PRIORITIES
DRIVERS
STATUTORY
AMBITION
VISION
BUY-IN
HUMAN IMPACTS
HIGH DEMAND
 FUNCTION
SUITABILITY
PARTNERSHIP
CAPACITY SYNERGY
DESIGN
MEASURES
OPTIONEERING
 PROVISION
POLICY
CAPABILITY
MONETISED?
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL
CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS
NATURAL CAPITAL
FUNCTION
VALUE
MULTI-FUNCTIONS
NATURAL ASSETS
SuDSOPEN SPACES
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
SYNERGIES

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Area(km²)
Natural Environment
Domestic Garden
Natural Surface
Inland Water
Urban
Other
CURRENT ASSETS
Land-cover Composition
Green Wedges
These areas of land offer a space for recreation and nature
conservation, providing a “green lung into urban areas”. They
have been included in the planning policy for Leicester and
Leicestershire for many years.
River Sence
This is the longest tributary
of the River Soar at around
~28km in length.
This map shows the main areas of natural infrastructure
across Leicester and the surrounding wards. There is a
diverse collection of natural habitats and green/blue
spaces across the area; including the wetlands and
riverine habitats to the north of the city, around
Watermead, and species-rich grassland to the
south at Aylestone Meadows Local Nature Reserve.

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
CURRENT ASSETS…continued
These maps illustrate the high level of detail that is available for mapping green and
blue infrastructure, in Leicester. Data is mapped for two example wards; Rushey
Mead Ward and a detailed section of Abbey Park and the surrounding area in
AbbeyWard.
Due to the detailed mapping and high resolution datasets provided
by Leicester City Council, we are able to view features such as outdoor
sports areas, play areas and street trees.
Rushey Mead Ward
Abbey Park in Abbey Ward
NATURAL CAPITAL

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
BENEFITS ASSESSMENT
To target and implement interventions that enhance natural capital effectively have
developed a series of metrics that assess the current benefits being
experienced by people and the environment.
Each metric is a measure with the potential to be
enhanced through natural solutions.
Access to Green Space
Percentage of people that meet the criteria outlined in Natural
England’s ANGSt (Accessible Natural Greenspace Standard).
Air Quality (PM10)
Mean concentration of PM10 modelled
for 2016, derived from background
maps from the UK-AIR data archive.
Flood Risk (Rivers and Sea)
Number of buildings that have a
greater than 1 in 100 year chance of
flooding from rivers and/or sea.
WFD Ecological Status
The 2014 Water Framework Directive
ecological status for the surrounding
river waterbody catchment.
Average House Price
Mean price for a two-bedroom
house in December 2015.
Flood Damage Cost (Rivers and Sea)
Estimated costs incurred due to flood damage
from rivers and sea, based on figures used in the
EA National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA).
Aesthetic value of landscape
Number of nature-related photos taken in
the area that have been uploaded to Flickr
and tagged accordingly.
Cultural Activity
Number of recreational facilities per 1000 people,
including places such as allotments, sports clubs.
Flood Risk (Surface Water)
Number of buildings that have a
greater than 1 in 100 year chance of
flooding from surface water.
Climate Regulation
Percentage of land area that is carbon
/GHG-sequestering habitats of
woodland, grassland, wetland or scrub.
Priority Habitat
Percentage of ward area that is
described as a priority habitat in
Natural England’s Priority Habitats
Inventory.
BENEFITS
• Ward-scale analysis
• Metrics represent range of
values in Leicester
• White spaces represent
opportunity for improvement
Low Flows
The water availability value of river
waterbody catchments, according to
the EA’s Catchment Abstraction
Management Strategy (CAMS).

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
BENEFITS SUMMARY
13. Beaumont Leys
Pop – 16,480
37. Abbey
Pop – 14,926
6. Western Park
Pop – 10,609
8. Fosse
Pop – 13,072
16. New Parks
Pop – 17,128
21. Westcotes
Pop – 11,644
17. Freemen
Pop – 10,949
44. Castle
Pop – 22,901
12. Charnwood
Pop – 13,291
22. Coleman
Pop – 14,669
23. Belgrave
Pop – 11,558
35. Spinney Hills
Pop – 25,571
43. Stoneygate
Pop – 20,390
45. Latimer
Pop – 12,457

TARGETED
ACTION
INTERVENTIONS
DELIVER
FUNDING
TOOLBOX
OPPORTUNITY
BUY-IN
SUITABILITY
PARTNERSHIP
CAPACITY SYNERGY
DESIGN
MEASURES
OPTIONEERINGCAPABILITY
STRATEGIC
STRATEGIC
MANDATE
POLICY/LEGISLATION
MONETISED?
ECONOMIC
SOCIAL
CULTURAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS
NATURAL CAPITAL
FUNCTION
VALUE
MULTI-FUNCTIONS
NATURAL ASSETS
SuDSOPEN SPACES
ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
SYNERGIES
PROTECT
CONSERVE
MANAGE
ENHANCE
NO DETERIORATION
STOCK
NEED
PRIORITIES
DRIVERS
STATUTORY
AMBITION
VISION
HUMAN IMPACTS
HIGH DEMAND
 FUNCTION
 PROVISION
POLICY

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
OPPORTUNITY AREAS
The final step of this assessment is to identify key areas for improvement and
investigate areas of priority, opportunity and feasibility for implementing
measures at these sites.
1. Key areas of opportunity across Leicester, such as potential development
sites (including regeneration and brownfield sites) and proposed
wildlife sites.
Potential Sites for Nature
Potential for expanding local sites for nature in
Leicester. There are a number of proposed Local
Nature Reserves and Local Wildlife Sites, which if
designed effectively could produce a number of
benefits for the wider area.
Ashton Green
Abbey Meadows
Waterside Regeneration

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
TARGET AREA IDENTIFICATION
Landscape Priority Area 1
LowerWillowbrookWards
45. Latimer
- Very poor air quality
- High flood risk from rivers and sea
- Very high surface water flood risk (and damage costs)
- Low carbon storage
- Low property values
12. Charnwood
- Very high flood risk from rivers and sea
- Low provision of cultural activity resources
- Very low habitat provision and low carbon storage
- Very low property values
35. Spinney Hills
- High flood risk from rivers and sea
- Low property values
22. Coleman
- Low access to green space and very poor air quality
- Very high flood risk from rivers and sea and surface water, as well as
very high predicted costs of damages
- Very low property values
2. Using the information gathered from the previous sections, we are able to identify wards
that could benefit the most from increased or improved environmental infrastructure
and also what types of interventions are appropriate to meet those needs.

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
TARGET AREA IDENTIFICATION
Landscape Priority Area 1
LowerWillowbrookWards
3. Perform high resolution hydrological and suitability analyses to identify candidate sites
for specific interventions – these sites can then be ‘worked-up’ with resource/funding
sought, community consultation,optioneering, design and delivery.

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
URBAN TOOLBOX
Splits into FOUR broad approaches -
• Restoration / regeneration of urban environments
• GI or SuDS in new development
• Retrofit or greening actions
• Increased functionality – e.g. increased amenity or
access
• For each intervention we have developed
factsheets including cost and benefits info
AND include opportunity/feasibility criteria to
facilitate mapping/scenario development

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
Rain Gardens are usually small vegetated depressions in
the ground created mainly in residential areas to take
surface water run-off from roofs and hard surfaces.
RAIN GARDEN
Infiltration, bio-retention, soakaways
+ They but can vary significantly in size and are sometimes also called
‘bio-retention cells’
+ Aid infiltration by slowing water down and increasing soil permeability
+ Reducing runoff through root uptake of water and transpiration
+ Can act to remove pollutants from water – especially if wetland areas
are incorporated into the design
+ Aesthetically pleasing and can improve QoL and landscape value
IMPLEMENTATION
Rain gardens mimic the natural water retention of undeveloped land and reduce
the volume of water entering drains so they need to be hydrologically connected
Costs: £20-270+/m2 dependent on size and context.
Due to high variability of design and situation.£ £ £
Maintenance: low dependent on context but mainly
litter/sediment removal. Plants need to endure
waterlogged as well as dry conditions.
£ £ £
 Stress levels
 Wellbeing
 Exposure to nature
 Outdoor Learning
x
 Allergy risk
Aesthetic quality can
degrade if not managedFeasibility: Can be used for retrofit in residential, industrial or
urban areas. Hydrological connectivity must exist or be created

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
RAIN GARDEN
Infiltration, bio-retention, soakaways
Stakeholder
dialogue
Partnership
working
Benefits/value
assessment
CASESTUDIES
Strategic
targeting
Practical delivery
of measures
The Rain Garden Guide
This guide is intended to help the homeowner or property manager
to create a simple rain garden within their own property.
www.raingardens.info/the-rain-garden-guide
Rain garden: design, construction and maintenance
recommendations based on a review of existing
systems
N. Somes, M. Potter, Joe Crosby and M Pfitzner.
In order to better understand factors that contribute to the
successful implementation of street scale Water Sensitive Urban
Design (WSUD) assessments were undertaken at 22 sites across
Melbourne.
www.eng.warwick.ac.uk/ircsa/pdf/13th/Somes.pdf
Evaluating rain gardens as a method to reduce the
impact of sewer overflows in sources of drinking water
Autixier L, Mailhot A, Bolduc S, Madoux-Humery AS, Galarneau M,
Prévost M, Dorner S.
Science of the Total Environment (2014) 499:238-47
Rain gardens were evaluated for their reduction of volumes of water
entering the drainage network and of CSOs.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25192930
SuDS for Schools -
The SuDS for Schools project is working with ten schools in the
Pymmes Brook catchment in North London to design and build
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) in the school grounds.
www.sudsforschools.wwt.org.uk/
Ashby Grove residential retrofit rain garden, London
The Ashby Grove rain garden retrofit is designed to remove roof
water from a social housing block in Islington. The aim is to
disconnect one of the roof downpipes and allow water to flow
directly into a newly designed rain garden.
tinyurl.com/zpowlef
Islington Raingarden
The Ashby Grove raingarden in Islington was designed and
constructed as a practical example of what can be done in small
landscape spaces as suggested in the Islington SuDS Design Guide.
robertbrayassociates.co.uk/projects/islington-raingarden
Strutts Centre Rain Garden, Belper
Trent Rivers Trust have just completed this National Demonstration
Sustainable Drainage scheme (SuDS) designed by national expert Bob
Bray, on a grade II listed building.
www.trentriverstrust.org/site/Rain-Gardens

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
Trees can perform a number of functions that in turn
provide a number of different benefits to people in urban
landscapes -
TREES
Street trees, tree pits, urban forest
+ Improving air quality by trapping pollutants
+ Intercepting rainfall to slow the rate of water reaching the ground
+ Increasing infiltration by creating permeable surfaces
+ Reducing runoff through root uptake of water and transpiration
+ Trees are also aesthetically pleasing natural features in an urban
landscape and thus provide many less tangible benefits that improve
people’s quality of life, health and wellbeing
IMPLEMENTATION
Trees are very versatile and can be used in a variety of situations. The benefits
produced depend on their size, species, location and style of delivery.
Costs per singular tree: £100-400
(including planting and initial maintenance)£ £ £
Maintenance: mainly pruning
(as part of landscape management)£ £ £
 stress levels
 exercise frequency
 New-born health
 exercise frequency
 New-born health
Property damage:
roots, litter, shading
x
 allergy risk
Can block views
Feasibility: can be planted in pavements large enough to receive
them. Cab planted on existing GI or in new developments

LOCALACTIONPROJECT
TREES
Street trees, tree pits, urban forest
Stakeholder
dialogue
Partnership
working
Benefits/value
assessment
CASESTUDIES
Strategic
targeting
Practical delivery
of measures
Urban Forest Effects Model (UFORE) & i-Tree Eco
The Urban Forest Effects Model (UFORE) is a science-based, peer-
reviewed computer model designed to assess and quantify urban
forest ecosystem services, based on field data inputs and external
datasets (e.g. weather and pollution). It was adapted for inclusion
with the i-Tree software suite from the USDA Forest Service, and
was subsequently renamed as i-Tree Eco.
www.itreetools.org
Longitudinal effects on mental health of moving to
greener and less green urban areas.
Alcock I, White MP, Wheeler BW, Fleming LE, Depledge MH.
Environmental Science & Technology (2014) 21; 48 (2):1247-55.
Moving to greener urban areas was associated with sustained mental
health improvements, suggesting that environmental policies to
increase urban green space may have sustainable public health
benefits.
Torbay's Urban Forest
The study (the first of its kind in the UK) used the i-Tree Eco model
(developed by the US Forest Service, and based on peer reviewed
research) to quantify the structure, and some of the major
environmental benefits delivered by Torbay’s trees.
www.torbay.gov.uk/tuf.pdfitreetools.org
StreetTree London
Street Tree is a non-profit making company founded on the belief
that trees should form an integral part of the urban landscape. Our
aim is to increase London's tree stock, working with Local
Authorities, Fund-holders, and business partners, to promote street
trees and the many benefits they bring.
www.streettree.org
Red Rose Forest – Green Streets Case Studies
Red Rose Forest's Green Streets team is dedicated to making our
towns and cities greener and more attractive places to live, work and
invest. They plant street trees, deliver bespoke street greening
projects, create places to grow food, greenspace improvement, plant
community woodlands and orchards, build green roofs and improve
school grounds.
tinyurl.com/j3vhpxm
Wirral StreetTrees Programme
A tree planting programme that is helping to transform Wirral into a
thriving economic hub. By April this year over 600 trees across 8km
will have been planted in streets and green spaces, as part of a three-
year programme to link residential areas to places of employment
and training.
tinyurl.com/jn5ggpd

Green
Infrastructure
for
Water
–

River
Irwell
Pilot
Study

•  Growing
body
of
evidence
of
eﬀec<veness
of
GI
in
tackling

problems
with
water
environment.

•  Builds
on
work
undertaken
over
previous
years
by
RRF,
EA

and
UoM
to
tackle
Urban
Diﬀuse
Pollu<on.

•  Builds
also
on
Urban
Catchment
Forestry
ideas.

•  Ini<ally
funded
by
EA
(with
some
addi<onal
support
from
EU).

•  Developed
with
input
from
colleagues
in
EA
and
CaBA
.

•  Further
sessions
planned
with
EA
and
Catchment
Partnership

to
iden<fy
ways
to
strengthen
model
and
take
forward.

Background

•  There
has
been
a
focus
on
rural
problems
and

opportuni<es
(Forest
Research).

•  Recent
work
on
Urban
Diﬀuse
Pollu<on
has

concentrated
on
loca<ons
of
greatest
need,
and
been

broad
in
scale.

But
this
model:

•  Aims
to
highlight
loca<ons
of
genuine
opportunity,
at

catchment
scale.

•  Guide
design/selec<on
of
GI
interven<ons.

•  Focus
on
both
issues
of
quality
and
quan<ty.

•  Guide
cost
eﬀec<ve
deployment
of
GI.

Purpose

Evidence
of
the
Problem

Approach

Issues
of
water

management

and/or
quality

Likely
pathways

from
source
to

receptor

(ie
watercourse

or
ﬂood
zone)

Opportuni0es

for
GI
to

disrupt

pathway

•  ccc

Overlay
Model

•  Guidance
on
loca<on:

–  To
highlight
loca<ons
with
highest
co-‐incidence
of
opportuni<es
and
to

iden<fy
the
range
of
projects/interven<ons
that
would
be
most
appropriate

in
that
loca<on.

–  To
highlight
loca<ons
where
a
specific
given
project
should
be
delivered
to

have
greatest
impact.

•  To
provide
addi<onal
evidence
of
need,
to
support
a
given
specific

project.

•  Guidance
on
improving
the
design
of
a
given
project
in
order
to

elicit
maximum
mul<ple
benefits
(i.e.
designing
a
street
tree

scheme
to
integrate
with
road
drainage
to
protect
a
local

watercourse).

How
the
Model
Can
be
Used

•  Weigh0ng
-‐
Each
dataset
in
the
model
has
been
weighted

equally
when
overlaid.

•  Spa0al
priori0sa0on
-‐
Further
spa<al
priori<sa<on
would

allow
the
model
to
beZer
indicate
where
the
greatest
impact

could
be
achieved
e.g.
IntermiZent
Discharges.

•  Other
Assump0ons
–
Highways
drains,
CSW,
deliverability

•  Addi0onal
reﬁnement
–
Filtering
out
residen<al
streets

lacking
space
for
trees?
Filtering
out
less
busy
roads?

Reﬁnement

•  Tackling
issues
of
quan<ty
will
have
beneﬁcial
impact
on

quality.

•  Highlights
loca<ons
with
the
greatest
scope
for
GI

interven<ons.

•  Doesn’t
replace
need
for
site
survey,
but
directs
eﬀort
at

catchment
scale.

•  Being
used
by
the
EA
and
Catchment
Partnership
to

inform
projects
that
address
UDP.

In
Summary

-SuDS-
urban spaces for water, wildlife and people

Andy
Graham
–
Head
of
Community
Working
Wetlands

They
work...

ATTENUATION

SuDS
for
Schools

10
schools
–
one
catchment

2000+
students
engaged

Knowledge,
skills
and
conﬁdence

Cleaner
stream,
new
habitats

Healthy,
connected
people

InspiraIonal
places

Transformed
learning
–
not
just
the
students

“Love
the
garden.
The
children
sit
at

the
benches
by
the
garden
every

break
and
lunch8me”

Susi
Earnshaw

Partnership,
parIcipaIon
and
legacy

What
a
wonderful
day
we
had!
It
exceeded
all
our

expecta8ons.
Thank
you
so
much
for
everything.

Please
pass
on
our
thanks
to
all
your
colleagues

who
made
it
such
a
successful
event.

Mr
Westmore,
AcIng
Head
Teacher

SuDS
are
now
well
and
truly

in
the

Hollickwood
consciousness,
and
also
of
all

our
community
guests,
(I
see

that
all
the

parents'
Facebook
pages
are
going
crazy

tonight
with
admiring

comments
about

our
SuDS!).

Linden
Groves,
Parent

&
Gardening

CommiQee

-‐Transforming
the
Salthill
catchment
in
Slough-‐

mulIple
beneﬁts
–
broader
support

Health
and
well-‐being
strategies

Reduced
(fear
of)
crime

Engagement
-‐
community
cohesion

Skills,
knowledge
–
jobs

Cleaner
streams
(WFD)

Reduced
ﬂood
risk
(SWMP)

CC
adaptaIon

Wetlands
and
wildlife
(GI)

Prince
of
Wales
community
wetland

Urban
regeneraIon
–
blue/green

infrastructure

2ha
of
new
urban
wetlands

SuDS
to
clean
road-‐run-‐oﬀ

Community
co-‐design
and
management

Skills,
training,
empowerment,
civic
pride

•  Engage
early

•  Build
broad
support
-‐
who
beneﬁts?

•  CollaboraIve
design

•  Be
prepared
to
adapt

•  Community
management

•  Planners
and
permissions

hQp://www.wwt.org.uk/uploads/documents/1400927422_

Sustainabledrainagesystemsguide.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=InZKJ6JlCF4

Support for SuDS
Paul Shaffer, CIRIA
Elvetham
Heath,
Hampshire

§  Founded 1960
§  Not for profit
§  Independent / collaborative
approach
§  Member-based, around 500
corporate members
§  Focus on performance
improvement
§  Cross sector / inter
disciplinary
CIRIA?

www.ciria.org | www.susdrain.org
Where do we start
§  The context
§  The team
§  Engagement
§  Funding

The context
§  New build or retrofit
§  Drivers
§  Opportunities and
constraints
§  The delivery process

The team
§  The role of champions
§  Disciplines
•  Engineers
•  Landscape architects
•  Urban designers
•  Communication
§  Partners
§  The community

Who’s doing what?
§  Local authorities
•  Planning
•  Flood risk managers
§  Developers
§  Sewerage undertakers
§  River/Wildlife trusts
§  Third Sector

Where to go for information

Lamb
Drove,
Cambridgeshire

Awareness –
susdrain
§  Website & events
§  Signposts guidance
§  50+ case studies
§  100+ videos
§  50+ presentations
§  Summarised guidance
§  Blog
§  Animation &
infographic

§  Comprehensive update/re-write
§  36 chapters
•  Philosophy & approach
•  Applying the approach
•  Technical detail
•  Supporting guidance
§  Key themes covering
•  Delivery of four design objectives
•  Overcoming site challenges
•  Delivering SuDS in urban areas
•  Integration
§  Free download
The SuDS
Manual

Retrofitting
§  Two approaches
•  Strategic
•  Nibbling
§  Underpinned by a
framework
§  Dependencies
•  Urban design
•  Engagement
•  Business models

Engagement
§  Overview of engagement
§  Principles
§  Framework
•  Opportunities
•  Identifying stakeholders
•  Preparing a plan
•  Deliver and monitor
§  Skills
§  Techniques
§  Free downloads

§  Approach to assessing benefits
§  Support practitioners to value
the quantity and monetary
benefit
§  Looking at monetising 14
benefits
§  Compare drainage options
§  Support discussions and
funding partnerships
Benefits of SuDS Tool

Confidence
§  Good to talk
§  Capacity building
§  Training
•  Intro to SuDS
•  SuDS design
•  SuDS and planning
§  Organisations
•  CIRIA
•  CABA
•  Consultancies

Thank you…
Susdrain: www.susdrain.org
CABA: www.catchmentbasedapproach.org
Livingroofs: www.livingroofs.org
SUDSNET: sudsnet.abertay.ac.uk
LinkedIn Group – Sustainable Drainage Systems
Twitter - @sudsulike paul.shaffer@ciria.org

Engaging with Local Authorities
CaBA Workshop
15th March 2016

a planners perspective of balance
Climate change
Environmental issues
Localism
Today’s pressures
Viability of town centres
Public interest
Economic recession
Meeting housing needs
Long term strategies
Brownfield development
Retail ‘market forces’
Individual interest

Processes
ENGAGE AGREE FORMALISE

Establish principles - engage
WORKS IN THE RIVER CHANNEL
STAGE ONE
ESTABLISH PRINCIPLES
E
S
T
A
B
L
I
S
H
PUSH FOR LARGE SCALE IMPROVEMENTS
LAND AND WATER CONSIDERED
TOGETHER
ONGOING MAINTENANCE
WHO? HOW?
OPEN UP RIVER CHANNELS
PUBLIC ACCESS
SMALL SCALE WORKS ONLY POSSIBLE
SPACE OR FLOOD RISK
RESTRICTIONS
LIMIT COSTS TO COUNCIL

Initial discussions - agree
EXPECTATIONS
COSTS FED INTO VIABILITY
RELATIONSHIPS
WITH EA - CONSISTENCY
STAGE TWO
INITIAL DISCUSSION
PRE APPLICATION
C
O
N
S
I
D
E
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
IMPORTANCE OF THE RIVER
POLICY CONTEXT
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
ADDRESS THE RIVER
LOCAL POLICY?
DISCUSSION WITH USER GROUPS

Planning application - formalise
STAGE THREE
PLANNING APPLICATION
S
U
B
M
I
T
T
E
D
I
N
F
O
R
M
A
T
I
O
N
RIVER IMPACT STUDY
DESIGN AND ACCESS STATEMENT
BIODIVERSITY SURVEY AND REPORT
ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT
FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT
LANDSCAPE SCHEME
OPEN SPACE ASSESSMENT
DAYLIGHT/SUNLIGHT ASSESSMENT

Catchment
Partnerships
–
the

beneﬁts
of
collabora5ve
working

Rob
Collins

The
Rivers
Trust

rob@theriverstrust.org

h?p://waterlife.org.uk

www.catchmentbasedapproach.org

CaBA
Evalua5on

•  Leveraged
funding
4:1
rela5ve
to
ini5al
Defra
investment

•  Increased
scale,
depth
and
integra5on
of
engagement

across
water
management
issues

•  More
cost
eﬀec5ve
delivery

•  Captures
local
knowledge
and
exper5se;
greater

community
engagement

•  Driving
a
more
holis5c
and
integrated
approach

•  Mul5ple
beneﬁts
realised
through
collabora5ve
working

Mul5ple
Beneﬁts

•  Flood
Risk
Management

•  Improved
Water
Quality
and
Quan5ty

•  Climate
Resilience

•  Biodiversity

•  Green
(&
Blue)
Spaces

•  Community
Health
and
Well-‐being

•  Business
Growth

•  Urban
re-‐genera5on

Urban Pollution
•  Misconnections;
CaBA
Partnerships,
LA’s
&
Water
Companies

•  Diﬀuse
Urban
Runoﬀ

•  Category
3
Pollution
Monitoring

•  Community
Engagement
and
Awareness
Raising

www.catchmentbasedapproach.org/volunteer-‐monitoring

CaBA Partnerships provide an ideal vehicle to mobilise debate
between flood threatened communities and those
organisations (& individuals) able to enact mitigation action
Inﬂuence
of
the
wider
catchment
upon

towns
and
ci5es

A
partnership
approach;

Soar
Catchment
Partnership,
City
Council,
EA,
LEP

Flood
Risk
Management
in
the
Soar

underpinned
by
data
and
evidence

Catchment
Partnerships
–
the

beneﬁts
of
collabora5ve
working

Rob
Collins

The
Rivers
Trust

rob@theriverstrust.org

1.

What
are
the
opportuni5es
you
see
to
delivering

sustainable
and
collabora5ve
urban
water

management
and
how
can
any
barriers
be
overcome?

2.

What
key
elements
of
urban
water
management

should
be
captured
in
local
plans
and
policies?

3.

How
can
those
plans/polices
be
inﬂuenced

The Sankey Framework- setting water management into a wider context
Rick Rogers
Environmental Planning
St Helens Council

Sankey Valley Project
• 15 mile corridor
• Integrated approach across
- Economy, Visitor Economy;
- Heritage;
- Biodiversity;
- Hydrology;
- Health;
- Access to Employment;
- Recreation
Vision:
“Create and manage a 15-mile long
green corridor from Spike Island, Widnes,
through Warrington, to Carr Mill Dam, St
Helens which provides outdoor
recreation opportunities for the Mid-
Mersey Region. Benefiting the visitor
economy, the corridor is important for
recreation, heritage, health and
wellbeing, water management and
wildlife”.

Project Aims
• To safeguard, enrich and promote the Cultural Heritage of the Sankey Valley and the Sankey
Canal Corridor;
• To develop a functioning hydrological catchment which minimises the frequency and
intensity of flooding within the Sankey Catchment, assists in improving the quality of the
water environment and maximises the water resource for recreational and biodiversity
needs;
• To improve the quality of the valley as a functioning ecological corridor through appropriate
habitat management and creation;
• To increase the connectivity of the valley for sustainable commuting and recreational
purposes;
• To maximise the potential of the Sankey Valley as a visitor destination and economic asset;
• To promote the use of the Sankey Valley for health and wellbeing.

Catchment Framework Plan(s)
Project Portfolio development
Ideas, Issues and Opportunities
Hydrology Biodiversity Heritage Health Economy Access Recreation
Strategic
• What? Project Vision, aim, objective
• Why? Policy review
• Where? Sankey Valley > Needs Assessment Issues / Themes
• Who Benefits? – audience?
• How? Partnership : St Helens BC, Warrington BC , Halton BC, Environment Agency,
Healthy Waterways Trust, Groundwork , Mersey Forest, Wildlife Trusts,
Natural England , Canal River Trust, SCARS, LFAU, Canal and Rivers Trust,
United Utilities, Natural England, RSPB, MEAS, Merseyside Archaeological Society,
Merseyside Industrial Archeology Society

Aim:
To develop a functioning
hydrological catchment
which minimises the
frequency and intensity of
flooding within the Sankey
catchment , assists in
improving water quality
and maximises the
resource for recreation and
biodiversity
Water quality
Water & Land
Management
Stakeholder
Workshop 1
• Identifying
Issues
• Current
activities
• Opportunities
• Knowledge
gaps
A
N
A
L
Y
S
I
s
Stakeholder
Workshop 2
• Project
Ideas
• Synergies
Stage 1 Projects
Development of Project Portfolio
( Co-ordination Group)
Hydrology Process

Sankey Catchment Plan
Surface Water
Management Plans
EA Programmes
UU AMP
ProgrammesHLF Landscape
Partnership Bid
Planning Policy /
Development Control
Delivery Mechanisms

Catchment covers
approx. 179 km2 with
126km of main river

Broad Zones
Slow and Filter Zone
e.g. Leaky dams, grass margins to
channels, off-line storage
Urban Intervention Zone
e.g. daylight culverts, create wet
woodlands, swales, embankments,
channel modification, mine water
amelioration through reedbeds
Discharge Zone
e.g. Create new channel between
Sankey Brook and lower reaches of
Sankey canal

Stanley Bank Natural Flood Management Measures

Examples of multi-functional benefits : Debris Dams at Stanley Bank
• Slowing flow on Stanley Brook;
• Built using Employment Training scheme via
Groundwork;
• Providing water quality improvements;
• Improving the condition of a SSSI * Natural Solutions to Flooding KTP project

Engine Lock Enhancement – Broad Oak St Helens
• Water management;
• Access Improvement;
• Local Wildlife Site enhancement –de-silting a wetland.
• Heritage enhancement – rediscovering a lost canal lock;

Catchment approach to flood risk
management
Derek Antrobus
Chair,
North West Regional Flood and Coastal Committee

NW RFCC - 2030 Vision
•  Need for catchment wide approach to water management
•  Need for greater impetus on ‘Slow The Flow’
•  Need to use ‘Communities at Risk’ approach
•  River Basin Management Plan alignments

Flood Defence Grant in Aid – being a partner

Creating resilient infrastructure

Supporting resilient communities

The challenge of infrastructure

Summary:
•  Work with Environment Agency and contribute to partnership
funding to enable schemes to proceed
•  Embed flood risk in strategic planning and planning policy
documents to deliver resilient development
•  Retrofit existing homes and businesses with property level
resilience measures
•  Work with communities to ensure that they are prepared for flooding
•  Ensure that drainage infrastructure reduced flood risk
•  Work with others at a catchment level to deliver natural flood
management
•  Think about the resilience of wider infrastructure

Water Management in Greater
Manchester – the story so far
Will Horsfall, Salford City Council
Natural Capital Group
GM’s Local Nature Partnership

1970s – 1990s Greater Manchester
River Valleys
• Greater Manchester Council - Joint River
Valley Partnerships
• River Valley Local Plans
• Land Reclamation
• Joint Ranger Services
• Joint Committees
• Clear local authority leadership

Reducing resources, pressure on
priorities
Croal Irwell Valley
Mersey Valley
Etherow Goyt Valley
Bollin Valley
Tame Valley
Medlock Valley
Douglas Valley
Bollin Valley
Irk Valley
Not primarily about water quality .. Land restoration and
recreation

Multi sector partnership
• Backed by government
• Long term – improvements to Mersey Basin
water quality
• Private sector - key partners
• United Utilities, Environment Agency
• Voluntary sector and local community – local
action

Rivers Return
The Irwell Catchment Pilot

Catchment Based Approach
• Government sees third sector playing a key
role
• Co-ordination and leadership
• Supported by EA, UU, local authorities
• Local people and volunteers
• EA River Basin Management Plans
• Local Catchment Plans?

Progress so far in GM
• Four Catchment Management Partnerships
• Established Rivers Return Irwell Catchment
Pilot – Irwell Catchment Management Plan
• Water Framework Directive – big challenge

EU LIFE Integrated Project
‘This project will be a game changer in
managing the water environment through co-
ordination, collaboration and convergence’
• 10 year project
• 17 million Euros
• Initial focus on Irwell Catchment

GM’s Local Nature
Partnership

2010 Lawton Review
Making Space for Nature
‘Bigger, Better, Joined up’
‘The Natural Choice – securing the value of
nature’
Government White Paper on Natural
Environment – June 2011

Membership
• Lancashire Wildlife Trust – Chair Anne Selby
• United Utilities – Vice Chair Chris Matthews
• Co-operative Group
• Canals and Rivers Trust
• Environment Agency & Natural England
• AGMA – Low Carbon Hub & Planning and Housing & Flood Risk
Management Board
• Council for Protection of Rural England & North West Environment Link
• Salford University
• Manchester University
• Salford City Council – theme lead Will Horsfall 0.2 fte
• Public Health representative
• Red Rose Forest
• Greater Manchester Ecology Unit

Vision
• ‘The Natural Capital Group will promote the natural
environment, co-ordinate activity across green
infrastructure, waterways and biodiversity and develop
their understanding of key ecosystem services across
GM’.
• ‘The group will highlight the importance and role of
natural capital with the opportunities of health and
wellbeing and the role that natural capital plays in
climate resilience whilst promoting sustainable economic
growth’.

Some issues
• Lots of examples of brilliant water related
projects led by third sector, local people,
councils, UU, EA
• Local focus … less strategic activity, catchment
scale
• Invasives – giant hogweed

Some issues – lessons from the past
• Leadership
• Engagement of all key players – at the right level
• Key contributions from all partners
• Planning – joint Local Plans vs National Planning
Policy Framework
• Compare with Lead Local Flood Authority role –
opportunity
LIFE Integrated Project – real opportunity

Urban Water
Quality Monitoring
Caroline Riley
Partnership Manager
Healthy Rivers Trust

The Mersey Basin
•  Urban area
•  High population

The salmon
has returned,
…but there’s
still more to do
The Mersey Basin

What does the
Healthy Rivers Trust do?
Projects
Litter BoatCaBA
Conferences
& workshops Engagement

Catchment-Based Approach
What do we do?

CaBA
catchments
Upper Mersey
Irwell
Lower
Mersey
Alt/Crossens
Weaver Gowy

Our future
aspirations rely on
having improved
water quality.
Clean and
healthy rivers
full of fish.
Aspira'ons

issues

•  Pollution
•  Litter

Urban Diffuse Pollution
•  Urban run-off (eg from roads)
•  Misconnections
•  Trading estates
•  Sediment
•  Contaminated land (eg landfill sites)

Where’s it coming from?
Road
run-off
Highway
drains
River
Mis-
connections
Surface
water
drains
River
Source Pathway Receptor

Engagement project
•  Upper Mersey – Nameless tributary
•  Catchment Partnership project
•  River improvement
•  River survey indicates misconnections
•  Engaging public to find misconnections
•  Name the stream competition & vote

Evidence-based
Approach
•  Locate the inputs to a local river
•  Take water samples at hotspots
•  Analyse to establish likely source
•  Prioritise
•  Deal with each
source accordingly.

•  Primary ground survey of
the waterbody
•  Target identified reaches
•  Identify points for wet
weather sampling
River Survey

Wet weather
sampling
Analyse for:
•  Nitrogen
•  Ammonia
•  Phosphate
•  Silicate
•  Heavy metals
•  Temperature
•  Conductivity
•  pH

Data collected
•  Sources
•  Types
•  Severity

Misconnections
•  Public awareness
is low

here
Asking
people…
Where does this go to?

Easter Hunt for
Misconnections
•  Residents check
their own plumbing
•  Prizes include a
plumber to fix it.

Engaging to find
Misconnections
•  ConnectRight
•  Helps prevent more
misconnections

Engaging
With local MP
at an urban
makers market

Next Steps
•  Roll out the methodology to other urban areas
•  Already incorporated into three other projects
In Mersey Basin
•  Monitor issues
•  Simple water tests
•  Follow up investigations
Bring in volunteer help locally
•  Promoting this technique
•  Working with CaBA Urban working group
Nationally

To address Urban Diffuse Water Pollution
issues:
•  Evidence-based project
•  Engaging the public locally
•  Targeting issues found in river surveys
•  Local scale
•  One brook at a time.
More urban surveys

Future
Less of this … and more of this

Thank you
info@healthyriverstrust.org.uk
Website: www.healthyriverstrust.org.uk
Twitter: @merseyrivers

Accounts
www.theriverstrust.org
Defra Urban Demonstrator
Sankey and Irwell case studies

How does the urban demonstrator fit in with our
wider data & evidence approach?
Local knowledge
and experience
Mentoring & Regional Hubs
Wider evidence base of Data & GIS

How does the urban demonstrator fit in with our
wider data & evidence approach?
OpenData ++Re-purposed data
from models
1234
1
2
3
4

We already have problems in urban areas and
they are likely to get worse
“David Balmforth, Ex president of the ICE”

Surface water flood modelling
Source
area
Pinch
point

Sewerage system: What can an Infoworks models
tell us? Below ground only.
CSO

What can an integrated urban model (surface
water and sewerage) tell us?
•  More reliable identification of source
areas?
•  A much fuller conceptual understanding of
urban hydrology?
•  The example we will look at is in
Cambridge.

What information can we extract from flood risk
modelling in urban areas?

Six flood models
in the catchment
What information can we extract from flood risk
modelling in urban areas?
Physical
barriers
A more complete picture to understand fish
passage in our urban environment?

•  Licensing model software?
•  Licensing model data, input and output?
•  Technical knowledge and expertise?
•  Trust. Model outputs can look good even if input data is
weak?
•  Partnership.....LA, Water Company and others.
•  There is much more knowledge/evidence out there...we
just need to re-purpose it.
•  This sort of evidence can make a difference .......
What is stopping us making more use of model
input and output to understand urban hydrology
better?

Thank You
Any Questions?
www.theriverstrust.org

1
Evidence & Measures
Working with Stakeholders to Implement Evidence-Based Measures
Prepared by Paul Hulme and Nick Rukin for the CaBA UrbanWorkshops, 15 & 18 Mar 2016
Moston Brook:
Evidence,Actions & Funding
Moston Brook Evidence & Measures ProjectTeam
Danielle Tallboys Danielle.talboys@environment-agency.gov.uk
Nick Rukin rukin@rukhydro.co.uk
Paul Hulme paul.hulme@pjhydro.co.uk
Paul Hulme

2
Three Evidence & Measures
Catchments in the North-West
River Petteril
4 water bodies in the Eden Catchment
Between Penrith and Carlisle
Setting: lowland rural
Key problem: poor trout numbers
Tidal Ribble
8 water bodies between in the Ribble Catchment
Between Preston and Lytham St Anne’s
Setting: mixed rural, urban and coastal
Key problems: poor coarse fish and water quality
Moston Brook (Sep 2012 – Mar 2013)
1 water body in the Irwell Catchment
North-east Manchester
Setting: urban
Key problems: no fish, bad water quality
Aim: to work alongside stakeholders
and use existing evidence
to reach consensus on measures.

3
Moston Brook
Photos: Ann Bates, Moston Brook Project Officer,
Partnership Project - Oldham Council &
Manchester City Council

4
Contents
1.  Use of existing evidence with stakeholders
2.  How this shared understanding empowered people to raise money and take action
3.  How you can get started
RiverIrk

5
1. Using existing evidence with stakeholdersRiverIrk

6
Suspected Problems
Identified at Moston Brook Officers’ Group Meeting

7
Examples of Mapped Environment Agency Data
The downstream end (Silchester Drive to River Irk)
(Size of red circle reflects
annual volume of discharge)
- - - culvert
Discharge consents (stars)
red stars = sewage
Combined Sewer Overflows

8
Photographic Evidence
Sewage rags on culvert outlets at the top of the brook
Photo provided by Environment Agency

9
Phosphate vs. Flow
B
A
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
1/32 1/16 1/8 1/4 1/2 1
OrthophosphateConcentration(mg/lP)
Daily Average Flow (m3/s) (Agency Estimate) (Log2 Scale)
Variation of PO4 with Flow in Moston Brook at Wrigley Head
N Culvert 2011
N Culvert 2010
N Culvert 2009
S Culvert 2011
S Culvert 2010
S Culvert 2009
Alford St 2010
Alford St 2009
Alford St 2008
Plot of phosphate concentration against flow:
• A: deterioration with increased flows (evidence for storm sewage)
• B: deterioration with reduced flows (evidence for misconnections)
High flowsLow flows

10
Mill Lane
AlfordStreeet(NthenS)
ChauncyLane
D/sHaleLane
U/sBroadway
D/sBroadway
LowerMemorialPark
WilliamsRoad
SilchesterDrive
PtcIrk
0
10
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
384000 385000 386000 387000 388000 389000 390000 391000 392000
Ammoniacal+NitrateNitrogenConcentration(mg/lN)
Easting
Downstream Changes in Moston Brook at Different Flows
7/2/2011 (0.362 m3/s)
16/12/2010 (0.167 m3/s)
7/9/2010 (0.107 m3/s)
25/6/2010 (0.046 m3/s)
19/09/1995 (0.038 m3/s)
Sample Points
Downstream Changes in Water Quality
A
UpstreamDownstream
B
Ammonia gets worse
at both A & B
Low conc
(good)
High conc
(bad)
At low flows
At higher flows

11
Mill Lane
AlfordStreeet(NthenS)
ChauncyLane
D/sHaleLane
U/sBroadway
D/sBroadway
LowerMemorialPark
WilliamsRoad
SilchesterDrive
PtcIrk
0
10
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
384000 385000 386000 387000 388000 389000 390000 391000 392000
Ammoniacal+NitrateNitrogenConcentration(mg/lN)
Easting
Downstream Changes in Moston Brook at Different Flows
7/2/2011 (0.362 m3/s)
16/12/2010 (0.167 m3/s)
7/9/2010 (0.107 m3/s)
25/6/2010 (0.046 m3/s)
19/09/1995 (0.038 m3/s)
Sample Points
Water Quality Ratios
A
UpstreamDownstream
B
Point B:
Observed ratio of
ammonia:phosphate
is typical of ratio in
sewage.
Point A:
Observed ratio of
ammonia:potassium
is typical of ratio in
landfill leachate.
Low conc
(good)
High conc
(bad)

12
The Sewer Network
7. Silchester Dr to R Irk
Location of sewage entering
culvert , photographs from EA
culvert inspection team, 16 & 17
Aug 2005
- - - culvert
Point B

13
Evidence for Misconnections
Diurnal Sewage Signal in Water Quality Logger (Point B)
Typical domestic
sewage signal
Mon WedFri
Sunday
(it rained
so signal
lost)

14
Strength of Evidence Tables
Gathering all the evidence into one place for stakeholders to review
See handout for details

15
2. How this shared understanding empowered people to
raise money and take action

16
Main Causes of Failure
Main Causes Measures
Top Sewage from
CSOs, sewage
misconnections
Middle Landfill leachate,
sewage
misconnections
(side tributary)
Bottom Sewage
misconnections or
leaking sewers,
sewage from CSOs

17
Main Causes of Failure and Selected Measures
Main Causes Measures
Top Sewage from
CSOs, sewage
misconnections
EA and UU act together to investigate any uncharted combined sewage overflows
(CSO) and wrong connections - easy ones now, harder ones next AMP cycle.
Middle Landfill leachate,
sewage
misconnections
(side tributary)
Hardman Fold: capping with suitable design, install leachate drain/interceptor &
enhanced toe drain. Surface water transfer from canal or surface drains to increase
flow in the brook, dilute & increase resilience to pollution.
Stop up and divert the drains at 2 sites; the Lancaster Club & Lower Memorial Park.
Wrong connection awareness campaigns either by post or email. Influence planners
and local authority to open up culverts.
Remove weir and replace with rock ramp for aeration.
Bottom Sewage
misconnections or
leaking sewers,
sewage from CSOs
Rationalisation of 6 CSOs into 2 in culvert between Kenyon Lane and Potters Lane.
EA to attend Category 3 pollution incidents that have been identified as a risk in
Moston Brook (for sewage).
UU and EA culvert team to develop a joint survey to identify known and unchartered
combined sewer overflows (CSOs) and wrong connections (with potentially some
water quality sampling).

18
Some Actions Implemented Since March 2013
Top UU: Fitting existing pumping station with new filter system and
building a new underground tank, chamber and sewers (see leaflet, next slide).
Top UU: Alford Pumping Station scope of works has been completed.
Top Work on misconnections in Alford Street area.
Top Project Officer: Mill Lane project Phases 1 & 2: to address urban diffuse pollution from
surface water run-off from a car breakers yard, industrial units and former landfill sites.
Top Project Officer: Green infrastructure & community development - sustainable urban
drainage (SuDS) footpath trial scheme at Wrigley Head to address urban diffuse pollution
from surface water drainage from former landfill sites.
Middle One significant issue that was identified at the Evidence & Measures workshops, and
where progress has not been made, is the Hardman Fold landfill site. Hardman Fold has
changed hands and is now privately owned.
Bottom UU: Installed a new filtering system near Monsall St. & Queen's Rd.
Top &
Bottom
UU: Have doubled their efforts into investigating sewage misconnections in Moston
Brook.
Project Officer: Community awareness-raising project on WQ & sewage misconnections.
Work on sewage infrastructure, misconnections, SuDS, community awareness & development.

19
Other Benefits & Funding Since March 2013
Other Environment Agency & Water Co projects – details not known ?
Other Local Authority projects:
•  Clean City Award for 4 new Moston Brook entrances & environmental improvements. ~£94k
•  Grant from Oldham Council for a new Moston Brook entrance. ~£17k
•  Investment from Oldham Council to improve access at Wrigley Head ~£16k
•  Successful acquisition by Lancashire Wildlife Trust of the remainder of the Moston
Fairway leading to:
•  Investment by People’s Postcode Lottery into a Forest Schools Project.
•  Viridor landfill tax grant for access improvements.
•  Grant from Veolia for habitat improvements and 2-day per week funded post.
~£106k
•  Manchester City Council have appointed consultants to treat non-waterside invasives.
Environment Agency have continued to treat waterside invasives.
•  Annual programme of community events delivered including annual Moston Brook Fun
Day.
•  Moston Brook Friends group committee meeting monthly.
•  Funding applications submitted to Tesco & Asda community funds.
•  Small grant received from FTPE & Forestry Commission for wildflower planting.
Moston Brook attracted up to 10 times the funding of similar catchments?

20
Changes Since 2013: Ammonia
§  Ammonia was the biggest WQ problem.
§  Since 2013 it has improved so dramatically that Moston Brook may now be at
good status for ammonia.
2013Year

21
Changes Since 2013: Dissolved Oxygen
§  At the same time dissolved oxygen levels have recovered.
2013Year

22
3. How can you get started?

23
Readily-Available Data: 1 or 2 Water Bodies
Dataset CaBA GIS Environment Agency Water Company
Water quality
monitoring
WFD status at
monitoring points
Original monitoring data
Pollution incidents Summaries per
water body
Detailed point data
Discharge consents Summaries per
water body
Detailed point data
Source apportionment Summaries for P
& N
More detail for P & N
Sewer network map Permission needed
Catchment to surface
water outfall
Permission needed

24
Readily-Available Data: Many Water Bodies
CaBA GIS dataset
§  Data collated in the categories: biodiversity, water quality, flood risk and
urban deprivation

25
More Information
Moston Brook Summary Report
On the internet, search for:
“Moston Brook Summary Report for the
Evidence and Measures Project”
Evidence & Measures
2-page Summary Notes
(handouts)

26
Proposed Programme of Work Being Discussed
A chance to get involved
§  Collaborative with multiple partners;
§  Aiming to apply learning from Moston Brook to other areas in the Irwell.
1.  Review the impact of the measures implemented on Moston Brook
a.  Record measures implemented on Moston Brook.
b.  Review their impact in terms of objectives agreed with stakeholders.
(For example: water quality, community engagement, improvements to deprived areas, flood risk,
biodiversity, recreation opportunities etc.)
c.  Produce bulletin to show benefits.
2.  Use readily-available CaBA datasets & learning from Moston Brook to
produce initial evidence base to agree actions in the Irwell
a.  Meet with Irwell CaBA team and identify their key issues and locations.
b.  Use the readily-available CaBA datasets to rapidly produce initial evidence against these
key issues. (Potential to tie-up with LIFE-IP project in the North-West.)
c.  At a workshop, stakeholders review evidence and identify what areas and measures will
be prioritised.
d.  Identify funding mechanisms for the agreed measures.
e.  Carry out more detailed evaluation of the evidence if stakeholders require.

27
Conclusions
Evidence Stakeholder Workshops
Shared Understanding
Agreement on What Needs Doing and Where
People Available to Get Things Done
(Moston Brook Project Officer, United Utilities)
Improvements On The Ground (and In The Water)

29
Ratios of different water quality components
To identify discharges from landfill and sewage
At point A (Broadway to Williams Rd)
§  Blue diamonds show observed ratio of
ammonia + nitrate (N):potassium (K)
§  Red line shows average ratio in landfill.
At point B (Williams Rd to the Irk)
§  Blue diamonds show observed ratio of
ammonia:phosphate.
§  Red line shows average ratio in sewage.
Shows that A is predominantly a landfill
source and B predominantly a sewage
source.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0
Increasein[AmmoniacalN+Nitrate-N](mg/lN)
Increase in Potassium (mg/l)
Changes in [NH4 + NO3] and K between Broadway and Williams Rd on Moston Brook
Williams Road - d/s Broadway
LandSim Landfill NH4:K Ratio
20%
10%
5%
1%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
IncreaseinAmmoniacalNitrogend/sofWilliamsRoad(mg/lN)
Increase in Orthophosphate d/s of Williams Road (mg/l P)
Changes in NH4 and PO4 between Williams Rd and the Irk on Moston Brook
to ptc R Irk
EA Guidance Sewage Ratio
% is %Sewage in Water
Ammonia+Nitrate
Potassium
Ammonia
Phosphate

Guy Pluckwell
Environment Agency Project Manager

Love your river Telford
!   Evidence

!   Main objectives
!   Improve water quality and habitat by working
efficiently together
!   Community engagement and participation
!   Raise awareness
! Mis-connections
!   Pollution prevention
!   Physical improvements

Working together
Clean
Stream
Team
Volunteers
groups
Local
Community
Business
Community
Stakeholder
organisations
Schools

Working together
!   Clean Stream Team
•  Proactive multi organisational team
!   Volunteer Groups
•  Support
•  Training
•  Equipment

Working together
!   School education
programme
•  River Rangers
!   Local community

Working together
!   Business Community
!   Organisations

!  Clean Stream Team
!  React to reports
!  Seek and investigate
!  Community liaison
!  Pollution Prevention
!  Advice

!  Clean Stream Team
!  1 contact number
!   familiar faces
!  1 agreed approach
!  Togetherness
!  Efficient approach
!  Improved relationships

Working together
! Deculverting

Working together
!  In-channel improvements

Benefits
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Cost
of
project Potential
savings
realised

by
project
238
1825
Cost
v
Potential
saving
(£k)

Looking beyond
!   External
funding

Transferable model
!   Bromsgrove
!   Worcester? Hereford? Gloucester? Evesham? Merseyside?
Portsmouth? East Anglia? Ireland? Trentside? Amber Valley?
!   See blog : https://environmentagency.blog.gov.uk
!   See Twitter: @LYR_Telford
Questions?

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
2

The
scale
of
the
challenge

WFD
classiﬁca6on

vs
popula6on

density

STW

Urban

P
Source
Appor6onment

•  Large
areas
where
we

clearly
need
to
address
P

load
from
treatment
works

•  …but
a
large
number
of

rivers
where
other
urban

sources
are
a
bigger
issue

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
3

Impact
of
urban
areas

Why
are
United
U9li9es
interested
in
urban
diffuse
pollu9on?

•  High
level
of
interac6on
between
urban
run-‐off
and
our
sewers

•  Risk
of
misconnec6ons
to
surface
water
sewers

•  Many
combined
systems
that
spill
to
river
at
peak
flow

•  Overloading
and
blockages
cause
sewer
flooding
of
proper6es

•  Our
treatment
works
are
not
able
to
remove
many
pollutants

•  Many
chemicals
are
already
highly
prevalent
in
the
environment

Flooding

Misconnec6ons

Sewer

misuse

Tackling

pollu6on
at

source

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
4

Urban
diffuse
pollu9on:
impact
for
water
industry

•  Surface
water
runoffs
to

sewers

•  CSO
spills

•  Sewer
flooding

•  Pumping
sta6on
capacity

Sewer

network:

Reduced

capacity
and

opera9onal

performance

•  Screening
issues

•  Flow
compliance

•  Process
capacity

(load/volume)

•  FE
quality
compliance

•  Sludge
volume

increase
&
quality

reduc6on

Sewage

treatment

works:

Reduced

capacity
and

opera9onal

performance

Reduced

water
quality

Nega9ve

reputa9onal

impact

Permit
failure

Prosecu9on

Fines

Opera9onal

impact

Pollu9on

incidents

Asset
and

customer

flooding

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
5

Chemical
Inves9ga9ons
Programme
Phase
2
(CIP2)

What
are
we
doing
and
why?

The
stated
aims
of
CIP2
are
to:

•  Move
to
a
more
site-‐specific
assessment
of

individual
discharges
priori6sed
by

environmental
risk;

•  Provide
a
defini6ve
(high
confidence)

assessment
of
EQS
compliance
downstream
of

discharges;

•  Assess
the
contribu6on
made
by
WwTW

effluents
to
concentra6ons
of
trace
substances;

•  Establish
demonstra6on-‐scale
trials
of
novel

treatment
processes
for
trace
substance

removal

•  Explore
a
catchment-‐based
rather
than

discharge-‐based
approach
to
pollu6on

management.

Samples
analysed
for
70
substances
including

pharmaceu6cals
such
as
ibuprofen,

contracep6ve
hormones
(oestrogens),
garden

products
and
household
cleaning
products.

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
6

Urban
diffuse
pollu9on:
routes

Mobilisa9on
of
diffuse

pollutants
through
surface/
sub-‐surface

water
runoffs

Diffuse
pollutants:

Par6culate
macer

Nutrients

Metals

Endocrine-‐disrupters

Hydrocarbons

Solvents

Herbicides

Pes6cides

Faecal
coliforms

Trigger:

Rainfall
events

(and
snow
melt)

Urban
pathways:

Impermeable
surfaces

Piped
drains

CSOs

Soil

Copyright
©
United
U6li6es
Water
Limited
2016
7

Sustainable
Urban
Drainage
Systems
(SuDS)

Provides
a
dual
beneﬁt

-‐  Slows
surface
water
runoﬀ

-‐  Reduces
pollu6on
at
source

Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester

Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (6)

Semelhante a Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester

Semelhante a Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester (20)

Mais de CaBASupport

Mais de CaBASupport (20)

Último

Último (20)

Urban Water Management Workshop Manchester