Using flood risk information in spatial planning

A review into how information on all sources of flooding is used in spatial planning to achieve good outcomes for flood and coastal risk management

Documents

Using flood risk information in spatial planning - project report (391KB) PDF

Using flood risk information in spatial planning - evidence report (757KB) PDF

Project summary

This project analysed how information on all sources of flooding is used in spatial planning to help manage flood risk. It used the findings to improve guidance.

Context

Planning policy in England and Wales steers development away from areas at highest risk of flooding. Where this isn’t possible, developments must be designed to adequately manage the risks to people and be resilient to flooding for their lifetime, and not increase flooding elsewhere. Local planning authorities (LPAs) produce strategic flood risk assessments (SFRAs) in England and strategic flood consequence assessments (SFCAs) in Wales to support planning decisions. LPAs use these assessments to locate new developments in areas with the lowest risk of flooding and to reduce the impacts of flooding in existing communities.

Approach

Over 150 policy and guidance documents, flood assessments and research reports were reviewed. The project also looked at national flood risk planning policies and recommendations from Defra’s previous research on strategic flood risk assessments (2009) to inform the work. Interviews with planners and flood risk management staff helped to identify ways of using flood risk information effectively in spatial planning.

Findings

Good practice criteria were developed using national planning policy requirements, and the project also identified where existing guidance needs to be improved, or is missing. Topics included considering all sources of flood risk, climate change and assessing cumulative risk. The feedback from interviews was used to develop other good practice criteria for developing and using the SFRA/SFCA, including collaborative working and using the evidence to achieve wider environmental outcomes.

The criteria were used to identify good practice in the documents that were reviewed. 18 case studies were looked at in more detail to describe good practice examples. Little information was available for Wales, therefore the evidence and subsequent review and analysis were largely limited to England. The report focuses on recommendations for English planning policy and plan making. A separate set of recommendations for Wales is included based on the evidence available.

Using the project findings

The Environment Agency used initial recommendations to update the online SFRA guidance (Environment Agency) and flood risk standing advice in summer 2019.

To complement this, a good practice guide for strategic flood risk assessments has been developed which includes the case studies and good practice criteria (Environment Agency, ADEPT, CIWEM). This will support local planning authorities in England to produce SFRAs that meet planning policy and deliver outcomes for flood and coastal risk management. The recommendations from the research have also been used to inform updates to the National Planning Policy Framework (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, 2021), the Planning Practice Guide, and the government’s planning review.

Project information

Project and Theme manager: Hayley Bowman, Flood and Coastal Risk Management Research, Policy, Strategy and Investment Theme Manager

Research contractor: AECOM Ltd

Research collaborators: Coleman Planning and Environmental; RAB Consultants; Capita.

This project was commissioned by the Environment Agency’s FCRM Directorate, as part of the joint Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Research and Development Programme.

A Welsh translation of the summary is also available.

Published 1 March 2021
Last updated 10 December 2021 + show all updates
  1. A link to the strategic flood risk assessment good practice guide has been added to the 'using the project findings' section.

  2. The project outputs have been published under documents heading. The details paragraph has been removed and replaced by a project summary. The project is marked as complete.

  3. First published.