Flood Risk. Highway works may increase the volume of surface water entering a watercourse and affect the natural drainage of an area. Highways can potentially increase water levels in watercourses because of the effects of bridges, embankments and cuttings. Cuttings may affect the level of groundwater. Often, proposals for new roads or bypasses involve works within a floodplain and/or new river crossings. Highways Agency construction and maintenance activities in or near water have the potential to affect the bed and banks of a watercourse and the quantity of the water by: • repairs, maintenance or improvements to any structure in, over or above a watercourse • erection or construction of any structure, permanent or temporary, in, over or above a watercourse • diversion of flows along a watercourse • works within a channel of a watercourse or lake • works within the vicinity of a river or wetland • any works likely to increase the risk of flooding. Highway works can also affect the ability of the Drainage Authority to undertake maintenance by building within the maintenance margin next to a river or watercourse (commonly 10 metres from a main river watercourse or flood defence, but there may be local variations in this). For proposed new highway schemes construction and maintenance activities, the Parties will work together to identify and gain an appreciation of the key constraints and potential consequences for the environment from flooding. The Parties will seek to avoid risks where possible or agree reasonable mitigation measures for such effects to ensure that the receiving environment is adequately protected from the risk of flooding which, on major highway schemes, will form part of an Environmental Impact Assessment. The vulnerability of the existing trunk road and motorway network to flooding (i.e. fluvial, pluvial, groundwater or coastal) should be properly assessed and appropriate mitigation or contingency measures put in place where a risk of flooding is identified. The Parties will work together to implement a programme to identify and effectively manage flooding hotspots on the network. Every flood defence asset has a programmed inspection. Information collected by the Environment Agency is collated and recorded on the National Flood and Coastal Defence Dataset (NFCDD). These inspections are carried out to comply with the Environment Agency corporate targets agreed with the Department of Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The Environment Agency employs dedi...
Flood Risk. (i) To the best of Oakland's knowledge, none of the ---------- Oakland Facilities is located in either a special service district or an area for which federal flood risk insurance is necessary.
Flood Risk. 30. All RM applications shall demonstrate how the mitigation measures from the FRA have been incorporated, both in the final design and in the construction phase. Wind
Flood Risk. None of the Facilities is located in either a special service district or an area for which federal flood risk insurance is necessary.
Flood Risk. The Permit Holder understands that Evergreen Brick Works is operated by Evergreen, a national registered charity, under the terms of a lease agreement with the City of Toronto (“the City”) and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (“TRCA”). The Permit Holder understands and agrees that Evergreen Brick Works is located within a flood plain and that there has been and will continue to be a likelihood of both nuisance and actual flooding on the premise. The Permit Holder acknowledges that Evergreen may require the site to be evacuated without advance notice based on flood warning indicators. The Permit Holder acknowledges that any damage or cost occasioned by such evacuations and/or flood events to the Permit Holder and equipment, installations, systems, facilities and all other goods and work from time to time is the responsibility and sole risk of the Permit Holder, who shall have no recourse against Evergreen, TRCA or the City in any such events.
Flood Risk. Why is a flood risk assessment not being suggested in the proposed development agreement, as this is an opportunity to conduct one? There is a need for a moral decision to be made on this issue; It is considered by the developer that a flood risk is not necessary, specifically because it was not a requirement at the time of the original planning permission. Attempts to force this issue in a new agreement would have produced the position outlined in the answers to several questions above. The moral force of this issue would be more acute if the site was specifically at risk because of its location, but this is not the case, being protected by 2 sea defence walls and a significant stretch of beach to attenuate wave action. The sea and weather conditions that would affect this site would leave significant stretches of England’s coastal towns including Thanet’s underwater and with major damage to buildings. On this basis insisting on a specific provision on this issue now would be unreasonable in relation to the lack of unique risk involved.
