Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme

Transcription

1 Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme (External Consultation Version) Revision 1 November 2005 B&V Ref: Environment Agency Midlands Region Olton Court 10 Warwick Road, Olton, Birmingham, B92 7HX Telephone

2 Page has been left intentionally blank

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY...iii SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose of the Document Location Background to the Project SECTION 2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES Objectives of the Project SECTION 3 THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT Introduction Data Collection and Study Area The Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS Generic Environmental Conditions Site Specific Environmental Conditions Sawley Trent Meadows Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick Constraints and Opportunities SECTION 4 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS How the options were developed Standard of Protection Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS Options Alignments of Flood Defences (Option 3) for Scheme Areas Sawley Trent Meadows Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick Flood Embankments Flood Walls Drainage SECTION 5 CONSULTATION Previous Consultation Current Consultation Future Consultation SECTION 6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Our approach to impact assessment How we assessed the impacts Impacts of Do Nothing (Option 1) Impacts of Do Minimum (Option 2) November 2005 Page i

4 6.5 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Generic Impacts & Mitigation Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Site Specific Impacts & Mitigation Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Sawley Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Trent Meadows Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Attenborough Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Rylands Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Meadows Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Colwick Cumulative Impacts...59 SECTION 7 ENHANCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES Areas of Proposed Environmental Enhancement Enhancement Opportunities at Sawley Enhancement Opportunities at Trent Meadows Enhancement Opportunities at Attenborough Enhancement Opportunities at Rylands Enhancement Opportunities at Meadows Enhancement Opportunities at Colwick...65 SECTION 8 NEXT STEPS IN THE EIA PROCEDURE...67 SECTION 9 FURTHER INFORMATION...69 ANNEXES Annex 1: Annex 2: Annex 3: Annex 4: Annex 5: List of Consultees Glossary Planning Documents EIA Scoping Impact Matrices Plans and Drawings FIGURES (in Annex 5 unless otherwise stated) Figure 1 Extent of Scheme (in main text) Figure 2a Indicative Outline Design Sawley Figure 2b Indicative Landscape Plan Sawley Figure 3a Indicative Outline Design Trent Meadows Figure 3b Indicative Landscape Plan Trent Meadows Figure 4a Indicative Outline Design Attenborough Figure 4b Indicative Landscape Plan Attenborough Figure 5a Indicative Outline Design Rylands Figure 5b Indicative Landscape Plan Rylands Figure 6a Indicative Outline Design Meadows Figure 6b Indicative Landscape Plan Meadows Figure 7a Indicative Outline Design Colwick Figure 7b Indicative Landscape Plan Colwick Figure 8 Hierarchy of Flood Defence Management (in main text) Figure 9 Example of Profile for Flood Embankment (in main text) Figure 10 Example of Profile for Flood Wall (in main text) Figure 11 Summary of EIA Process (in main text) November 2005 Page ii

5 SUMMARY Purpose of the The Environment Agency is committed to managing the flood risk in Nottingham. We are investigating options to protect properties and people along the left bank of the River Trent through our Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme. Over 15,000 properties could benefit from this scheme and we are currently seeking public comment on our proposals. As part of the Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS) we are looking to: reduce flood risk to homes and businesses on Nottingham s left bank. improve the biodiversity, amenity and recreation value of the river corridor. consider the interests of individuals and organisations. General Location Plan We have produced this as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. There will be a month long consultation period for this document, during which time we welcome any comments, questions or concerns about the options under consideration. We would also welcome any suggestions for environmental enhancement. Feed back forms are available from our website or alternatively please submit your comments to Jody Harris at the following address: Jody Harris Environmental Assessment Officer Environment Agency Olton Court 10 Warwick Road Olton Solihull B92 7HX Telephone Nottingham.FAS@environment-agency.gov.uk The closing date for consultation is Friday 23 rd December Due to the large number of comments we are expecting to receive, we are unlikely to be able to answer any queries individually. However, we will summarise responses to queries in a newsletter to be published early in We will also update the website regularly with frequently asked questions. November 2005 Page iii

6 Further copies of the, outline design drawings, and indicative landscape plans are also available from our website or from the address on the previous page. We will also be publicising the in a series of roadshows. More information on these roadshows is available on our website. Background to the Project Nottingham has a well-documented history of flooding, dating back to The most serious, recent flood occurred in March 1947 when 28 miles of streets, 3,000 properties and 86 factories in the city centre were flooded. In response, during the 1950s, flood defences were constructed through Nottingham. Fifty years on, these defences still protect Nottingham from the River Trent. Although the flood defences have been well maintained over the last half-century, they are nearing the end of their design life. The standard of flood protection provided to some areas is below that currently recommended by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Fluvial Trent Flood Risk Management Strategy Following the widespread flooding in 1998 and 2000, the Environment Agency carried out an appraisal of flood risk along the River Trent, between Stoke-on-Trent and Newark. We assessed the condition and height of the existing defences and investigated options to improve flood protection to properties. Our appraisal highlighted the need for an increased standard of flood protection in Nottingham and showed that the best method of doing this would be to construct new, or raise existing, flood defences. In March 2005 we published our findings in the Fluvial Trent Flood Risk Management Strategy (the Fluvial Trent Strategy ). Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme Having identified the flood risk to Nottingham, we carried out more detailed investigations through the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS. We have concluded that: some areas of Nottingham s Left Bank are only protected against a flood which has a 1 in 25 1 chance of occurring in any year most areas are protected against a 1 in 50 annual chance event some stretches of existing defence are in poor condition 1 Floods are categorised by their size and the frequency with which they are expected to occur. A 1 in 25 annual chance event has a 1 in 25, or 4%, chance of occurring in any given year. A 1 in 100 annual chance event has a 1 in 100, or 1%, chance of occurring in any year, but its effects can be very large. November 2005 Page iv

7 What are our options? The options being considered for each location are, in summary; do nothing do minimum or business as usual construct flood defences We always consider the do nothing and the do minimum options for all our schemes as a baseline against which all other options are assessed. For Nottingham, our preferred solution is to increase the height of existing flood defences and to construct new defences where required. We propose to construct these defences to protect against a 1 in 100 annual chance event. Where are we proposing to work? We are looking to improve flood protection between the M1 at Sawley and Radcliffe Railway viaduct in Colwick; a distance of 27km. This will reduce flood risk to over 15,000 properties. Within this area, works need to be carried out at six geographical areas (shown on Figure 1): Sawley Trent Meadow Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick Figure 1: Extent of Scheme November 2005 Page v

8 What stage are we at? We have already begun consultation in order to develop a number of options for each of the six areas. We have produced outline design drawings for each area and are currently seeking your input on: the proposed route of the defences the proposed type of defence (walls or embankments) any local features that could benefit from or constrain the scheme What are the impacts? In the long term, the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS will have a positive impact on the city. It will reduce the flood risk to thousands of people s homes and businesses, enhance people s enjoyment of the river, and improve the existing environment. However, there are potentially some negative environmental impacts associated with new or raised defences. The most significant negative impacts are likely to be: potential disturbance of archaeological interest along the Trent floodplain the visual impact of new and raised defences particularly in areas of high historic, scenic or recreation value such as Sawley, Attenborough, and the Meadows disturbance to areas of wildlife value, including a number of Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs) and Attenborough Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) In the short-term, there may also be some impacts associated with our construction activities. These may include restricted access to properties and businesses, increased traffic and noise, and disturbance to the local environment. We will minimise these impacts by consulting people affected and by following the Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment processes. When the scheme is complete, there will be a modest increase in flood levels both upstream and downstream of Nottingham during periods of extreme flooding. We plan to ease the impact to these areas through appropriate mitigation. We also intend to undertake a separate study, investigating long term solutions to reduce flood risk to these communities. What are the opportunities? This scheme offers an opportunity to enhance the riverside areas through the city. We have produced indicative landscape plans for the six areas. These plans highlight the enhancement opportunities that we are exploring and include: creating wetland areas at Sawley enhancing the river and adjacent habitat for fish providing additional footpaths, improved access and recreation throughout Nottingham enhancing the Attenborough SSSI lakes and other wildlife sites improving the area for specific species, for example bats and otters November 2005 Page vi

9 When do we plan to undertake work? We are currently in the scheme s Appraisal phase. This involves demonstrating that building the scheme is technically possible, environmentally acceptable and best use of public money. Provided this is the case, we will construct the scheme in stages over the next six years. The Way Forward We will consider all comments received on this before finalising the outline design for the scheme. We will then proceed with the detailed design of the scheme and undertake further environmental assessment and evaluation. The environmental impact assessment will be documented in an Environmental Statement. The Environmental Statement will include an Environmental Action Plan, which will outline how the environmental impacts associated with the scheme will be managed and mitigated. We will continue to consult with landowners, residents and interested parties throughout the design and construction of this scheme. November 2005 Page vii

10 This page has been left intentionally blank. November 2005 Page viii

11 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION This section explains why we are developing a flood alleviation scheme for the left bank of the River Trent through Nottingham. It covers: the purpose of this report the main legislation an overview of the need for the scheme 1.1 Purpose of the Document The Environment Agency is the leading Government authority for the protection and improvement of the environment in England and Wales. We have produced this document as the first stage of our Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS). EIA is the process to ensure that environmental impacts of schemes are identified prior to the work being carried out, so that proposals can be modified or managed in such a way that adverse impacts are avoided or minimised The requirement for EIA derives from the European Community Directive 85/337/EC, and amended by Directive 97/11/EC. These Directives are implemented in the UK by a series of Regulations and those which relate to our EIA works are: Environmental Impact Assessment (Land Drainage Improvement Works) Regulations 1999 (SI 99/1783 as amended by SI 2005/1399) The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 (SI99/293) This report presents the environmental scoping of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS. It outlines the existing environmental conditions and makes a preliminary assessment of the likely environmental impacts of the proposed options. It allows interested parties to provide feedback on the EIA with any concerns, opportunities or alternative views relevant to the proposed works We will produce an Environmental Statement, which will document the EIA process and include a detailed EIA of the preferred option. The Environmental Statement will accompany any associated planning applications. 1.2 Location The Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS follows the line of the River Trent through Nottingham, stretching from the M1 at Sawley to Radcliffe Railway viaduct in Colwick. Due to the size of the area, we have split it into the following six geographical areas: Sawley Trent Meadows November 2005 Page 9

12 Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick The boundaries of these areas are shown on Figure 1. Each area is shown in more detail on Figures 2-7 in Annex Background to the Project Flood risk in Nottingham The city of Nottingham, situated on both banks of the River Trent, contains over 22,000 properties which are currently at risk from a flood which has a 1 in chance of occurring in any year (1in 100 annual chance event) In March 1947, thousands of properties were flooded nationally and Nottingham was one of the worst hit areas. Twenty eight miles of streets, including 3000 properties and 86 factories, were flooded. In response to this, a comprehensive scheme of flood defences was constructed during the 1950s to protect Nottingham The defences prevented significant flooding during the November 2000 event but parts of the city did flood. We classified this flood as a 1 in 33 annual chance event. Arkwright Street, Nottingham, during the 1947 event. Attenborough Railway Village, during the November 2000 event. 2 Floods are categorised by their size and the frequency with which they are expected to occur. A 1 in 100 annual chance event has a 1 in 100, or 1%, chance of occurring in any given year. November 2005 Page 10

13 Our Approach We adopt a tiered approach to investigate flood risk, as shown in Figure 8. This approach is recommended by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). The Fluvial Trent Strategy We issued the Fluvial Trent Flood Risk Management Strategy ( Fluvial Trent Strategy ) in This was a high level technical, environmental and economic appraisal of options for all the flood risk areas in the 200km length of the fluvial River Trent between Stoke on Trent and Newark. Figure 8: Hierarchy of Flood Defence Management Flood Risk Management Strategy (Fluvial Trent Strategy) Detailed Scheme Appraisal (Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS) Construction and Management The findings of the Fluvial Trent Strategy can be summarised as follows: flood defences through Nottingham are of insufficient height and in poor condition raising or construction of new defences is technically, economically and environmentally the most appropriate option to improve protection the solution providing best value for money is to protect against a 1 in 100 annual chance flood event there is opportunity for environmental enhancement and improvement to leisure and recreation facilities along the river frontage separate appraisals should be carried out for the left and right banks of Nottingham, as these are effectively independent flood cells November 2005 Page 11

14 Nottingham Trent Left Bank Flood Alleviation Scheme In accordance with recommendations of the Fluvial Trent Strategy we are now undertaking a detailed appraisal for improvements along the left bank through Nottingham (the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS ). Up to 15,000 properties are potentially at risk from flooding on the left bank of the Trent, in a 1 in 100 annual chance event. This appraisal process involves demonstrating that building the scheme is technically possible, environmentally acceptable and the best use of public money. Provided this is the case, we will construct the scheme in stages over the next six years. November 2005 Page 12

15 SECTION 2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES This section describes the objectives of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS. These include: technical objectives environmental objectives The section also describes how these objectives will be developed as the scheme progresses. 2.1 Objectives of the Project Our primary objectives for the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS are to: 1. Implement the recommendations of the Fluvial Trent Strategy relating to flood management options for the Sawley, Trent Meadows, Attenborough, Rylands, Meadows and Colwick areas of Nottingham. The Fluvial Trent Strategy indicates that constructing new and raising existing flood defences is the preferred option at these areas. 2. Determine the appropriate alignments and design of defences taking into account issues, such as: reduction of flood risk legislative requirements technical feasibility costs impact on the environment The environmental objectives for the scheme are outlined in Table 2.1. We have developed these objectives in line with our vision for the environment and a sustainable future As the scheme progresses we will develop more detailed site specific environmental objectives. These will be included in the Environmental Statement. November 2005 Page 13

16 Table 2.1: Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS Environmental Objectives Environment Agency Vision Themes A better quality of life An enhanced environment for wildlife Cleaner air for everyone Improved and protected inland and coastal waters Restored, protected land and healthier soils A 'greener' business world Wiser sustainable use of natural resources Limiting and adapting to climate change Reduced flood risk Objectives for Nottingham Trent Left Bank Scheme Provide clear overall social benefit in the provision of flood risk management. To protect features of local archaeological and historic interest. To design flood protection (if required) that enhances the visual amenity of the neighbourhood. To identify opportunities for development and redevelopment in areas affected by the proposed works, including enhanced recreational facilities. To minimise the adverse impacts on affected communities and individuals including noise, visual and traffic impacts during construction of flood protection assets (if required). To ensure proposed construction works result in minimal disruption to infrastructure services. To minimise impacts on biodiversity and to identify opportunities for ecological enhancement. To protect air quality by avoiding or minimising emissions from construction activities (if required). To protect water quality by avoiding or minimising emissions from construction activities (if required). To avoid or minimise the impact of works on beneficial land uses, including adjacent agricultural land uses. Where opportunities for development and redevelopment are identified, ensure sustainable outcomes are developed. To incorporate sustainable design and procurement initiatives across the scheme. To ensure the potential impacts from climate change are considered and incorporated in the scheme. To reduce the number of properties at a high risk of flooding. November 2005 Page 14

17 SECTION 3 THE EXISTING ENVIRONMENT This section describes the existing environment. It includes: an explanation of how the information was collected a general description of the existing environment of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS study area. a description of the generic environmental features a more detailed description of the key environmental features of each area 3.1 Introduction In Section 3.2, we set out our study area and the methods used to collect the data. We then describe the existing environment for the study area. In EIA it is standard approach to describe the existing environment in terms of ten receptors: Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Air & Climate Landscape & Visual Amenity Water, including navigation Cultural Heritage, Archaeology & Material Assets Traffic & Transport Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology Use of Natural Resources Due to the nature and scale of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS the existing conditions for a number of these receptors are similar across all the areas within the scheme. We consider these as generic receptors (see Section 3.4): Air and Climate Water, including navigation Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology Use of Natural Resources Where the environmental conditions differ significantly between the sites, we consider these separately for each area. These receptors are as follows and are discussed in Sections : Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets November 2005 Page 15

18 Traffic and Transport The environmental features of each area are also shown on the Indicative Landscape Plans in Annex Data Collection and Study Area We collected environmental data for the study area from the following sources: desk study research walk over surveys by Engineers, Ecologists and Landscape Architects information and comments from our environmental specialists an archaeological desk based assessment consultation (refer to Section 5) The limit of the study area is the 1 in 100 annual chance floodplain as shown in Figure 1. There are a number of tributaries that flow into the Trent within the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS. These form separate flood cells and are not within our study area We have summarised the environmental data in the Indicative Landscape Plans in Annex 5. There is a plan for each of the six areas. For reference purposes, we have sub-divided the areas into reaches which are marked on the plans and referenced in the text. For example, the area at Sawley is subdivided into nine reaches, numbered from S1 to S The Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS This section provides an overview of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS study area. The scheme extends from Sawley in Derbyshire, through the centre of Nottingham and finishes just downstream of Colwick Country Park in Nottinghamshire. We have listed the affected counties and local planning authorities in Table 3.1. Details of the relevant development plans produced by each planning authority are listed in Annex The scheme lies mainly within English Nature s Trent Valley and Rises Natural Area. Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire have each developed a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP). These include lists of priority species and habitats which require protection, active restoration and creation respectively. We have presented the main water related BAP habitat and species for each county in Table The scheme lies within the Countryside Agency s Trent Valley Washland and Trent and Belvoir Vales Landscape Character Areas. November 2005 Page 16

19 Table 3.1: Administrative Counties and Local Planning Authorities Area County Local Planning Authority Sawley Derbyshire Erewash Borough Council Trent Meadows Derbyshire Erewash Borough Council Attenborough Rylands Nottinghamshire Nottinghamshire Broxtowe Borough Council and Erewash Borough Council Broxtowe Borough Council & Nottingham City Council Meadows Nottinghamshire Nottingham City Council Colwick Nottinghamshire Nottingham City Council and Gedling Borough Council Table 3.2 Water Related Biodiversity Action Plan Species and Habitats Biodiversity Action Plan Lowland Derbyshire Relevant Areas Sawley Trent Meadows Nottinghamshire Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick Water Related Habitat & Species Habitat Rivers and streams Standing open water including ponds, lakes and canals Lowland swamps, mires, fens and reedbeds Wet woodland Floodplain grazing marsh Species Otter (Lutra lutra) Water vole (Arvicola terrestris) Habitats Lowland wet grassland Rivers and streams Eutrophic and mesotrophic standing waters Species Otter (Lutra lutra) Water vole (Arvicola terrestris) Freshwater white-clawed crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) November 2005 Page 17

20 3.4 Generic Environmental Conditions In this section, we describe the environmental receptors that are similar for all the six geographical areas. These generic environmental receptors are: Air and Climate Water, including navigation Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology Use of Natural Resources Air and Climate Air quality is better in the rural areas, such as Sawley and Attenborough. Nearer the centre of Nottingham or near major roads the local air quality is lower The impact of climate change will be taken into consideration in the design. Current Defra guidance indicates that increases of up to 20% in peak flows could be experienced within 50 years. Water, including navigation The River Trent and its floodplain have been significantly modified in the past. As a result, their ecological interest has been reduced. The river and its non-urbanised floodplain, however, still remain a significant ecological resource. We will maintain and enhance its value, wherever possible There are a number of tributaries of the River Trent through Nottingham. The largest are the River Erewash at Attenborough, and the River Leen at Rylands Lakes formed by gravel extraction are a characteristic landscape feature and many now provide an important ecological and recreational resource, particularly at Attenborough and Colwick Country Park There are several active canals along the left bank. These include the Erewash Canal at Sawley along with the Beeston Canal connecting Rylands and the Meadows. The River Trent is fully navigable between Sawley and Beeston Lock, and again downstream of Meadow Lane Lock at Trent Bridge. Meadow Lane Lock, where Beeston Canal meets the Trent. Meadows area. November 2005 Page 18

21 Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology The solid geology comprises rocks of the Mercia Mudstone and Sherwood Sandstone Groups of the Triassic Age. The Triassic rocks are underlain by Coal Measures Overlying the rocks are superficial deposits of Pleistocene and Recent Age. Alluvium and terrace gravels are widespread throughout the floodplain. The soils are mainly silts and sands, which reflect the underlying geology. There is widespread man-made filled ground linked with the extensive urban and commercial development of the left bank The Sherwood Sandstone is a recognised aquifer. The terrace gravels also act as an aquifer and are likely to provide hydraulic links to the river. This means that water can flow underground to the river. Use of Natural Resources The floodplain provides a valuable resource for the extraction of gravels. Our works will need to ensure that there is no significant impact on the availability of gravels or the day to day running of the extraction sites. 3.5 Site Specific Environmental Conditions In this section, we describe the key environmental receptors that are specific to each area. These are: Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport 3.6 Sawley Sawley currently has existing flood protection through most of the area. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 2a in Annex 5. Main features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 2b in Annex 5. Existing flood embankment to the west of Harrington Bridge. November 2005 Page 19

22 Human Beings and Land Use The urban communities of Sawley and Long Eaton form much of this area and are mainly residential. Nearer the river, the agricultural fields are crossed by a network of informal footpaths, which are regularly used by local residents. The Trent Lock Golf Club is also an important local recreational resource The River Trent at this location is partly navigable and a significant number of leisure craft join it from both the Erewash and Trent and Mersey canals. Sawley Marina is located to the south of the river along Sawley Cut The land around the existing defences is mainly agricultural. The existing defences also run around the old Sawley town centre, which includes residential properties, the Harrington Arms Public House and All Saints Parish Church. Flora and Fauna There is one Derbyshire Site of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC) to the west of Sawley close to the existing defences (Sawley Carr SINC (ER037)). This has been established along the old course of the River Trent. To the east of Sawley, there are two SINCs close to the proposed areas of work near Sheetstore sluice, namely the Erewash Canal SINC (ER150) and Lock Lane Ash Tip Nature Reserve (ER061) A number of other SINCs are located in the wider area but will not be affected by the scheme Outside of the SINCs, the fields behind the main defences are generally arable or intensively managed agricultural grassland. These are of a limited nature conservation value. Apart from the golf course, the fields riverside of the main defences are generally less intensively managed and have a higher value for wildlife There are a number of protected species in the local area. The river and the adjacent meadows are used by otter and water vole. Bats are present, with mature trees, buildings and other structures, such as the railway bridges, providing potential roosting habitat. There are also records of great crested newts in the Long Eaton area. Landscape and Visual Amenity Around the old town centre, the landscape still has a rural quality and is visually attractive. The settlement of Sawley has an attractive village setting and is designated as a Conservation Area. All Saints Church is a major landmark in the local landscape and is attractively set with mature trees in its grounds. These, and a large number of other trees within the Sawley Conservation Area, are subject to Tree Preservation Orders The existing flood embankment is a significant feature in the flat and open landscape. However, it sits well in the floodplain and does not restrict views of the surrounding countryside. In sections, the embankment is well masked from nearby housing by a tall hedgerow. November 2005 Page 20

23 As the landscape is very flat, the large residential areas of New Sawley and Long Eaton to the north are not visually intrusive. The railway viaduct, crossing the floodplain and the River Trent, is an attractive landscape feature The fields along the river are fairly open, being a mixture of arable land and grassland. Field boundaries are mainly hedgerows with only scattered mature trees. There is more extensive woodland to the west of Harrington Bridge, which forms Sawley Carr SINC. Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets We have undertaken an archaeological assessment to identify sites of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental interest likely to be affected by the scheme. The features found are discussed below and their locations are marked by the letters A to G on Figure 2b in Annex 5. Cropmarks and palaeochannel (A). The fields to the north of the defences in reach S2 contain cropmarks, which may be prehistoric. It is possible that the surrounding area may contain archaeological remains. In addition, the flood defences twice cross a palaeochannel. Sawley medieval village (B). This area is thought to be of medieval or perhaps even earlier date. This is based on evidence provided by excavations, maps, aerial photographs and architecture of the church. A fishpond and a possible rectangular earthwork may also be medieval. The area was originally surrounded on the west and south by ridge and furrow field systems of medieval date. Overall, this area could be of regional significance for archaeology. Earthwork, Scheduled Monument (C). The flood defences run adjacent to a Scheduled Monument, which may be of Roman or medieval date. The scheduled area covers the whole of the field in which the monument is located. Legislation and planning controls protect the Scheduled Monument and its setting. Cropmarks and palaeochannel south of Scheduled Monument (D). Cropmark features lie to the south west and south east of the Scheduled Monument. These are undated but may relate to the medieval village. A palaeochannel is also apparent to the south east of the Scheduled Monument. Ridge and furrow and palaeochannel near Harrington Bridge (E). There is evidence that there was ridge and furrow to the west and east of Harrington Bridge. These could provide protection for medieval or earlier remains. There are also two palaeochannels. Ridge and furrow around Grounds Farm (F) and Trent Farm (G). Around Grounds Farm and Trent Farm there are areas of ridge and furrow. These are recorded on aerial photographs and can still be seen on the ground at Trent Farm. These areas, therefore, could have some archaeological interest In addition, Harrington Bridge is a listed structure. The remains of the south section of the former bridge and Sawley Church are Grade II listed buildings. There are also a number of palaeochannels and other sites on the Sites and Monuments Record in the Sawley area, but these are not considered to be affected by the proposed works. November 2005 Page 21

24 Traffic and Transport The River Trent has influenced the development of the road network at Sawley and throughout Nottingham. At Sawley, there are just two river crossings; the M1 at the upstream limit of the scheme, and the main route from the south into Sawley across Harrington Bridge. Sawley is also crossed by a number of railway lines, several sections of which perform a flood defence function. 3.7 Trent Meadows Trent Meadows currently has flood defences through reaches T4 and T6 with high ground and the railway forming a flood defence function elsewhere. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 3a in Annex 5. Key features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 3b in Annex 5. Existing flood embankment off Pasture Lane Trent Meadows Human Beings and Land Use Trent Meadows lies to the south east of Long Eaton and comprises residential areas and large areas of agricultural land. Sections of the existing defences run in part through residential gardens. The Trent Meadows Picnic Area and Cranfleet Canal both provide amenity areas. A series of formal and informal footpaths connect the River Trent, the canal and the picnic area. Flora and Fauna Barton Pool SINC (ER075) lies to the north of the picnic area, adjacent to the railway line. Much of the SINC is wet woodland. To the south of Barton Pool, lies Trent Meadows Candidate SINC (ERR6559), a mostly grassland area which has established over an area of former landfill. To the south east is Attenborough West Gravel Pits (ER078), which is a wetland area adjacent to the River Trent. Protected and notable species recorded in the area include badger and otter, as well as plant species that are rare for the county. Landscape and Visual Amenity The existing embankment passes along the edge of Sawley Brook and through agricultural land, blending well with the surrounding landscape. The raised land at the picnic area provides panoramic views across to Gotham Hill and Ruddington Moor. November 2005 Page 22

25 Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets We have undertaken an archaeological assessment to identify sites of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental interest likely to be affected by the scheme. The features found are discussed below and their locations are marked by the letters H to J on Figure 3b in Annex 5. Palaeochannel (H). A palaeochannel lies close to the railway and is crossed by the existing flood defences. Ridge and furrow and cropmarks at Home Farm (I). The area to the east of Home Farm shows evidence of ridge and furrow and of possible cropmarks. Cropmarks and palaeochannels near the River Erewash confluence (J). Two palaeochannels lie to the south of the proposed defence. Traffic and Transport There are few roads in the area immediately surrounding the defences. However, there is a single railway line acting as an informal flood defence. 3.8 Attenborough Attenborough currently has no formal flood defences except for a short reach at the most westerly point of Allendale Avenue, in Attenborough village, and along the Erewash. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 4a in Annex 5. Key features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 4b in Annex 5. Attenborough SSSI, with the village church spire in the background. Human Beings and Land Use The community of Attenborough is formed by an older village situated riverside of the railway with newer residential and commercial areas behind. Riverside of the railway, the land is dominated by the Attenborough Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Nature Reserve. This contains a series of inter-connected lakes which were formed as a result of aggregate mining. Aggregate mining in the wider area is expected to continue for another 15 to 20 years. November 2005 Page 23

26 3.8.3 There is a network of footpaths and bridleways across the SSSI and a visitor centre has recently been constructed. The area is very popular with local residents and visitors for activities such as bird-watching, walking and dog-walking High voltage underground cables were recently installed through the SSSI, along the approximate alignment of the proposed defences. Flora and Fauna Attenborough SSSI is an extensive area of gravel pits of varying age. It includes areas of open water and mature woodland. The boundaries of the SSSI lie adjacent to the railway line and the proposed defences. Due to the sensitivity of this site, we have already had preliminary discussions on the alignment and design options with English Nature The lakes of Attenborough SSSI and the River Trent are important for breeding and over-wintering waterfowl. In addition, Attenborough provides habitat for several protected species, including otter and water vole, and supports a wide variety of invertebrates, including butterflies and dragonflies. There are also bat, badger and harvest mice in the area. The Erewash catchment supports white-clawed crayfish Two of the SINCs within Trent Meadows extend into the Attenborough area (the Attenborough West Gravel Pits (ER078) and the Trent Meadows Candidate SINC (ER R6559)). The Erewash and its floodplain upstream of the railway also contain two SINCs, namely Attenborough Junction Tip (ER076) and Attenborough Pastures (ER198). Landscape and Visual Amenity Attenborough SSSI is a scenic area. Attenborough itself has a number of attractive listed buildings, including St Mary s Church, and is designated as a Conservation Area. The church spire acts as a local landmark and forms a picturesque focal point from the surrounding landscape. The cricket pitch and backdrop of attractive houses create an attractive village setting To the north east of Attenborough, there is a quarry batching plant, which is a visually unattractive feature. Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets We have undertaken an archaeological assessment to identify sites of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental interest likely to be affected by the scheme. The features found are discussed below and their locations are marked by the letters J to R on Figure 4b in Annex 5. Cropmarks and palaeochannels near the River Erewash confluence (J). At reach A1, near the River Erewash confluence, cropmarks are located just to the south of the proposed defence. This may indicate the location of archaeological remains. Two palaeochannels also lie to the south of the proposed defence. Cropmarks and palaeochannel along Erewash (K). Some cropmarks have been observed on aerial photographs within the area north of the River Erewash November 2005 Page 24

27 confluence. Within this area, a broad palaeochannel runs east to west and the proposed defences would cross this. Attenborough medieval village (L). The Attenborough area around the medieval Church of St Mary s has potentially high archaeological value. Medieval artefactual material and structures may survive in the area and there is a suggestion of a moated site to the south and west of the church. There is evidence of medieval finds, structures and ridge and furrow just to the north of the railway line. Fishponds, Scheduled Monument (M). Six medieval and possibly post-medieval fishpond are located south east of the church and are designated as a Scheduled Monument. The group value of these sites makes this an area of potentially regional archaeological significance. Post-medieval gatehouse (N). The post -medieval gatehouse dates from 1886 (or earlier) and lies on the line of the proposed defence, between reaches A3 and A4. Cropmarks (O). Undated cropmarks lie close to the proposed flood defences at reach A3 and the area has the potential for archaeological remains. Further listed buildings in Attenborough (P). Two further listed buildings, Rose Cottage (Grade II) and Ireton House (Grade II*), lie close to the proposed new defences at A5. Palaeochannel (R). A palaeochannel has been identified by desk study in the east of the SSSI but may no longer exist There are two Conservation Areas in Attenborough. The Attenborough Church Conservation Area is centred around St Mary s Church and the Barge Lane Conservation Area lies north of the railway line. Traffic and Transport The A6005, a major route into Nottingham runs along the landward side of the floodcell through Attenborough. Any new defences would need to cross Barton Lane and other roads within the village. There is an arterial railway line into Nottingham, along the length of the Attenborough area. The railway line passing through the Attenborough area. This currently provides the only low-level flood protection to the area. November 2005 Page 25

28 3.9 Rylands Rylands currently has flood defences along its entire length. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 5a in Annex 5. Key features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 5b in Annex 5. Beeston Lock, Rylands, where the Beeston canal meets the River Trent. Human Beings and Land Use The Rylands study area includes a large industrial complex, allotments, a caravan site, residential areas, Beeston Canal and large recreation grounds stretching down to the river. There are footpaths along the canal and the River Trent. The downstream end of Rylands is dominated by large industrial estates. Flora and Fauna The Attenborough SSSI lies at the upstream end of the area. We describe this in detail in Section 3.8 (Attenborough). There are a number of SINCs close to the river near the A453 Clifton Bridge. There are records of water vole in the Beeston Canal and surrounding area. There are also records of badger, and the mature trees appear suitable as bat roosts. Landscape and Visual Amenity Rylands is an urban area which comprises residential housing, a caravan park and a number of industrial complexes. Open areas include an allotment and recreation ground. The footpath on the embankment along Beeston Canal provides a scenic walk towards Nottingham city centre. The Lock Keeper s Cottage and canal lock gates create an attractive setting at the confluence of the canal with the River Trent. There are views across the Trent to the hills opposite and buildings occupied by Nottingham Trent University. Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets We have undertaken an archaeological assessment to identify sites of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental interest likely to be affected by the scheme. The features found are discussed below and their locations can be seen on Figure 5b, Annex 5. Beeston canal and lock (Q). The 18th century Beeston Canal and lock. November 2005 Page 26

29 Palaeochannel (R). A palaeochannel has been identified by desk study to the west of the flood defences but may no longer exist Meadow Road Bridge on the Beeston Canal is a listed structure. Traffic and Transport Rylands contains part of the A453 road (Queen s Drive), which is one of the main roads leading into the centre of Nottingham Meadows The Meadows currently has flood defences throughout its length. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 6a in Annex 5. Key features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 6b in Annex 5. The London Plan trees currently aligned to the Victoria Embankment. Human Beings and Land Use The Meadows is an urban area near to Nottingham city centre. Victoria Embankment is a large recreation area, which attracts local residents and visitors, and is a venue for public events. The Memorial Gardens are also located on Victoria Embankment. The Nottingham Canal joins the Trent just downstream of Trent Bridge and the river is well used by recreational boats. The river frontage from Trent Bridge through to Colwick Country Park forms part of the proposed Waterside Regeneration Area. Landscape and Visual Amenity The Meadows is a popular attraction for both the locals and tourists, and is within walking distance from Nottingham city centre. The bridges, mature trees, open parkland and War Memorial create an impressive riverside landscape. Victoria Embankment is the main vehicular route through the Meadows and is lined with an avenue of mature London Plane trees. November 2005 Page 27

30 The existing flood defence wall runs part way along Victoria Embankment. The defence ties into high ground opposite Victoria Public Baths, over which there are views to the riverfront The avenue of mature London Plane trees which lines Victoria Embankment is highly attractive and a landscape feature. The War Memorial is an historic landmark and the surrounding gardens are maintained to a high standard. Trent Bridge is also one of the most famous landmarks in Nottingham Downstream from Trent Bridge, the riverside is dominated by a number of industrial units and warehouses. The Park Yacht Club lies beyond the warehouses. The Yacht Club has attractive grounds including mature trees. Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets We have undertaken an archaeological assessment to identify sites of archaeological and palaeoenvironmental interest likely to be affected by the scheme. The features found are discussed below and their locations are marked as letters S to Z on Figure 6b, Annex 5. Anglo-Saxon finds near suspension bridge (S). An Anglo-Saxon brooch found close to the suspension bridge indicates that other finds of the period are possible. Trent Bridge (T). The area around the modern Trent Bridge may retain archaeological remains of the medieval bridge or a medieval chapel which stood on the bridge. Much of the present bridge structure dates from the 19th century. Suspension bridge (U). The suspension bridge across the River Trent. Wilford Lodge at rear of Wilford recreation ground (V). At the rear of the recreation ground is the site of a former 1609 house. The house was demolished by Cropmark enclosure at recreation ground (W). A cropmark of an enclosure was recorded on the west side of the recreation ground Victorian Public Baths (X), Wilford Bridge (Y) and Trent Bridge Lock Gates (Z). The Victorian Public Baths, Wilford Bridge and Trent Bridge Lock Gates are all located close to the line of the proposed works The area also includes a concentration of Historic Parks and Gardens, including the Victoria Embankment, the Victoria Embankment Recreation Ground and Memorial Gardens. There are a number of listed buildings within the Memorial Gardens, including the Municipal War Memorial. Traffic and Transport The Meadows includes three bridges over the River Trent, namely Wilford Bridge, Trent Bridge and the Meadows Suspension Bridge. Only Trent Bridge is used by vehicle traffic and it forms a key route into the centre of Nottingham. The Victoria Embankment connects Rylands, Trent Bridge and Nottingham city centre. November 2005 Page 28

31 3.11 Colwick Colwick currently has flood defences throughout its length. The existing flood defences are shown on Figure 7a in Annex 5. Key features of the existing environment are shown on Figure 7b in Annex 5. Colwick Country Park. Human Beings and Land Use A large proportion of this area is comprised from Colwick Country Park, Nottingham Racecourse and residential areas. Downstream of the country park, the area is dominated by a large industrial estate. Flora and Fauna Colwick Country Park SINC (2/901) includes landscaped areas of former sand and gravel workings, and an old course of the River Trent. The park has a variety of habitats including open grassland, planted woodland, swamp areas and lakes. Racecourse Wetland (Pond) SINC (5/7) comprises two wetland areas which are connected by culverts beneath the racecourse; it includes a notable variety of dragonflies and damselflies There are records of bats and water voles at Colwick, and a wide variety of birds pass through to over winter and breed in the large waterbodies within the country park. The invasive plant Himalayan Balsam dominates much of the bankside vegetation along many sections of the River Trent but is particularly extensive by the Colwick industrial estate. Landscape and Visual Amenity Colwick Country Park and Nottingham Racecourse make up a large part of the area. Colwick Hall Hotel and St John s Church create an attractive setting next to the Trent Backwater. The Holme Sluice control structure on the main river channel is a dominant feature. November 2005 Page 29

32 Cultural and Historic Heritage Colwick Hall is a listed building. There are also a number of archeological features in that may be affected by the proposed works. These are described below and their locations are indicated by the symbols AA to EE on Figure 7b, Annex 5. Archaeological remains in the Country Park (AA). Parts of the Country Park are likely to retain archaeological remains of various periods. Earthwork mound close to Daleside Road East (BB). A mound close to Daleside Road East may have archaeological interest. Roman and medieval finds near River Road (CC). Roman and medieval material found close to River Road indicates that the area may have archaeological interest. Neolithic site close to river in Industrial Estate (DD). Unusual finds of Neolithic axes in the area of the Industrial Estate indicate that it may be an area of prehistoric occupation close to the river. Palaeochannels (EE). A palaeochannel lies near to the flood defences. Lakes in Colwick Country Park Drainage outfall through existing flood embankments near Candle Meadow, Colwick November 2005 Page 30

33 3.12 Constraints and Opportunities We have summarised the key constraints and opportunities on the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS on the Indicative Landscape Plans in Annex 5. The key constraints that influence the choice of options are summarised in Table 3.3. In Section 7, we describe in more detail the potential environmental enhancement opportunities. Table 3.3 Key Constraints that Influence the Options Site Sawley Trent Meadows Attenborough Rylands Meadows Colwick Constraints Restrictions on working near railway Significant archaeological interest including Scheduled Monuments, listed buildings Numerous utilities including gas mains and sewers High scenic value of area including a Conservation Area Proximity of SINCs Key road crossing of Trent Canal lock forms part of defences Need to maintain navigation Sections of existing defences in private gardens Proximity of SINCs Need to provide flood protection to railway Restrictions on working near railway Electricity pylons Archaeological interest including paleochannels Need to provide flood protection to railway Restrictions on working near railway Proximity of SSSI Proximity of SINCs Need to cross Erewash High voltage underground cables High amenity value of area High archaeological and landscape value of Attenborough Village Conservation Area Significant archaeological interest including Scheduled Monument and paleochannels Need to maintain navigation and public amenity at Beeston lock Caravan park riverside of existing defences Proximity of Attenborough SSSI Archaeological interest of Beeston Canal and lock Archaeological importance of Victoria Embankment, recreation grounds, Memo rial Gardens and Trent Bridge Large number of visually important mature trees High public amenity value of adjacent land and trees Need to ensure defences do not compromise future plans to develop the Meadows area, including for recreation Need to maintain navigation at Trent Lock Proximity of SINCs High recreational value of the area Visual and safety impact of new defences close to residential and amenity area Commercial interests of hotel and racecourse Need to ensure options do not compromise future development of footpath network Ongoing redevelopment at Colwick Industrial Estate Archaeological interest in area November 2005 Page 31

34 Page has been left intentionally blank November 2005 Page 32

35 SECTION 4 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS This section includes how the: options were developed through the Fluvial Trent Strategy standard of protection was identified alignments were developed for each area 4.1 How the options were developed The Fluvial Trent Strategy identified that there are 20 specific areas at risk from flooding along the 200km of the fluvial Trent. This included the main conurbation of Nottingham To reduce flood risk to these areas, 18 generic options were investigated to determine their suitability. Table 4.1 presents these options, identifying those we found to be most suitable for Nottingham using the following three criteria: technically: Will it work? economically: Is there a good case for spending public money? environmentally: What are the effects on the environment? We built a mathematical model of the Trent to technically assess each option. This was developed following a comprehensive survey of the river and surrounding floodplain. Observed river flow data was input to the model and the resulting water levels checked against observed flood levels, photographs and maps. We then used the mathematical model to assess whether each option would prevent flooding and if it did, what the surrounding impacts would be The environmental appraisal considered the effects of the options against the objectives in our Strategic Environmental Assessment For those options which were both technically and environmentally acceptable, we carried out an economic assessment to ensure it was sound use of public money. The economic appraisal followed guidance published by Defra. These guidance documents set out a method where the costs of the options are compared with the flood damages that the proposed option would prevent. If the damages avoided are greater than the costs, public money may be spent on this proposal. November 2005 Page 33

36 Table 4.1 Options considered for Nottingham by the Fluvial Trent Strategy No Name Description Technically Suitability 1 Do nothing Undertake no further maintenance or construction work whatsoever on the watercourse 2 Do Minimum Continue to undertake present day maintenance and flood warning tasks 3 Off-line & The increase in capacity, or managed use of Floodplain Storage available floodplain storage x - x 4 On-Line Storage The creation of a water retaining structure(s) across the valley to create a flood storage area(s) x - x 5 Managed Retreat Abandon flood defences and defended property and revert back to a natural floodplain x - x x 6 Development Prevent development within areas that are at risk Control from flooding - 7 Sustainable Drainage systems that mimic natural processes, such Drainage Systems as allowing water to soak into the ground. - x x 8 Managing the Raise awareness of flooding issues, including the use Effects of Floods of local flood-protection measures - 9 Land Management Change land use to reduce the amount and rate of Options runoff to local watercourses - 10 Weirs and Sluices Manage water levels in the river using existing, or new control structures x - x 11 Groundwater Divert flood water into natural underground aquifers Recharge - - x x 12 Underground Divert flood water into man made underground tanks Tanks - - x x 13 Dredging Mechanically remove sediment from the river bed to increase the capacity of the river channel x x 14 Remove Remove, or modify structures that have a detrimental Floodplain Obstructions effect on water levels in the floodplain - 15 River Re-profiling Re-build the river channel to aid the dispersal or storage of flood flows x - x 16 Flow Diversion Create artificial channels to divert flood water x x 17 Tributary Storage Retain water within tributary catchments to reduce flows in the Trent 18 Defences Raise existing, or construct new barriers to protect property from flood water Economically Environmentally Recommended - - x November 2005 Page 34

37 4.1.6 Table 4.1 confirms the options that the Fluvial Trent Strategy found to be most suitable for Nottingham are: Do-nothing Do-minimum Development Control Managing the Effects of Floods Land Management Options Remove Floodplain Obstructions Construct flood defences Development Control, Managing the Effects of Floods and Land Management are effectively best practice methods and would not significantly reduce the flood risk. Removal of Floodplain Obstructions is technically possible through Nottingham. However, this would mean the removal, or rebuilding, of most river crossings, including Harrington Bridge, Trent Bridge, Lady Bay Bridge and Radcliffe Railway viaduct. The associated impacts on the local environment, transport and likely construction costs make this unfeasible Therefore, through further analysis of the options recommended by the Fluvial Trent Strategy for Nottingham, we have confirmed that the only suitable options are do nothing, do minimum and construct flood defences. 4.2 Standard of Protection Whilst the Fluvial Trent Strategy identifies that defences are the preferred option, we still needed to determine the optimum standard of protection. Through detailed studies we have confirmed that areas of the Nottingham left bank are only protected against a flood that has a 1 in 50 chance of occurring in any year. This is well below the standard recommended by Defra. In addition, we found that the majority of the city s defences are nearing the end of their design life We concluded that: The most cost effective solution is to provide Nottingham with defences capable of protecting against a flood which has a 1 in 100 chance of occurring in any year. Detailed appraisals should be carried out separately for the left and right banks, as these are effectively independent flood cells. The right bank works have been appraised under the West Bridgford FAS. More information on what we are proposing for the right bank is available on our website Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS Options We considered the following options appropriate for the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS: November 2005 Page 35

38 Option 1 Do nothing: This is the baseline case against which the other options are compared. We would not construct any new defences and would cease all maintenance and flood warning works. Option 2 Do minimum: This is a business as usual approach. All maintenance and flood warning activities would continue at their present level. As the condition of the defences deteriorates, breaches will occur which would be repaired. No raising or rebuilding of the defences would take place. Option 3 Construct flood defences: Construct flood defences to protect against a 1 in 100 annual chance event These options apply to each of the six areas on the left bank. We have confirmed the flood defences (option 3) will protect against a flood which has a 1 in 100 chance of occurring in any year. However, there are still the following outstanding decisions to be made: whether to raise or replace the existing defences where new defences are required, whether embankments or walls are more appropriate the defence alignment 4.4 Alignments of Flood Defences (Option 3) for Scheme Areas Currently, existing flood defences are in place along most of the left bank. The notable exception is Attenborough where informal protection is provided by the low level railway embankment combined with slightly high natural ground For the majority of reaches, we will either raise or rebuild defences along their current alignment. This is the choice which is most likely to: be the cheapest be acceptable to Council Planning Departments cause the least environmental impact have minimal detrimental visual impact In addition, there are a number of reaches at Sawley, Trent Meadows, Attenborough, Meadows and Colwick, where new defences may be required. At these locations, our choice of alignment is influenced by a number of factors including topographic features, existing property locations and maximising floodplain storage The following sections provide more information on the flood defence options for each area. We outline the proposed works, summarising where alignment choices exist and the associated factors likely to influence the alignment decision. November 2005 Page 36

39 4.5 Sawley Figure 2a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for Sawley. For reference purposes, Sawley is split into nine reaches (S1 to S9) For reaches S2, S4, S6 and S8 we propose to raise the existing flood defences along their current alignment by between 0.1 and 0.5m The only reach through Sawley where we propose a variation in alignment, is reach S3. At this location, the existing defence ties into ground which is not sufficiently high. We therefore know that a new defence is required and have identified three possible alignment choices. The following is an explanation on why we have proposed each alignment and any associated constraints. Alignment A: Would follow the naturally high ground across Tamworth Road, tying the two existing embankments together across the shortest route. Alignment B: Would follow the boundary of the properties to the west of Tamworth Road. This ensures protection to these properties but would require an embankment 3m in height and the raising of the road by 1.5m. Alignment C: Would again follow the boundary of the properties to the west of Tamworth Road. To avoid the raising of the road, the embankment would tie into the Harrington Bridge where the parapet was sufficiently high. Existing flood embankment at Trent Farm Sawley. Existing flood embankment to the rear of the Harrington Arm s public house. November 2005 Page 37

40 4.6 Trent Meadows Figure 3a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for Trent Meadows. For reference purposes, Trent Meadows is split into six reaches (T1 to T6) For reach T4 we propose to raise the existing flood defences along its current alignment by between 0.1 and 0.5m. For reach T2 we propose to raise the road and build a new flood defence wall of between 0.05 and 0.5m The only reach through Trent Meadows where we propose a variation in alignment, is reach T6. At this location the existing defence ties into a railway embankment which is not sufficiently high. We therefore know that a new defence is required and have identified three possible alignment choices. The following is an explanation on why we have proposed each alignment and any associated constraints: Alignment A: Would raise the existing embankment, continuing it in parallel to the railway line and on towards Attenborough. This maximises the natural floodplain. Alignment B: Would again raise the existing embankment, but would continue it around the Barton Pool SINC to protect this wildlife site. Alignment C: Would follow the shortest route across the reach. The existing embankment would be abandoned and the material from it used to construct the new defence. This alignment reduces the natural floodplain. Existing flood embankment at Home Farm Trent Meadows. Existing flood embankment to Trent Meadows picnic area. November 2005 Page 38

41 4.7 Attenborough Figure 4a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for Attenborough. For reference purposes, Attenborough is split into eight reaches (A1 to A8) There are currently no defences through this area. We therefore propose new defences throughout, with a mixture of different defence types For reaches A1, A3, A4, A6, A7 and A8, a new flood defence would run parallel to the existing railway. All these reaches pass through the lakes at the Attenborough SSSI. There are three buried electrical cables which run along the route of the proposed defence. Consequently, it is necessary to consider a number of different defence types and alignments to accommodate these constraints. Figure 4a in Annex 5 provides more information, but in summary the feasible alignments are: Alignment A: A new embankment would run approximately 10 to 15m from the existing railway boundary fence and beyond the outer electrical cable. This is also generally to the east of any access path/road but, through reaches A3 and A4, there would be encroachment into the lake. Alignment B: A new wall would run approximately 10 to 15m from the existing railway boundary fence and beyond the outer electrical cable. This is also generally to the east of any access path/road. Alignment C: The existing access path/road would be raised to form the defence. This alignment is not favoured by the electricity company as it would restrict access to their cables in certain reaches. Alignment D: A new wall would run approximately 1 to 3m from the existing railway boundary fence. It would be sited between the 11kv and inner 132kv electrical cables. Alignment E: We would replace the existing post and rail railway boundary fence with a new flood defence wall. This would require Network Rail s consent and, in some reaches, the 11kv cable would need to be realigned Given the constraints the preferred choice of alignment for reaches A1, A3, A6, A8 is alignment D, for reach A4 it is alignment A and reach A7 it is alignment C Around Attenborough village, reach A5, a new defence is required and we have identified five possible alignment choices. The following is an explanation on why we have proposed each alignment and any associated constraints: Alignment F: Would follow the naturally high ground via the shortest route across Church Lane, before tying into The Strand. Beyond this point, the defence could follow a number of alignments (H, I or J) which are described below. Alignment G: Would follow the boundary of the isolated properties to the southwest of the village. These eight properties would be protected by a 2m high defence following a convoluted route. Beyond this point, the defence could follow a number of alignments (H, I or J) which are described below. Alignment H: Would be the replacement of the hedgerow along the Strand with a flood wall. This is the shortest route through this stretch and the existing views would be maintained as the wall would be a similar height to the hedgerow. This alignment maximises the natural floodplain. November 2005 Page 39

42 Alignment I: Would follow the southern boundary of the cricket pitch. The embankment would be approximately 1.8m high and, to avoid removal of the existing trees, would encroach onto the pitch s outfield. This alignment reduces the natural floodplain. Alignment J: Would be similar to alignment I, but to avoid directly impacting on the cricket pitch, would be positioned on the southern side of the existing watercourse. This alignment further reduces the natural floodplain The proposed works on reach A2 are to prevent flooding from the Trent via the River Erewash railway culvert. Through this reach, we are proposing new defences to the low lying areas. Existing railway line currently providing the only flood protection to the area. The river Erewash, which flows out to the Trent through the Attenborough Nature Reserve. November 2005 Page 40

43 4.8 Rylands Figure 5a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for Rylands. For reference purposes, the area is split into three reaches (R1 to R3) For reach R1 we propose to raise lengths of existing flood defences along their current alignment by between 0.1 and 0.3m. The raising of existing roads is also required through this reach We do not propose a variation to the current alignment along any of the reaches in this area. Flood embankment with natural floodplain in foreground. Flood embankment at Beeston Lock. November 2005 Page 41

44 4.9 Meadows Figure 6a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for the Meadows. For reference purposes, the Meadows is split into six reaches (M1 to M6) For all of reach M1 and short lengths within reach M4, we propose to raise the existing flood defence along its current alignment by between 0.1 and 0.8m The only reach through Meadows where we propose a variation in alignment, is reach M2 along Victoria Embankment. At this location, the existing protection is provided by a flood wall and surrounding ground, both of which are insufficiently high. A new defence is required and we have identified three possible alignment choices. The following is an explanation on why we have proposed each alignment and any associated constraints Alignment A: Would raise the existing flood wall and continue it along the shortest route to high ground around Victoria Embankment. A precise alignment to avoid interference with the mature London Plane trees would be required. Alignment B: Would follow the northern boundary of the recreation grounds to avoid the majority of the London Plane trees and to maximise the natural floodplain. The defence would return to the Victoria Embankment at the bandstand to ensure protection to the Memorial Gardens. Alignment C: Is a similar route to alignment B. The defence would cross the easterly recreation ground at a location where construction is easier and natural ground slightly higher. Flood wall along Victoria Embankment. Outside County Hall, looking across to the Meadows area on the far bank. November 2005 Page 42

45 4.10 Colwick Figure 7a in Annex 5 shows the indicative design for Colwick. For reference purposes, Colwick is split into four reaches (C1 to C4) For reaches C2 and C3 we propose to raise the existing flood defences along their current alignment by between 0.1 and 0.5m The only reach through Colwick where we propose a variation in alignment, is reach C1. At this location t he existing defence ties into ground which is not sufficiently high. We therefore know that a new defence is required and have identified two possible alignment choices. The following is an explanation on why we have proposed each alignment and any associated constraints: Alignment A: Would be the setting back of defences by tying into the A612, which is sufficiently high. This maximises the natural floodplain. The racecourse and Colwick Hall Hotel area is currently protected by high ground against a flood which has a 1 in 50 chance of occurring in any year. Alignment B: Would follow the naturally high ground through the Country Park. An alignment to minimise tree removal would be required. Existing flood embankment at Candle Meadow. Route of proposed flood defence alignment B through Colwick Country Park November 2005 Page 43

46 4.11 Flood Embankments We propose new flood embankments of the profile shown in Figure 9. This embankment has 1 in 3 slopes and a 4m crest to enable safe vehicular access needed for maintenance. We also require a 10m easement at the embankment toe for access during the proposed, and any future, construction. Table 4.2 summarises the approximate widths for a range of embankment heights. Table 4.2: Land Impact from Varying Embankment Heights Height (m) Landtake (m) Desired Easement (m) Total Effected Area (m) The embankment described is the desired profile, with landtake being the land occupied by the flood defence after it is constructed. We accept that this profile will not always be possible due to, for example, a nearby property. Figure 9: Example of Profile for Flood Embankments 4.12 Flood Walls We propose new flood walls of the profile shown in Figure 10. The typical wall would be reinforced concrete with cladding to suit its surroundings. Concrete foundations are likely but steel sheet piles for stability or cut -off purposes may be necessary at some locations To ensure cost savings we will, where appropriate, raise rather than replace the existing walls. However, we will require detailed geotechnical and structural assessments before finalising such a decision. November 2005 Page 44

47 Typically a new flood wall will require a 2m landtake with a 10m easement, which would include the working area. Figure 10: Example of Profile for Flood Walls 4.13 Drainage We will include drainage systems at the toe of the defences on the landward side, where necessary, to enable surface water or groundwater to flow into the River Trent. An example of this is through Attenborough, where the runoff from the railway embankment would need to be dealt with Surface water outfalls within the existing flood defences affected by the proposed works will be upgraded, where necessary. New outfalls will be constructed through reaches where we propose new flood defences to ensure current drains and minor watercourses continue to discharge to the River Trent. November 2005 Page 45

48 Page has been left intentionally blank November 2005 Page 46

49 SECTION 5 CONSULTATION This section includes a summary of: previous consultation (including those undertaken for the Fluvial Trent Strategy) our approach to current and ongoing consultation during the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS 5.1 Previous Consultation Our consultation process began in March 2004 with the issue of the draft Fluvial Trent Strategy. Public launches in Nottingham and Alrewas were followed by three months of public consultation, during which we sent out over 300 copies of the report and received 60 comments. The final version of the report was issued in March The results of this high level consultation are summarised in the final strategy report, which is available on the Environment Agency website To identify opportunities and constraints for the flood defence alignments for the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS, we have held meetings with a number of organisations. These include the various departments of Borough, City and County Councils, the Trent River Park Group, the Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trusts, English Nature, Network Rail and major landowners, including Cemex and British Waterways. 5.2 Current Consultation We have produced this as part of our Environmental Impact Assessment process. Details of the internal and external parties that are being consulted on this are provided in Annex 1. There will be a month long consultation period for this document, during which time we would welcome any additional data/information on the areas, and any comments, questions or concerns about the options under consideration. Consultees are also encouraged to highlight opportunities for environmental enhancement Feed back forms are available from our website or alternatively please submit your comments to Jody Harris at the following address: Jody Harris Environmental Assessment Officer Environment Agency Olton Court 10 Warwick Road Olton Solihull B92 7HX Nottingham.FAS@environment-agency.gov.uk November 2005 Page 47

50 5.2.3 The closing date for consultation is Friday 23 rd December Due to the large number of comments we are expecting to receive we are unlikely to be able to answer any queries individually. However, we will summarise responses to queries in a newsletter to be published early in We will also update the website regularly with frequently asked questions Further copies of the, outline design drawings, and indicative landscape plans are also available from our website or from the above address There will be an official launch to the main consultees on the 22 nd November We will also be publicising the by a series of roadshows at some of the scheme areas. 5.3 Future Consultation To co-ordinate future consultation, we have prepared a Community Engagement Plan. This aims to: identify important groups with a likely interest in the works clarify the roles and responsibilities of the project team for specific aspects of external communication establish a programme for future consultation rounds November 2005 Page 48

51 SECTION 6 POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES This section: describes our approach to the impact assessment describes potential impacts that are generic to all areas describes the main potential impacts in each area 6.1 Our approach to impact assessment This section provides a summary of the environmental impacts of all the options. In Sections 6.3 and 6.4, we consider the impacts of the do nothing and the do minimum options. The impacts of these options are similar for all areas so we have assessed these for the whole of the left bank We then assessed the potential impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3). Where the impacts on an environmental receptor are considered similar for all areas, we discuss these in Section 6.5 under generic impacts. Where the impacts are specific to each area these are discussed in Sections Further detail of the impacts, together with possible mitigation measures, are provided in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping Impact Matrices in Annex 4. The matrices also detail where we intend to carry out further surveys, the scope of which will be agreed in advance with the relevant stakeholders This provides an outline assessment of the options. We will provide a detailed assessment of the preferred option in the Environmental Statement. 6.2 How we assessed the impacts An outline assessment of the impacts and mitigation on the receptors in each section has been made. A number of criteria have been used to determine whether or not the potential impacts of the proposed scheme are significant. Impacts are assessed to be either during the construction stage or at the end state (the operational phase) In carrying out this assessment, a general method for grading of the significance of environmental impacts has been adopted to ensure consistency in the terminology of significance, whether for a positive or a negative impact. The two principal criteria determining significance are the sensitivity of the receptor and the magnitude of the change arising from the scheme, as shown in Table 6.1 below As can be seen in the Table 6.1, the assessment of impact significance has been classed as major, moderate, minor or none; either positive (beneficial) or negative (adverse). This categorisation is widely recognised and accepted in the field of EIA. November 2005 Page 49

52 Table 6.1 Determination of Impact Significance MAGNITUDE OF CHANGE High (e.g. >75% of area or receptor affected) Medium (e.g % of area or receptor affected) Low (e.g. 5 to 25% of area or receptor affected) Very Low (e.g. s>0, but <5% of area or receptor affected) High (e.g. international, national protection) SENSITIVITY OF RECEPTOR Medium (e.g. regional, local protection) Low (e.g. no protection) Major Major Moderate Major Moderate Minor Moderate Minor None Minor None None 6.3 Impacts of Do Nothing (Option 1) The impacts of the do nothing option for the River Trent s left bank through Nottingham are summarised below and presented in Matrices 1.1 and 1.2 in Annex The do nothing option is the benchmark against which the other options are compared. For this scenario, we would not construct any new defences and would cease all existing maintenance and flood warning works. The flood risk to Nottingham would increase with time as defences reach the end of their design life and fail This option is not recommended due to the increased flood risk. 6.4 Impacts of Do Minimum (Option 2) The do minimum option is a business as usual approach. All maintenance and flood warning activities would continue at their present level. As the condition of the defences deteriorates, breaches will occur which would be repaired. No raising or rebuilding of the defences would take place This option is not recommended as the existing defences currently protect, on average, against a 1 in 50 annual chance event. Some reaches only protect against a 1 in 25 annual chance event, which is less than the standard recommended Defra for a population the size of Nottingham. November 2005 Page 50

53 6.5 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Generic Impacts & Mitigation Due to the nature and scale of the Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS the impacts on a number of the environmental receptors are similar across all the areas within the scheme. We consider these as generic impacts. We have therefore described the impacts on the following receptors for the entire Nottingham Trent Left Bank FAS: Air and Climate Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology Use of Natural Resources Air and Climate There will be potential impacts on local air quality during the construction works. Dust emissions can arise from the movement of stockpiled material and machinery/vehicles. There will also be noise generated from machinery and vehicles. The severity of any impacts would be greatest in the more rural locations, such as at Rylands, and sensitive environmental areas, such as Attenborough. The effects would be reduced by the adoption of good working practices. Soils, Geology and Hydrogeology None of our proposals are expected to have a significant adverse effect on the geology, hydrogeology and soils in any of the areas. The reinstatement of some natural floodplain, particularly in Colwick (alignment A), would allow natural geological and hydrogeological processes to develop. Use of Natural Resources Material would be needed to raise or create new defences. Most would be required at Attenborough, where significant lengths of new defences are proposed. Such impacts will be greatest in areas where the materials cannot be sourced locally. We will look to identify opportunities to maximise sustainability during the design and construction phases, wherever possible, by: the use of sustainable or recycled materials sourcing material locally designing a solution that requires minimal maintenance. 6.6 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Site Specific Impacts & Mitigation Where the environmental impacts on a receptor differ significantly between the sites, we consider these separately for each area (see Sections ). The following receptors are considered for each area: Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity November 2005 Page 51

54 Water, including navigation Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport 6.7 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Sawley The main potential impacts of flood defence works at Sawley are: disturbance to the significant archaeological interest of the area disturbance to Trent Lock Margins candidate SINC construction impacts to the community of Sawley, including disruption to traffic using Harrington Bridge Table 6.1 and Figure 2b (in Annex 5) summarise these impacts with further detail provided in Matrix 1.2 in Annex 4. Table 6.1 Summary of Potential Impacts at Sawley Receptor Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Water Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport Summary of Potential Impacts during Construction Disturbance to Sawley village and some disruption to footpaths/access during construction. Disturbance to protected species and SINCs. Reduced visual amenity during construction. Pollution risk during works close to waterbodies. Disruption to Erewash Canal during works to sluice. Disturbance to significant archaeological interest. Disruption to traffic across Harrington Bridge. Increased local traffic movements. Summary of Potential Impacts Post-Construction Minor landtake Improved standard of flood protection. Minor landtake and severance of habitats. Potential for habitat creation. Raised and new defences including through the Conservation Area. None. Visual impact on setting of listed buildings and Scheduled Monument. Improved flood protection to listed buildings, Scheduled Monument and Sawley Village. None. November 2005 Page 52

55 6.7.3 The specific impacts of the different alignment choices for reach S3 are: Alignment A would potentially cause the most disturbance to Sawley village and would pass through the Sawley Village Conservation Area. Alignments B and C would cause increased disturbance to Trent Lock Margins SINC and have more of an impact to the setting and the structure of Harrington Bridge than Alignment A. 6.8 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Trent Meadows The main potential impacts of the flood defence works at Trent Meadows would be: working in private gardens disturbance to a feature of archaeological importance (palaeochannel) disturbance to two SINCs (Trent Meadows candidate SINC and Barton Pool SINC) Table 6.2 and Figure 3b (in Annex 5) summarise these impacts with further detail provided in Matrix 1.3 in Annex The specific impacts of the different alignments for reach T6 are: Alignment A would potentially cause the most disturbance to Barton Pool SINC but it would not present a barrier between Trent Meadows candidate SINC and Barton Pool SINC. Alignments B and C would result in a physical barrier across an area of high wildlife value, as well as being more visually intrusive. These alignments would also reduce the available floodplain. Public footpath across railway line onto existing flood embankment; Trent Meadows. November 2005 Page 53

56 Table 6.2 Summary of Potential Impacts at Trent Meadows Receptor Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Water Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport Summary of Potential Impacts during Construction Minor disturbance to public recreation areas. Works to existing defences through private gardens and agricultural land. Disturbance to Trent Meadows candidate SINC and Barton Pool SINC. Summary of Potential Impacts Post-Construction Improved standard of flood protection. Minor landtake. Landtake within SINCs. Creation of physical barrier between SINCs. Opportunity to enhance SINCs. Reduced visual amenity. Visual impact of new and raised defences, particularly in private gardens and recreation areas. Pollution risk during works close to watercourse. Works proposed in areas of archaeological interest. Increased traffic on local road network. None. No additional impacts. None. 6.9 Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Attenborough The main potential impacts of the flood defence works at Attenborough would be: landtake in the Attenborough SSSI and three SINCs (Attenborough Pastures, Attenborough Junction Tip and Trent Meadows candidate SINC) disturbance to archaeological interest the visual impact of the new defence disturbance to the community of Attenborough village and users of the SSSI during construction Table 6.3 and Figure 4b (in Annex 5) summarise these impacts with further detail provided in Matrix 1.4 in Annex 4. November 2005 Page 54

57 Table 6.3 Summary of Potential Impacts at Attenborough Receptor Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Water Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport Summary of Potential Impacts during Construction Disturbance to recreational areas including Attenborough SSSI and footpaths. Works sometimes in or adjacent to private property and through paddocks. Disturbance to SSSI, three SINCs (Attenborough Pastures; Attenborough Junction Tip and Trent Meadows candidate SINC), and possibly some protected species. Reduced visual amenity. Pollution risk during works close to waterbodies. Works proposed in areas of significant archaeological interest. Increased traffic on local road network. Disruption to rail network. Summary of Potential Impacts Post-Construction Improved standard of flood protection. Minor landtake. Footpath and vehicle access may be improved. Minor landtake. Creation of physical barrier if wall constructed. Opportunity to enhance SINCs and SSSI. Visual impact of new and raised defences, particularly in private gardens, recreation areas and Attenborough Church Conservation Area. Minor loss of open water habitat if Alignment A chosen. Visual impact on setting of listed buildings and Scheduled Monument. Improved flood protection to listed buildings and Attenborough Village. None The specific impacts of the different alignments through the area are: Alignment A will impact on the open water and bankside habitat in some reaches. The banksides may support protected species such as water vole and provide important habitat for birds. The new bank profile would need to be designed to maximise the potential for biodiversity. Alignments A & B would result in the most disturbance to the SSSI in Reach A3 as work would be outside the existing track and in the natural vegetation. Alignments C, D & E would potentially cause the most impacts to the railway and the underground power cables. Alignments F & G would require work close to St Mary s Church and several listed buildings and would pass through the Attenborough Church Conservation Area. Alignment G would be closer to the Fishponds Scheduled Monument than F. November 2005 Page 55

58 Alignments I and J would protect the cricket pitch but would require the removal of mature trees along the boundary. Alignment J would cause the more disturbance to the SSSI then Alignment I. Alignment I would have a greater visual impact on the Conservation Area and require some landtake in the cricket pitch. Alignment H would require a new wall in the Attenborough Church Conservation Area, between the residential area and the cricket pitch, probably replacing the existing hedge Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Rylands As the defences are only to be raised by a very small amount, the main potential impacts at Rylands are associated with the construction phase and include the disturbance in the caravan park, the lock keeper s cottage and visitors to the canal. Table 6.4 and Figure 5b (in Annex 5) summarises these impacts with further detail provided in Matrix 1.5 in Annex 4. Table 6.4 Summary of Potential Impacts at Rylands Receptor Human Beings and Land Use Flora and Fauna Landscape and Visual Amenity Water Cultural Heritage, Archaeology and Material Assets Traffic and Transport Summary of Potential Impacts during Construction Disturbance to canal and footpath users. Disturbance to allotments and private property. Minimal risk of disturbance to SSSI/protected species. Reduce visual amenity. Pollution risk during works close to river/canal. No significant impacts likely. Increased traffic on local road network. Summary of Potential Impacts Post-Construction Improved standard of flood protection. Opportunities to improve access along river. None. Minor visual impact of raised defences. None. None. None Impacts of Flood Defences (Option 3) Summary for Meadows The main potential impacts of flood defence works at Meadows are: November 2005 Page 56

59 disturbance to the amenity, landscape and archaeological importance of Victoria Embankment, the recreation grounds, and the Memorial Gardens; the mature avenue of trees along the embankment has a particularly high landscape value and will be protected where possible; we also need to ensure that the navigation at Trent Lock is maintained and its archaeological interest protected; a large number of trees, including many with Tree Protection Orders (TPOs), are likely to be affected at Park Yacht Club and new landscape planting will be required Table 6.5 and Figure 6b (in Annex 5) summarises these impacts with further detail provided in Matrix 1.6 in Annex The specific impacts of the different alignments for reach M2 are: Alignment A along the Victoria Embankment may require the removal of some trees of landscape and ecological interest, and the raised/new walls would restrict views to the river. However, it would minimise the construction impacts on the residential community of Meadows. Alignment B and C would allow the recreation grounds to act as flood storage areas. However, this would mean the recreation area and Victoria Embankment would be unusable in a 1 in 75 annual chance event. Victoria Embankment, just upstream of Trent Bridge. Table 6.5 Summary of Potential Impacts at Meadows November 2005 Page 57