Maresfield Parish Neighbourhood Development Plan
Evidence Base Report
Topic 6. Other Infrastructure
EVIDENCE ASSESSED (list of sources/documents)
Data sources:1. The East Sussex Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (produced as a requirement
of the Flood Risk Regulations, 2009) which looks at flooding from local sources:
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/135538.aspx#2
2. The North Wealden Strategic Flood Risk Assessment which assesses flooding from
all sources, available online at:
http://www.wealden.gov.uk/Wealden/Planning_and_Building_Control/Planning_Policy/
Planning_Policy_Publications/Evidence_Base_for_LDF/Planning_Evidence_Base_Floo
d_Risk_Assessment_North.aspx
3. The Environment Agency’s Catchment Flood Management Plan for the River Ouse
Catchment available online at:
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/127387.aspx
4. The Environment Agency’s Flood Maps for Surface Water (FMfSW).
5. Ashdown Business Park planning application papers.
Consultees:1. Harriet Ellis, Flood Risk Management Officer, ESCC.
2. David Phillips, Head of Planning Policy & Environment, Wealden District Council.
KEY FINDINGS
Extract from the ESCC Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment
(produced as a requirement of the Flood Risk Regulations
(2009)
Flooding from local sources - areas identified in Maresfield Parish
1. Maresfield TQ4584125566 Horney Common
2. Maresfield TQ4423228016 Nutley School, High Street, 01/01/2001 Run-off from
adjacent development. Suggested that they install new drainage
3. Maresfield TQ4423228016 Nutley School, High Street, 01/10/2002 complaint re run
off from adjoining recent development, Ashdown Chase
4. Maresfield TQ4441827729 , Nursery Lane, 01/01/1994 Flooding of house and
garden, natural runoff
5. MARESFIELD; NEAR LONDON RTQO4A7D16923454 STONE COTTAGE;
BUDLETTS ROUNDABOUT
6. Maresfield TQ4423628108 ; Ashdown Chase; 01/10/2002 complaint from Nutley
School, advised rainfall probably exceeded design capacity of soakaways at
Ashdown Chase
7. 3792 Maresfield TQ4449825563 Black Ven Farm 01/10/1998 Sandbags
8. 3793 Maresfield TQ4707322911 Budletts 01/03/1991 Flooding of farm drive. Partial
collapse of culvert.
9. 3794 Maresfield TQ4707322911 Budletts 01/11/1992 Diversion works completed by
council £6800
10. 3795 Maresfield TQ4449627809 ; Clockhouse Lane; 01/11/1992 Obstruction of
ditch. No evidence on site.
11. 3796 Maresfield TQ4423228016 Nutley School; High Street; 01/01/2001 Run-off
from adjacent development. Suggested that they install new drainage when
extension is constructed. (Refer to file LV 8032).
12. 3797 Maresfield TQ4423228016 Nutley School; High Street; 01/10/2002 complaint
re run off from adjoining recent development, Ashdown Chase- advised rainfall
probably exceeded design capacity of soakaways
13. 3798 Maresfield TQ4726323314 Holly Cottage; London Road; 01/10/2000
Sandbags
14. 3799 Maresfield TQ4450127726 Chablis; Nursery Lane; 01/08/1997 Sandbags
15. 3800 Maresfield TQ4441827729 ; Nursery Lane; 01/01/1994 Flooding of house and
garden, natural runoff
16. 3801 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/01/1994
Flooding of houses due to water levels rising upstream of A22 culvert
17. 3802 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/07/1994
Discussions with ESCC re responsibility for A22 culvert. Councils opinion taken,
ESCC may only be responsible for maintenance
18. 3803 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/08/1997
Burnside, Old Forge, Stonebrook all flooded indoors- Badgers flooded underfloorpossible retention scheme upstream of houses, not favoured by NRA- Watercourse
clearance undertaken by WDC downstream of culvert
19. 3804 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/10/2000
Burnside, Old Forge, Stonebrook flooded indoors- Badgers underfloor -scheme for
culvert enlargement put forward for MAFF grant and contributions from ESCC&EA
20. 3805 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/12/2003
part of tree lodged against roadside handrail causing back up in stream- ESCC due
to attend, but didn’t so residents arranged clearance
21. 3806 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Old Forge; Old Forge Lane; Tn22 3EL 01/01/2008
Sandbags
22. 3807 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Badgers; Old Forge Lane; 01/01/1994 Flooding of
houses due to water levels rising upstream of A22 culvert
23. 3808 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Badgers; Old Forge Lane; 01/07/1994 Discussions
with ESCC re responsibility for A22 culvert. Councils opinion taken, ESCC may only
be responsible for maintenance
24. 3809 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Badgers; Old Forge Lane; 01/08/1997 Burnside,
Old Forge, Stonebrook all flooded indoors- Badgers flooded underfloor- possible
retention scheme upstream of houses, not favoured by NRA- Watercourse
clearance undertaken by WDC downstream of culvert
25. 3810 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Badgers; Old Forge Lane; 01/10/2000 Burnside,
Old Forge, Stonebrook flooded indoors- Badgers underfloor -scheme for culvert
enlargement put forward for MAFF grant and contributions from ESCC&EA
26. 3811 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Stonebrook; Old Forge Lane; 01/01/1994 Flooding
of houses due to water levels rising upstream of A22 culvert
27. 3812 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Stonebrook; Old Forge Lane; 01/07/1994
Discussions with ESCC re responsibility for A22 culvert. Councils opinion taken,
ESCC may only be responsible for maintenance
28. 3813 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Stonebrook; Old Forge Lane; 01/08/1997
Burnside, Old Forge, Stonebrook all flooded indoors- Badgers flooded underfloorpossible retention scheme upstream of houses, not favoured by NRA- Watercourse
clearance undertaken by WDC downstream of culvert
29. 3814 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Stonebrook; Old Forge Lane; 01/10/2000
Burnside, Old Forge, Stonebrook flooded indoors- Badgers underfloor -scheme for
culvert enlargement put forward for MAFF grant and contributions from ESCC&EA
30. 3815 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Burnside; Old Forge Lane; 01/01/1994 Flooding of
houses due to water levels rising upstream of A22 culvert
31. 3816 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Burnside; Old Forge Lane; 01/07/1994
Discussions with ESCC re responsibility for A22 culvert. Councils opinion taken,
ESCC may only be responsible for maintenance
32. 3817 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Burnside; Old Forge Lane; 01/08/1997 Burnside,
Old Forge, Stonebrook all flooded indoors- Badgers flooded underfloor- possible
retention scheme upstream of houses, not favoured by NRA- Watercourse
clearance undertaken by WDC downstream of culvert
33. 3818 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Burnside; Old Forge Lane; 01/10/2000 Burnside,
Old Forge, Stonebrook flooded indoors- Badgers underfloor -scheme for culvert
enlargement put forward for MAFF grant and contributions from ESCC&EA
34. 3819 Maresfield TQ4591225793 Burnside; Old Forge Lane; 01/01/2008 Sandbags
35. 3820 Maresfield TQ4615624100 99; Parklands; 01/06/2000 Water ponding on
grass verge in front of property passed to ESCC
36. 3821 Maresfield TQ4615624100 99; Parklands; 01/07/2000 Problem solved
(007)SSSSSouth East Water pipe burst
37. 3822 Maresfield TQ4427228001 ; School Lane; 01/11/2000 Pumps failed called out
Willow pumps
38. 3823 Maresfield TQ4417528024 The Cottage - War Memorial Hall 01/06/2000
Sandbags
39. TQ4557726356 Cackle Street in junction Tylers Lane Maresfield 08/04/2010 the
above owns land at that junction and water is going under the bridge and flooding
his land in the area.
(The following are extracts form a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment report dated March 2009 –
prepared for WDC by Scott Wilson Ltd – highlighting specific references to Fairwarp, Maresfield &
Nutley. A copy of the full report can be seen on the WDC web site by using the following link
http://www.wealden.gov.uk/Wealden/Planning_and_Building_Control/Planning_Policy/Planning_Po
licy_Publications/Evidence_Base_for_LDF/Planning_Evidence_Base_Flood_Risk_Assessment_N
orth.aspx).
Flood Risk Assessment
Wealden District Study Area Characteristics
The SFRA study area extends from Firle Beacon in the south to Holtye Common in the north and Weir
Wood Reservoir in the west to Wadhurst in the east. The study area is predominantly rural over a
varying landscape that includes both the High and Low Weald. The Low Weald; in the south is
characterised by gently sloping clay vales with small greensand ridges. In contrast, the High Weald, in
the north of the study area is characterised by steeper slopes that are in places heavily wooded but
include areas of open heathland. Ashdown Forest covers a large part of the north of the study area
and is comprised of predominantly oak-birch woodland with some open heathland ridges.
There are a number of environmentally sensitive areas that enhance the character of the district and
are also important considerations in the planning process. The High Weald is classified as an Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty, There are a number of Local Nature Reserves including Old Nutley
Wood, Chailey Common and Weirwood Reservoir. Buxted Park is classified as a Site of Special
Scientific Interest.
The study area includes the urban centres of Forest Row, Crowborough, Uckfield and Isfield. Under
the Draft South East Plan WDC is required to provide 8000 dwellings between 2006 and 2026, which
equates to an average 400 dwellings per year.
River Ouse (Upper Reaches)
The River Ouse rises in the Mid Sussex District (TQ261279), and flows in a south east direction
forming the western boundary of the WDC SFRA study area. It flows through the study area for
approximately 2.7 km near Fletching and then flows south along the study boundary. It is joined at
Sharpesbridge (TQ443206) by the Shortbridge Stream (enmained). Its confluence with the River Uck
and the Isfield Mill Stream is located on the study boundary, north of Isfield (TQ443179). It exits the
study area approximately 500 m south of its confluence with the River Uck (TQ445173).
The River Ouse catchment area is approximately 294 km² an estimated 35% is within the study
boundary. The catchment includes the urban areas of Nutley, Danehill, Maresfield and Isfield.
Draft River Ouse Catchment Flood Management Plan
The River Ouse CFMP is currently being developed by the Environment Agency. A draft River Ouse
CFMP (April 2008), published for consultation purposes, was available in time for this study. The River
Ouse CFMP includes the catchment of the River Uck and acknowledges the flooding that has
occurred in Uckfield.
The Environment Agency and the partners working on this CFMP, designated policy units that set out
the direction for flood risk management within the catchment in the future. Within the WDC Strategic Flood
Risk Assessment (SFRA) study area two policy units have been defined; Policy Unit 5 covers Uckfield and
Maresfield and Policy Unit 6 covers the area between Uckfield and Crowborough as well as to the western
boundary of the Wealden District.
Artificial Sources
The Environment Agency is the Statutory Body for Reservoir Safety under the Reservoirs Act 1975
as amended by the Water Act 2003. They hold a ‘Register of Reservoirs’ which shows data for the
‘large raised reservoirs’ located within the study boundary. For the purposes of the Reservoirs Act
1975, reservoirs are defined as an impounded body of water of a volume greater than 25,000 cubic
metres. From information provided by the Environment Agency and a review of ordnance Survey
1:50,000 mapping the following reservoirs have been identified within the study area:
• Buckhurst Park Lake, near Crowborough;
• Searle’s Lake, near Uckfied;
• Upper Woman’s Way Pond, near Maresfield;
• Wadhurst Park Lake; and,
• Weirwood Reservoir, near Forest Row.
The Environment Agency’s records also detail the reservoir volume; surface area; year built; dam type;
capacity; owner; and the undertaker. It is known that the Environment Agency assign the reservoirs a
risk category according to guidance compiled by the Institute of Civil Engineers. Reservoir
Inspection reports were also requested but were not supplied.
Groundwater vulnerability by area
Minor Intermediate – Moderately Vulnerable:Maresfield,
Piltdown,
West of Uckfield,
Forest Row,
Isfield,
Groombridge,
Hartfield, Northern
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) Suitability based on Geology and Soils in the
SFRA Study Area
GEOLOGY
PERMEABILITY
THICKNESS
Lower Tunbridge Wells
Sand
Variably
Up to 33 m
Ashdown Beds
Variably
Up to 210 m
SOIL
ASSOCIATION
Curtisden
PERMEABILITY
Slowly Permeable
LOCATION (AT
SURFACE)
SuDS
TECHNIQUES
(APPROPRIATE)
- Maresfield;
- Budletts Common;
- Bird-in-Eye
- Parts of Ridgewood;
and,
- Uckfield.
- Ashdown Forest
and
surrounding areas
including
Crowborough;
Nutley; Danehill;
Hartfield;
Forest Row; and
Groombridge.
- Etchingwood;
- Waldron Down; and;
- Framfield.
Infiltration and
Combined
Infiltration/Attenuation
LOCATION
- Most of study area
including:- Hartfield;
- Nutley;
- Fletching;
- Buxted;
- Hadlow;
- Forest Row;
- Groombridge;
- Mayfield;
- Northern Wadhurst; and,
- Framfield.
Infiltration and
Combined
Infiltration/Attenuation
SuDS TECHNIQUES
(APPROPRIATE
Infiltration and Combined
Infiltration/Attenuation
Summary Table of Groundwater Borehole Data
BOREHOLE
LOCATION
Fairwarp
NATIONAL GRID
REFERENCE
X 546635 Y
127156
LENGTH OF
RECORD
(YEARS)
Mar 1989 – Jan
2008 (19)
TREND
Rising
AVERAGE DIP
(M)
40.75
APPENDIX A
Policy Unit 5 from the Draft Ouse CFMP relevant to the WDC SFRA study area
Policy unit 5 Ouse Low Weald (West)
Physical characteristics:
- Gently undulating countryside.
- The north of the unit is underlain by greensand and gault changing to weald clay in
the south, with bands of sandstone crossing the greensand and gault in the west of
the unit.
- The soils are seasonally wet loam to clayey over shale to the north and seasonally
deep wet clay in the south over the weald clay.
- This policy unit contains mostly managed grassland and arable land with isolated
properties and small settlements.
- Agricultural land classified as grade 3 with areas of low grade 4 to the north and
grade 2 to the south.
- The policy unit borders the South Downs AONB. ESA and proposed national park
boundaries.
- This unit includes Chailey Common SSSI, which is not located in the floodplain
areas.
Flood mechanism:
- A low risk of localised fluvial flooding.
- Localised surface water flooding in Wivlesfield and Plumpton Green.
Receptor:
- Isolated properties.
- Low grade agricultural land (mainly Grade 3 or 4).
- Small number of properties in Wivlesfield Green and Plumpton Green.
Current Flood Risk Summary
Number of properties at risk of flooding (1% annual probability flood event) 0
Total damages (approx.) (1% annual probability flood event) £0
Annual average damages (approx.) £0
Future Flood risk:
- There is a low flood risk from fluvial flooding from the Bevern Stream and Longford
Stream, tributaries of the River Ouse, which is not expected to increase in the future.
- There is a low flood risk from surface water flooding in Wivlesfield Green and
Plumpton Green.
Future Flood Risk Summary (in 100 years time)
Number of properties at risk of flooding (1% annual probability flood event) 0
Total damages (approx.) (1% annual probability flood event) £0
Problem/risk
Annual average damages (approx.) £0
Policy selected Policy 3 – Continue with existing or alternative actions to manage flood risk at the current
level (accepting that flood risk with increase over time from this baseline).
Justification
This policy is appropriate where the current level of flood risk management is considered
acceptable. It is recognised that flood risk will change in the future, and management actions
may change in time to gain efficiencies or improve effectiveness. This policy is appropriate for
this policy unit for the following reasons:
- The current level of flood risk is low and it is not expected to increase in the future.
- The current flood risk management activities carried out for the surface water
flooding problems are considered appropriate and acceptable for the level of risk.
- The selected policy would help achieve the catchment objectives to ensure the
impact of flooding does not increase.
Catchment objectives
• Enhance landscape character and protect culturally important and heritage sites,
including scheduled and designated sites and features.
• Ensure the impact of flooding on people, property and infrastructure does not
increase (for example due to climate change).
Catchment-wide
opportunities
and constraints
There are opportunities to support the local schemes and studies already in place to reduce
the surface water flooding problems in Wivlesfield Green.
Alternative policies considered
Policy 1 – do nothing. This policy option would not address the localised surface water
flooding problems, which would increase if the ‘do nothing’ option were chosen.
Policy 2 – reduce the current level of flood risk management. As with policy 1, the localised
surface water flooding problems would not be addressed if the current flood risk management
actions were reduced.
Policy 4 – maintain the current level of flood risk into the future. This policy unit could also
apply, however, it implies considerable increased flood risk management in the future. The
need for this has not been identified or considered justifiable.
Policy 5 – reduce the level of flood risk, both now and in the future. The current level of risk is
considered tolerable and therefore this policy is not justified.
Policy 6 – increase flooding to reduce flooding elsewhere. There are limited opportunities
within this policy unit for this policy.
Uncertainties and dependencies
We have estimated the future increase in flood risk within this policy unit on the best available
prediction we have of climate change, frequency and size of storms, flood events and sea
level rise in the future.
Flood Maps for Surface Water (FMfSW)
Please see the two images below.
The FMfSW is the primary source of nationally derived information on surface-water flooding held by the
Environment Agency, Lead Local Flood Authorities and Local Resilience Forums. The mapping provides an
indication of broad areas at risk of surface water flooding but it is not suitable for identifying the risk to
individual properties. This is due to the information used to produce the mapping – no information on floor
levels, construction characteristics or the designs of properties was used. The Environment Agency is
currently in the process of updating the FMfSW and there are plans to make this publically available by
early 2014.
The FMfSW is not definitive, but provides information to support local flood risk management in the
absence of any better information.
The attached maps show the FMfSW at an appropriate scale for its use.
There are two rainfall extents: a 1 in 30 year rainfall event and a 1 in 200 year rainfall event. There are also
two depths, greater than 0.1 metres and greater than 0.3 metres.
The mapping should not be:
- Used as the sole evidence for any specific planning decision at any scale without supporting studies
or evidence;
- Incorporated with fluvial or tidal flooding maps;
- Used to identify individual properties at risk; or
- Be proactively published.
The mapping can be used, but only with other evidence, at the development planning system level (acting
as a starting point to highlight broad areas).
The images should not be proactively published at this stage due to guidance provided by the Environment
Agency. ‘Proactively publish’ is a health warning that has been attached to the Flood Map for Surface
Water mapping by the Environment Agency. The mapping is modelled and thus has many uncertainties
attached to it. Therefore if it is published and distributed widely to the public it may be used at a scale
which is not appropriate i.e. to identify individual properties. I have provided the mapping to you for
Maresfield Parish at a suitable scale. It is suitable to share the maps within the NDP Steering Group and to
agents working with it. Just be cautious about using the information within public facing documents
without other supporting information.
Extract from the Flood Risk Assessment for the Ashdown Business Park:-
Street Lighting
Scheme being rolled out across the county by East Sussex County Council from 2012 with
some resident engagement events.
Every scheme will be tailored to each specific area and ESCC will discuss proposals with
the parish/town councils, the police and our community safety team before holding a public
engagement event for the public to attend and consultation with residents, both on-line and
by letter. The works will generally follow the same overall changes as those implemented
in other areas (Heathfield, Crowborough, Seaford and Uckfield) and will involve installing
dimming equipment on the street lights along the main roads so that they are dimmed
between midnight and 0600 hrs, installing part-night lighting controls in all of the ESCC
maintained lighting on residential roads and providing a reduced number of street lights on
some of the secondary/estate feeder roads. The part-night lighting switches off between
0030hrs and 0530hrs. We will also be asking the parish/town councils whether they wish
to convert their own lighting to part-night operation at the same time; the cost to the Parish
Council for switching a light to Part Night Lighting would be £30 per light for the cell, which
would give a 46% energy saving for each light.
In Maresfield Parish the roads which are affected are Field End, Forest Park, Maple Close,
The Paddock, and 3 lights on Queens Drive (footpath).
In October 2012, Fiona Wellings at ESCC advised further on this matter and was able to
clarify some points:1. All the street lights in the roads concerned belong to ESCC; none are part of MPC’s
inventory or our responsibility.
2. It is proposed that lamps in the roads listed (Field End, Forest Park, Maple Close,
The Paddock, and Queens Drive) will be turned off from 00:30 to 05:30; dimming is
not an option as it would cost £200 per lamp for the required equipment. A 50/50
solution is possible where only every other lamp is turned off.
3. Excluding lighting in Parklands, this only leaves 14 lamps on MPC’s inventory that
could be considered, but these are on main roads in Maresfield village (Batts Bridge
Road & High Street) which are to be left on.
Re. Parklands; in early 2009 the Parish Council had to reverse the programme of partnight lighting due to the numerous complaints received from residents concerning safety,
etc.
OBJECTIVES FOR PLAN
There are flooding issues in the Parish in the following categories:1. Flooding from local sources.
2. Maresfield Parish is designated as moderate vulnerability for groundwater flooding.
3. Surface water flooding. The risk from this increases from Horney Common moving
south to the Parish boundary, and from Oldlands moving south to Maresfield village.
There are no existing issues relating to street lighting that need to be tackled as part of the
NDP process. Lighting for any new developments will be dealt with as part of the planning
application process.
The Parish Council has no adopted street lights in Fairwarp; only one in Nutley, and 30 in
Maresfield, most of which are in Parklands or in the High Street.
POTENTIAL OPTIONS
It is hard to see how the NDP can tackle any of these risks directly; this action is in the
remit of other authorities who produce reports and information on their activities,
including:
the ESCC Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment

Strategic Flood Risk Assessment report dated March 2009 – prepared for WDC by
Scott Wilson Ltd.

Flood Maps for Surface Water (FMfSW). The FMfSW is the primary source of
nationally derived information on surface-water flooding
FURTHER INFORMATION REQUIRED / NEXT STEPS
In the NDP survey of Parishioners, it is worth including a question along the lines of ‘Is any
of your property subject to serious flooding during times of heavy rainfall or snow melt?’