FLOODING
This is a guide to submitting an effective objection to the Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the Land East of Gamston and North of Tollerton. It focuses on Flood Risk, which is a key Material Planning Consideration.
Scroll down for the ‘How to structure your objection’ guide!
Why Flood Risk Matters
Flooding poses serious risks to life, property, infrastructure, and the environment. The airfield site encompasses Zone 2 and Zone 3 flood risk land. And, it currently acts as a large natural soakaway, helping to absorb rainfall and reduce runoff. Building over this land could significantly increase flood risk to surrounding areas, including Tollerton Lane and Cotgrave Lane.
Recent Flood Events
The area has suffered two Section 19 flood events in recent years, including one during Storm Henk in January 2024. The official investigation by Nottinghamshire County Council found:
- Surface water culverts and ditches were overwhelmed
- Runoff from surrounding fields worsened the flooding
- Properties on Cotgrave Lane and Tollerton Lane were directly affected
- The saturated catchment and lack of drainage capacity were key contributors
(Source: Tollerton Section 19 Flood Report – Storm Henk)
Concerns with the SPD
The SPD fails to address the serious flood risks associated with development on the airfield:
No site-wide flood risk assessment: There is no comprehensive modelling of how development will affect runoff, drainage, and flood risk.
No mitigation strategy: The SPD does not propose specific flood mitigation measures, such as attenuation basins, swales, or sustainable drainage systems (SuDS).
No reference to Section 19 reports: The SPD does not acknowledge recent flood events or the findings of the Storm Henk investigation.
Loss of natural soakaway: The airfield currently helps absorb rainfall. Development will replace permeable surfaces with hardstanding, increasing runoff.
No climate resilience plan: There is no strategy to address increased rainfall intensity and frequency due to climate change.
How to Structure Your Objection
Use your own words, but try to include the following elements:
1. Quote the SPD
Refer to sections that discuss infrastructure, drainage, or environmental impact (such as 3.28 p31, 4.53 p63 and 4.88, p74)
2. Highlight the Gaps
Explain that the SPD lacks:
A site-wide flood risk assessment
A mitigation and drainage strategy
Reference to recent Section 19 flood reports
A climate resilience plan
3. Explain the Risks
Say why this matters:
Increased flood risk to Tollerton Lane, Cotgrave Lane, and surrounding properties
Loss of natural flood protection from the airfield
SPD is not compliant with national flood risk policy
4. Refer to Planning Policy
Mention:
- NPPF Paragraphs 159–169 (flood risk and climate resilience)
- Flood and Water Management Act 2010 – Section 19
- Rushcliffe Local Plan Policy 2 (climate change and flood risk)
5. Request Specific Changes
You could ask for:
A full flood risk assessment and drainage strategy
A comprehensive hydrology assessment
Integration of Section 19 report findings into the SPD
Preservation of key soakaway areas
A specific climate resilience and SuDS plan
Example Phrases for Reference
Please do adapt these into your own words:
“The SPD fails to acknowledge recent Section 19 flood events, including Storm Henk.”
“There is no site-wide flood risk assessment or drainage strategy.”
“The airfield currently acts as a soakaway—development will increase runoff and flood risk.”
“Without mitigation, the SPD risks worsening flood impacts for Tollerton and Cotgrave residents.”
Where to Send Your Objection:
This is the email address for comments to Rushcliffe Borough Council on the SPD: localdevelopment@rushcliffe.gov.uk