Agenda item

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking will jointly provide a presentation to the Panel with a colleague from the Environment Agency. The presentation will be in two parts 1) An update on the Council’s duties with regards to the Flood Water Management Act and 2) The outcome of the Council’s investigations into the flooding during last winter.

Ed Lockington, Environment Agency and Kelvin Packer, Service Manager for Highways & Parking gave a presentation to the Panel regarding this item. A copy of which will be placed on the Panel’s Minute Book, a summary is set out below.

Role of the Regional Flood & Coastal Committee:

·  To advise the Environment Agency (Local context)

·  Environment Agency required to consult the RFCC on its exercise of flood and coastal risk functions

·  Their consent will be required prior to implementation of the Environment Agency’s regional programme of works

·  They will retain their executive powers in respect of raising and spending the Local Levy

·  Their remit is extended to cover coastal erosion as well as flooding

SUDS – Sustainable Urban Drainage System:

·  The Act has established a SUDS Approval Body (SAB)

·  The SAB will have responsibility for the approval of any proposed drainage system for new developments and redevelopments. Approval must be given BEFORE a developer can commence construction.

·  Part of the formal planning process

·  The SAB will be responsible for adoption and maintenance of the SUDS that serve more than one property

How is the Local Authority responding to the Act?

·  Looking to establish the Flood Risk Management Board

·  Planning regular meeting between the EA and Council Officers

·  Appointing a Flood Manager as part of the Highways restructure and increased resources.

·  Creating a single Drainage Team as the Lead Local Flood Authority. This team would co- ordinate all the drainage matters and Flood Risk Management issues.

·  Review the relationship with Emergency Planning and set up new working arrangements to reflect our extra duties.

BENEFITS

·  Single point of contact – Members of the Public and other departments will be well informed who should contacted regarding drainage and flood management issues

·  The Team will ensure that all the new statutory duties will be fulfilled

·  More effective way of working

Chew Magna:

·  Predominantly river flooding

·  Flood event that has a 1% chance of happening in any given year.

·  Public meeting with the Chew Valley Flood Forum (CVFF) and residents.

·  EA have improved flood warning system.

·  River maintenance work completed including de-silting at Tun Bridge and vegetation management work.

·  Working with the CVFF to promote risk awareness and help people to protect their properties.

Chew Magna PLP scheme (Property Level Protection):

·  A pilot scheme, limited to certain properties and a financial limit on the amount per property

·  31 properties experienced flood inundation (approximately half of the PLP properties)

·  Ownership and maintenance PLP not clear

·  Action plan to address the lessons

·  EA producing a new model for the river

·  Survey of properties affected

·  Funding bid for enhanced PLP

Chew Stoke:

·  River and surface water flooding

·  Intense rainfall caused rapid rise in river levels and saturated ground unable to absorb any more rain.

·  Planning a public meeting to review findings

·  Council have improved flood warning signs at the Ford

·  Flood warning system improved by the EA

·  Package of measures to mitigate the risk of surface water flooding.

·  Parish Council keen to develop their Community Flood plan

Mike Curtis and Rachel Wilson representing the Chew Valley Flood Forum were present and had prior to the meeting submitted a number of questions to the Panel. Responses to the questions were handed out at the meeting and a copy of them will be placed on the Panel’s Minute Book.

The Chair asked if they would like to make an additional statement.

Mike Curtis commented that he believed that there were two other organisations that needed to be approached regarding this matter, Bristol Water and the NFU (National Farmers Union).

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that he was happy to address the NFU and local land owners.

Ed Lockington added that the model work will try out different scenarios based upon residents feedback. He said that the model will include possible changes in the way the reservoir operates.

Rachel Wilson asked for a review of the PLP scheme as a 30% failure rate was not acceptable given the significant investment that was made.

The Chair commented that she was concerned over the timing of this review and that one had not already taken place given the close proximity of the winter months.

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that a review was carried out in the summer and that a number of discussions have taken place with the contractors.

The Chair asked would it be too late to implement any findings for this year.

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that it would depend on the outcomes of the review.

Councillor Charles Gerrish asked if £200,000 had been allocated in the budget for work relating to this matter.

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that he could confirm that.

Councillor Caroline Roberts added that no direct actions had yet been planned.

Councillor Douglas Nicol commented that any work to protect public property must be carried out immediately.

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that it was important to understand the reasons for failure amid allegations that residents had fitted the barriers incorrectly.

Councillor Charles Gerrish commented that a report on the last round of flooding incidents was published in September and he felt concerned that no progress was being made.

He added that the Council was praised for its actions last year and can recall meeting with residents of Chew Stoke and Chew Magna last December, but the dilemma for the public remains and they need to see evidence of action.

The Chair asked for that report to be circulated to the Panel.

Councillor Charles Gerrish said that the department had to work within its resources and that he had passed his concerns to them. He added that he felt they would need to be strong with the NFU.

Councillor Les Kew commented that the delay in direct action was a big concern as the fear to the public was very relevant. He added that he felt that any question relating to who is responsible for the PLP should be addressed after the identified problems had been fixed. He asked if residents with a river frontage to their property were contacted directly about the responsibility for keeping it clear.

Ed Lockington replied that the responsibility of these properties was made very clear at a recent public meeting – it is riparian responsibility.

Rachel Wilson commented that it was acknowledged by residents of their responsibility. She added that any help regarding base clearance would be appreciated.

Ed Lockington replied that the Environment Agency can provide advice on base clearance but have limited funds available for the actual work.

Councillor Charles Gerrish commented that dredging will not always provide a solution, that misconceptions were given by the provider on what PLP can / can’t do and that the property surveys missed certain risk areas.

Councillor Lisa Brett commented that she was concerned over the lack of any printed timescale for these projects.

The Service Manager for Highways & Parking replied that actions relating to Chew Stoke were already taking place.

The Chair asked for the Panel to be made aware as soon as possible of the following points:

·  Current preventative measures

·  An Action Plan, written in conjunction with the Cabinet Member(s)

·  Funding options

·  Resources

·  Discussions with the NFU

·  Relevant maps available to the Panel

Councillor Les Kew requested a progress report also be submitted to the January meeting of the Panel.

Councillor Charles Gerrish commented that he would ask the Democratic Services Officer to circulate his report on flooding to the other members of the Panel.

The Chair agreed that a progress report should be added to the workplan of the Panel for January and thanked everybody for their contributions to the debate.