Meeting documents

Flood Liaison Group
Tuesday 12 June 2012

ROYAL BOROUGH FLOOD FORUM
12TH JUNE 2012
18.00 GUILDHALL, WINDSOR

MINUTES

Present
Cllr Jesse Grey (Chair)
JG
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor
Cllr John Lenton
JL
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor
Cllr Richard Kellaway
RK
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor
Doug Hill
DH
Environment Agency
David Perkins
DP
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead
Simon Lavin
SL
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead
Lisa Morgan
LM
Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead (minute taker)
Harry Clasper
HC
Chair of Parish Flood Liaison Group
Andrew Davies
AD
Parish Flood Liaison Group
Ian Thompson
IT
Parish Flood Liaison Group
Ewan Larcombe
EL
Parish Flood Liaison Group
Fiona Hewer
FH
Parish Flood Liaison Group
Barrie Mair
BM
Fishery’s Residents Association
Karl Benz
KB
Thames Reach Residents Association


ITEMDESCRIPTIONACTION
1.0Welcome & Introductions
1.1JG welcomed everyone to the Guildhall, Windsor and asked everyone to introduce themselves.
2.0Apologies
2.1Councillor Beer - Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor
2.2 Ralph Green - Parish Flood Liaison Group
3.0Minutes of Previous Meeting (Accuracy)
3.1Agreed as a true record.
3.2 Point 4.1 – Electronic copy of ABI presentation, made at last Borough Flood Forum, has been circulated by email. BM and KB asked if they could also be forwarded a copy of this presentation and it was agreed that an electronic copy of this presentation would be forwarded to BM and KBSL
3.3Point 4.7 – no emails received with regards to ABI presentation. DP and JG still happy to receive enquiries and pass them onto Matt Cullen at ABI.
3.4Point 9.1 – SL confirmed that he had met IT on site in Datchet to look at the concerns raised in his letters. SL had however yet to raise these issues formally with the Environment Agency.SL
3.5Point 9.2 – Datchet Common Brook, concerns regarding siltation below Datchet Road bridge and fly tipping further downstream – matter being progressed between IT and DHIT/DH
3.6Point 9.3 – IT had yet to receive an invite to an annual inspection of an Environment Agency reservoir. DH confirmed that this offer was still open.DH
4.0Flood & Water Management Act Update
4.1SL stated that there was little to update on the Act since the last meeting.
The Berkshire Strategic Flood Risk Management Partnership has agreed that a consultant will be used to assist in drafting the generic sections of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy.
A consultant has now been appointed and is collecting data on the existing level of flood risk and existing policies from the five local authorities involved in the partnership.
4.2SL clarified that the five local authorities were Bracknell, West Berkshire, Wokingham, Reading, and Windsor and Maidenhead. Slough have joined the Buckinghamshire Strategic Flood Risk Management Partnership as this partnership is more appropriate to their catchment.
4.3SL also clarified the likely content of the generic sections of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy, stating that he anticipated that the generic sections will set out who the risk management authorities are, what their responsibilities and powers are, and the requirements of relevant legislation.
4.4It is anticipated that the generic sections of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy will be completed by September 2012. Each authority will then need to complete the localised sections of the strategy.
4.5JG stated that the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy should be in place by December 2012. DP stated that this date was not however set in stone and that all concerned would be given the opportunity to review and comment on the draft document. JG stated it was however good to have a date to work towards, to prevent the completion date extending too far.
4.6SL also stated that it is anticipated that powers to designate private structures and features, with a significant affect on flood risk, will come into affect “soon”. Once designated, a private structure or feature cannot be removed or altered without the designating authority’s formal consent.
4.7DH explained that a recent reorganisation within the EA meant that he would no longer be routinely attending the Royal Borough Flood Forum.
DP and JG reassured everyone that communication lines will however be kept open.
DP also stated that a meeting will be held with JG and the EA, and that an officer from the Environment Agency will be designated to work with the Council. This could be extended and encouraged within the Parish Flood Forum. IT commented that DH has already been doing this with Datchet Parish for some years.
5.0Battle Bourne Embankment Scheme Update
5.1DH provided an update on the Battle Bourne Embankment Scheme reporting that construction was well underway and that the works should be completed by August, subject to weather conditions. Landscaping to be undertaken following completion of main works.
5.2JG stated that he understood that the residents of Ham Island were unhappy with the tree works that were undertaken during bird nesting season. DH assured that all trees were inspected by a suitably qualified person prior to the works being undertaken, that the EA has been in talks with the residents, and that the problem was resolved.
5.3HC asked for clarification of the location for the embankment, JG clarified by giving location details, describing it as similar to a horseshoe in shape.
6.0Romney Weir Hydro Electric Scheme Update
6.1DH stated that works were progressing well on the hydro electric power scheme at the weir and should be substantially complete in July. The works were however being undertaken by a private developer and there was still a significant list of outstanding items, including directional drilling of the power supply cable. It is anticipated that the scheme will be operational by the end of the year.
6.2DH explained the EA’s role in such schemes, specifically stating that this included ensuring there is no lose of capacity at the weir.
6.3JG stated that he had been on a tour of the scheme recently and the project was very worthwhile going to see. HC requested if it would be possible for a tour to bet set up again. DH to investigate and advise.DH
6.4KB asked if there were any plans for Boulters Lock. DH stated no planning permission as of yet. DH to find out details and report back.DH
7.0Parish Flood Group Update
7.1HC stated that the household flood insurance presentation made by the ABI at the last meeting was a great disappointment. The Parish Flood Liaison Group are deeply concerned by this issue and are concerned that no one seems prepared to take a lead on its resolution.
JG responded stating that he considers that there is an element of brinkmanship going on between the ABI and the Government over this matter.
JG also felt that it was unlikely that the provision of insurance would be refused, but premiums are likely to reflect risk, and properties in vulnerable areas can expect to pay higher premiums.
JG also stated that the government and the insurance industry expect people to take some measures to help themselves (to mitigate damages during a flood event)
7.2 HC stated that it is understood that the Borough has no power to resolve this but representation of residents concerns need to be made. JG commented that he was happy. The Council is seen as a flagship authority by the Government, and as such it does have a voice.
7.3DP stated that the Borough was still awaiting a firm announcement from the Government on this issue, and that the Borough’s position is always “residents come first every time”. HC commented that attitude appears to be passive and that proactive attitude is required.
7.4 DP confirmed that the Borough was aware of IT’s paper on the future of flood risk insurance. While the contents of this paper cannot be formally endorsed or agreed, they have not been dismissed. IT stated that pressure applied via MPs had won the lock keepers issue, and that a similar concerted effort needs to be made relating to the future of flood risk insurance.
7.5FH stated that, as the Borough was at the top of the list in numbers of properties at risk of flooding, this should surely be a top priority and the Borough should be using its contacts to lobby the government.
7.6KB requested clarification from ABI with regard to the statement that insurance would not be refused. He considered that this was not a truthful statement. BM stated that he had cases where residents had been refused insurance including one resident who had been refused 81 out of 82 times. SL stated that the EA had previously requested examples of cases where residents had encountered difficultly in obtaining flood risk insurance, following the 2003 River Thames flood. No examples had however been provided, presumably as residents did not wish to jeopardise their insurance or property value. Evidence of specific instances where households cannot obtain insurance to be fed back to SL.
JG confirmed that he would then be happy to write to ministers including Caroline Spellman and Nick Herbert, highlighting these cases.
KB/SL/JG
7.7HC suggested that it would be a good idea if the Borough promoted a program to help property owners protect their properties. DP suggested that a flood fair could be held at the Town Hall, Maidenhead to encourage and promote ideas. HC stated that he considered that this was not doing enough.
DP also stated that he was happy to write to the ABI, explaining that he was planning to set up a flood fair, and to ask whether ABI members would recognise any measures installed by residents.
DP
7.8HC stated that he understood that the Borough’s Emergency Planning Officer post was currently vacant and that this was of great concern to the Parish Councils.
DP responded stating that the Borough still has a good response capability and listed a number of officers trained in dealing with the response to emergency situations. The Borough is also currently in the process of planning for a number of major events such as Royal Ascot, the Torch Relay and the Olympics.
DP also stated that the Borough is currently working on Reservoir Plans which will be circulated to members of the forum in the future.
HC stated that it was excellent to have one point of contact. DP stated again that the Borough has plenty of trained staff and that the community wardens could for example be used as a liaison point during an event.
In the short term any emergency planning issues should be sent to DP.
DP
7.9IT raised an issue relating to rapid fluctuations in river levels in the Thames following heavy rainfall in May. Apparently river levels were yo-yoing by as much as nine inches in half an hour. IT asked if these fluctuations were due to the operation of the Jubilee River? DH stated these fluctuations were not due to the operation of the Jubilee River and stated that a limited number of gate movements had actually been made. DH did however offer to investigate further if IT could provide details of dates and times of fluctuations in river level.IT / DH
7.9KB stated that communication seems to be an issue with regard to the river navigation and asked if lock keepers are communicating with each other? DH stated that Lock keepers knew what they were doing and that Flood Risk Management and navigation are two separate issues.
8.0Future Meetings
8.1Next flood group meeting at Town Hall, Maidenhead on 18th September 2012 at 18.00 in the Ascot Bray Room.
9.0Any Other Business
9.1IT raised an issue relating to a recent planning application at Connection House in Datchet. Datchet Parish Council / IT believed that the Planning Panel had been misled by information supplied relating to flood risk.
JG stated that this was a planning matter and that he was not prepared to discuss it further at this meeting.
9.2EL asked what exactly is happening with the Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy. DP stated there is a commitment from all leaders of all the affected Councils to meet and discuss how this scheme can be taken forward. There is also a possible argument that this scheme should be considered as nationally important infrastructure.
It was agreed that a formal update should be provided at the next meeting
DP / DH
9.3EL stated that there was a meeting being held today to discuss the location of more traveller sites within the flood plan in the Wraysbury area. JG stated that this meeting was only discussing possible sites and that no firm decisions were being made at this stage.
9.4EL commented that it is the tenth anniversary of the opening of the Jubilee River.