Flood Liaison Group
Tuesday 10 September 2013 6.00 pm
ROYAL BOROUGH FLOOD FORUM
10TH SEPTEMBER 2013
18.00 TOWN HALL, MAIDENHEAD
MINUTES
| Present |  | |
| Cllr Jesse Grey (Chair) | JG | Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor |
| Cllr Malcolm Beer | MB | Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Councillor |
| Jeanne Capey | JC | Environment Agency |
| Dave Murphy | DM | 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 |
| Ian Thompson | IT | Parish Flood Liaison Group |
| Fiona Hewer | FH | Parish Flood Liaison Group |
| Martin Coker | MC | Parish Flood Liaison Group |
| Ewan Larcombe | EL | Parish Flood Liaison Group |
| Hilary Murgatroyd | HM | Thames Water |
| Bob Cunningham | BC | Thames Water |
| Amanda Smith | AS | Thames Water |
| Karen Richardson | KR | West Berkshire (Observer) |
| ITEM | DESCRIPTION | ACTION |
| 1.0 | Welcome & Introductions | |
| 1.1 | JG welcomed everyone to the Town Hall, Maidenhead and asked everyone to introduce themselves. | |
| | |
| 2.0 | Apologies | |
| 2.1 | Councillor Richard Kellaway | |
| | |
| 3.0 | Minutes of Previous Meeting (Accuracy) | |
| 3.1 | Agreed as a true record. | |
| Actions from previous meeting | |
| 3.2 | Point 3.4 – Reservoir inspection, MP to confirm whether this has taken place. HC requested information on inspections. JC will provide list of frequency and date of last inspection for the reservoirs. | JC/MP |
| 3.3 | Point 3.5 - Battle Bourne Tour – date still to be confirmed – MP to liaise with HC. JC will remind MP. | JC/MP |
| 3.4 | Point 5.4 – HC asked what actions Thames Water were going to undertake to resolve issues identified in East Datchet. HT stated that plans were being drawn up for 2015 at present. Andrew Haggart to respond and provide details of likely timescale. – This action is still outstanding, HM to chase for response. | HM/AH |
| 3.5 | Point 5.7 – Little Marlow – to be covered by Thames Water during meeting. | |
| 3.6 | Point 9.1 – IT raised an issue relating to closing of a large culvert under the railway line adjacent to Datchet Golf course. SL stated that he had previously raised concerns that this culvert maybe beneficial in larger scale events, i.e. it may allow water to flow from north to south during larger events. EA to provide details of ground levels in the vicinity of this culvert and an assessment of the effects of closing this culvert. HC asked whether any progression had been made on investigating protection of Datchet Golf Course from fluvial flooding. JG stated that available funding was likely to be targeted at protecting residential properties and that no funding would be available for a scheme to protect the golf course. | MP |
| 3.7 | HC stated that details of the properties identified as being eligible for property level flood protection measures had still to be provided. DM stated that 1600 properties were initially identified as being eligible, and that this figure had been reduced to 1200 following detailed survey work. To date 534 properties have signed up to take part in the scheme. SL clarified that of the 1600 eligible properties approximately 200 were in the RBWM area and that approximately 100 had expressed an interest. IT indicated that flooding measures have been installed at Ham Island and the work has been good. MB stated that since the launch of the property level flood protection scheme no information had been provided to the ward councillors or the parish councils. | |
| | |
| 4.0 | RBWM Update. | |
| 4.1 | SL stated that the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (LFRMS) was well underway. Draft should be completed by Christmas 2013 with formal consultation likely early in the New Year. | |
| 4.2 | FH asked for an update on development of the register of structures and features (with a significant affect on flood risk). SL stated that this had been delayed due to the officer working on the register leaving the authority. SL also stated that this problem should be resolved shortly as a recruitment process was in place and interviews were to be held at the beginning of October. | |
| 4.3 | Cllr Beer stated that a number of parishes were developing flood plans and wanted to be sure that there was no conflict between these plans and the LFRMS. SL stated that the LFRMS was a high level document and was likely to refer to other plans and policies, i.e. the Borough’s emergency plans and spatial planning policy documents. The LFRMS was also likely to refer to community engagement processes, such as the Borough Flood Group and the Parish Flood Group DP stated that the Borough Flood Group was a fantastic forum and that the parish work will compliment the strategy. | |
| | |
| 5.0 | Update from Environment Agency | |
| 5.1 | Lower Thames Flood Alleviation Scheme – DM introduced himself and explained he had been brought on board to move the scheme forward. The preferred scheme option has been identified as diversion channels and property level protection measures. The total scheme costs have been estimated as £256m and it has been calculated that approximately £136m will be available through central government funding. A sponsors group, including senior officers from each local authority has been set up to explore possible funding mechanisms to meet the funding short fall. Scheme will need approval from DEFRA and the Treasury. Key issues have been identified as planning consent, environmental impact assessments and the Water Framework Directive, and workshops involving the Local Authorities are to be held in October. Phase 1 of the Lower Thames Flood Alleviation Scheme has an estimated cost of approximately £36m and includes improvements to 3 weirs, possible works to Desborough Cut and preparation of major incident plan. | DP |
| 5.2 | Property Level Protection – DM stated that the first wave was being undertaken and that 534 properties have shown an interest in the flood protection measures on offer. Approximately 100 of these properties are in the RBWM area. Basic measures are to be offered as part of the scheme Other products will also be available subject to a contribution towards the cost of the product i.e. new flood doors instead of flood guards. JG commented that when works commence and the flood protection measures start being installed more residents may come forward for inclusion in the scheme. | |
| 5.3 | Lower Thames FAS Major Incident Plan – DM reported three elements of the major incident plan. Local authorities preparing testing and exercising. A feasibility study into the use of demountable flood barriers to be completed by February 2014. The development of a flood visualisation tool providing better visualisation of the development of a flood event to assist the co-ordination of emergency responders. | |
| 5.4 | Communicating Flood Risk – JC reported that revised flood maps are on schedule for publication on the EA website in December. JG asked about the colour coding of the maps and Cllr Beer asked about the opacity of the colours to be used pointing out that map features should no be obliterated. JC stated that comments would be taken on board. EL asked if website was being connected to my backyard, and JC commented that it was hoped it would be but a few technical issues had been experienced. | |
| 5.5 | Insurance – JC commented that she did not have any additional information to bring to the table. The existing Statement of Principals will continue until favoured option has been implemented. | |
| | |
| 6.0 | Thames Water | |
| 6.1 | Little Marlow – AS confirmed that she had moved roles within the last six weeks. She confirmed that there was now a dedicated team on site at Little Marlow STW twenty four seven, with a technician on site and a manager on site or on call. The inlet screens have been or are being refurbished. One screen is outstanding and should be refitted by the end of October / early November all activated sludge pumps are back in service and there are two spares on site. The pontoon is to be left in situ at present, but is only being cleared once a week, at the start of April it was being cleared daily. Pumping station refurbishment to start tomorrow The whole site should be fully operational by Christmas this year. | |
| 6.2 | AS offered to arrange a site visit for interested parties and DP encouraged take up of this offer. Interested parties to email Streetcare so that details can be passed onto AS. | |
| 6.3 | FH stated that residents need to be kept informed. The situation has improved but no heavy rain has been experienced recently. Appreciate progress but Thames Water has been very lucky with the weather. Residents were informed that the inlet screens would be completed by October. AS to confirm details. | |
| 6.4 | Ham Island – HM confirmed that the ditch had been cleared. A study into the use of two underground pipes is being undertaken and the possibility of relocating the final discharge point is being investigated The work is currently estimated to cost approximately £50k and EA consent will be required to relocate the outfall. Further funding required for flood resistance plan to install further bunding etc. IT stated that the existing bunds need to be repaired as the cattle have broken them down. AS confirmed that this needs to be done before winter and HM to feedback to DP on this. | HM |
| 6.5 | HM confirmed that sewer repairs were taking place in Thames Street, Windsor for three months from October. | |
| 6.6 | IT asked about the issue with pollution in the Myrke Stream. HM confirmed that they were trying to progress issue with Slough Borough Council. BC confirmed that dual manholes were the problem and unfortunately Thames Water was having problems accessing them as most of the manholes are on private land. HC requested that feedback be given as the pollution affects the Datchet area. JG and DP to write to Slough BC and raise concerns regarding this pollution problem. Feedback to be circulated to group. | |
| | |
| 7.0 | Parish Flood Group Update | |
| 7.1 | HC asked if any movement had been made on the IT plan with Simon Arthur and that the two thousand pounds was still to be spent. DP confirmed that the two thousand was still to be spent and that he would be meeting with Simon Arthur on Monday. | |
| 7.2 | FH stated that a problem had occurred again in the Whyteladyes Lane sewer system. BC stated that this was not the same problem as experienced previously. Problem was caused by a blockage; as a result of rag snagging on scaled pipe work MC stated that unfortunately the residents think it is the same problem as in the same area. BC confirmed that the problem had been solved for now but stated that a lot of the pipe work is quite old. | |
| | |
| 8.0 | Future Meetings | |
| 8.1 | DP stated that the next meeting is to be held in the council chamber at the Town Hall, Maidenhead on 17th December 2013. | |
| | |
| 9.0 | Any Other Business | |
| 9.1 | DM stated that the EA had been notified that CEMEX had submitted a planning application to backfill Kingsmead lake. JC to be responding to planning as there is a possible conflict with the Lower Thames Flood Alleviation Scheme. | |
| 9.2 | IT requested information on the fly tipping issue at Datchet Common Brook. EA to provide feedback to IT. | JC |
| 9.3 | IT stated that an investigation needs to occur regarding use of pumps at the Myrke. JC confirmed that investigation had taken place. JC to request MP feedback outcome. | JC/MP |
| 9.4 | JG thanked everyone for attending. | |