To receive the above verbal update.

Brianne Vally, Environment Agency (EA), introduced the item by informing that Stuart Mollard, Environment Agency (EA), would be presenting an update on Datchet to Hythe End Flood Improvement Measures (DHEFIM).

 

Beginning with the Project Lifecycle, Stuart Mollard informed that the Project had passed the Strategic Outline Case (Gateway 1) at the end of May 2023, moving into the Appraisal Stage. It had then moved through to the Outline Business Case (Gateway 2) which would conclude in Summer 2026. The subsequent phases included presenting a Final Business Case (Gateway 3) and then the Delivery (Gateway 4).

 

Stuart Mollard explained that the long and vague timescales for Gateways 3 and 4 because the preferred option was not known at this stage. If the preferred option was simple or was a series of options, it would then be quicker to design and then construct compared to a more complex option.

 

Stuart Mollard further elaborated the project background by summarising the Strategic Case, which then lead, once it was approved, to the Business Outline Case. There was a number of properties (around 2,500) within the Project area which were at risk of flooding from the River Thames, including houses, schools, a fire station, places of worship, civic buildings, and critical infrastructure like railways, roads and utilities. Whilst there were some isolated flood risk management assets present, it was accepted that there were large parts of the Project area remained undefended.

 

From this, the EA sought to align the Project with both national and regional business strategies which called for measures to be undertaken to reduce flood risk in the Project area. In addition to flood protection, DHEFIM had the potential to deliver other benefits, namely several environmental, sustainability and social improvements.

 

The EA had been working in partnership with RBWM to seek out solutions which worked for communities and their environment, working together under a combined project team and a joint project board.

 

Stuart Mollard conveyed that the project team had made good progress in the last three months in taking the project forward.; however, he highlighted that the objective of DHEFIM project was to reduce the risk of flooding rather than unfeasible eliminate all the risks in its entirety. Nevertheless, he reassured that the EA were committed as part of the joint team in delivering flood alleviation works.

 

Stuart Mollard then moved onto summarising key activities in the last three months, namely working through the Appraisal Stage. The EA had finalised its contract with its framework consultant and technical supplier, Jacobs; and had been working with them in doing some significant technical work around project objectives, confirming the study area and investigating other sources of flood risk. Alongside flooding from the River Thames, the EA were looking into the risks associated with surface water flooding and ground water flooding.

 

The EA had also investigated other partnership funding sources. Whilst there was confirmed funding from the EA and RBWM, EA hoped to find alternative potential interested parties who would likely be positively impacted by this scheme and thus contribute.

 

The EA were also conducting much technical work and data gathering, ensuring that it had the right level of information to do robust assessments which were necessary in identifying the preferred options for the project.

 

The EA were planning to arrange some public events at some point in late-2023, likely a date in the end of November 2023, to invite residents and give an update on EA’s activities as well as receive feedback from communities; therefore, starting the engagement process.

 

Stuart Mollard then showed a timeline summarising the Outline Business Case, which was split into four blocks:

·       Project Definition (Summer/Autumn 2023),

·       Optioneering (Autumn 2023 – Spring 2024),

·       Short List Assessment (Spring 2024 – Summer 2025)

·       Preferred Options(s) Identified (Summer 2025 – Summer 2026)

 

The DHEFIM was reaching the conclusion of the Project Definition phase, which would involve a public engagement event. The next project phase, Optioneering, would involve formulating a long list of options and reducing it down to a short list of options. Moving into the Short List Assessment stage, the EA would then consult with the public to receive their views on the shortlist of options until a preferred option (or options) has been chosen. Once completed, in the Preferred Option(s) Identified stage, EA would then arrange for the technical justification for the preferred option(s) to provide the Outline Business Case.

 

(Councillor Coe had entered the meeting virtually at 6:31pm)

 

Stuart Mollard then explained that the approach framework for stakeholder engagement was inform, consult and involve; ensuring that the public was involved at key stages. The EA also planned to establish an external stakeholder engagement group. They planned to set this up after the public engagement events to see if there were any key individuals which were interested in being involved, and thus form the group from the people who put their interest forward at the events. From this group, the EA hoped to have a representative sample of people who would be impacted by the scheme.

 

To conclude, Stuart Mollard displayed the points of contact for the DHEFIM:

 

Datchet to Hythe End flood improvement measures - GOV.UK

(www.gov.uk)

 

For further information, or to provide feedback please contact:

·       THM.Schemes@environment-agency.gov.uk

·       flooding.enquiries@rbwm.gov.uk

 

Or call the Environment Agency customer contact centre on 03708 506 506; or Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead on 01628 683 800.

 

Any concerns about a pollution incident, or a blockage in the river,

call the Environment Agency’s 24-hour hotline on 0800 80 70 60.

 

Councillor Larcombe expressed concerns about the £10 million funding for flood defence, elaborating that he raised this at the recent Full Council meeting, and it was revealed that there was less than £1 million for flood defence in the budget. He asked who told the EA that there was £10 million in the fund as there was £53 million in the fund previously.

 

Ben Crampin clarified that the £900,000 was for the contribution for the Business Outline Case of the DHEFIM. The rest of the money, he was told, which was previously committed to by the previous administration came from borrowing. He added that while commitment had not ultimately been made by the new administration, officers had not been told any differently that the plans would be changing or there was no funding. From this, the project was carrying on as planned. Ben Crampin added that he had been talking with Councillor Coe regularly about the scheme, including a recent meeting between himself, Brianne Vally and Stuart Mollard with Councillors Coe and Werner, Leader of the Council, to brief them on scheme. A future action for officers was to go back to Cabinet for an official opinion on the scheme.

 

The Chair added to the point that the £2.5 million per year was in the budget but would not come into effect until 2024-2025.

 

Councillor Larcombe then asked why he had not been involved in any discussions despite stating that he was appointed on the Thames Regional Flood and Coastal Committee. Stuart Mollard replied that part of the DHEFIM scheme was searching for key stakeholders. The EA sought to contact key stakeholders in advance of the public engagement events in late-November 2023, and invite them to the events and possibly meet them before the public engagement events so they that they could be informed.

 

Stuart Mollard informed that Councillor Larcombe was listed as a stakeholder, and he offered to make a commitment to contact him and forward a briefing to him on what was being proposed and then take part in the public engagement events where the proposals would be presented.

 

Councillor Larcombe responded that it was “too little, too late”. He commented that River Thames Scheme Channel One was taken out of the DHEFIM scheme due to the Borough not allocating £53 million, elaborating that money was put into the scheme in 2017 but was then halted in 2020 without notice. He then informed that he conveyed to the Thames Regional Flood and Coastal Committee that the River Thames Scheme was no longer coherent in spite of the Committee approving the finance for the scheme in January 2023.

 

Councillor Larcombe then stated that the River Thames Scheme had been designated as a nationally significant infrastructure project (NSIP) and that it was in the pre-application planning stage with the EA seeking a development consent order. He then announced that he would actively ensure that the EA’s request for a development consent order would be denied on the grounds that the River Thames Scheme was incoherent.

 

Councillor Larcombe opined that “history [was] repeating itself” as with the Jubilee River scheme, claiming that it fell apart because it was designed and built wrong and was consuming millions of pounds.

 

Councillor Larcombe then announced that he recently discovered that the Berry Hill Bridge (a footbridge across the Jubilee River) no longer existed, having been removed around two years prior due to it falling apart and had not been replaced. He said he was asking questions on how much it cost to remove the bridge and who paid for it, adding that Bridge Number 12 further downstream was falling apart.

 

Councillor Larcombe concluded that the EA had failed to learn from the mistakes of the Jubilee River scheme, and that he would relay this to the planning inspectorate in regard to the EA’s request for a development consent order for the River Thames Scheme.

 

Parish Councillor Ian Thompson (Datchet PC) raised a series of points. He first stated that he had not received any feedback or been involved in the meetings between the EA and RBWM. Secondly, he then listed the three main flooding issues in Datchet:

·       At the Eton End area / Railway Arch

·       The River Frontage, near the entrance to the Eel Pass construction.

·       Datchet Common Brook – the objective to stop water flowing from Datchet Common Brook into central Datchet.

 

With winter approaching, Parish Councillor Ian Thompson asserted that he had raised for the last four years that these issues needed to be addressed but they had not. He stated that Thames Water would not communicate with him; and that he had no dialogue with the previous administration concerning their intentions with Network Rail in regard to the underpass in the Eton End area. He also raised that the EA had not yet submitted an application to take the land in Southlea Road alongside Poplars.

 

Parish Councillor Ian Thompson relayed local concerns that water levels would rise and flood the back of Datchet. Despite raising these issues as well as producing reports which described the flooding issues, no action had taken place and he had not received any dialogue. Reflecting Councillor Larcombe’s point, he conveyed that the only resolution was to ensure that all three sections of River Thames Scheme were working.

 

Responding to Councillor Larcombe and Parish Councillor Ian Thompson’s points, Brianne Vally replied that there was no representative for the River Thames Scheme in attendance at the meeting and that none of the EA officers present were the best people to respond on any specific queries or points. Nevertheless, she offered to forward the relevant contact details if Councillor Larcombe did not possess them.

 

ACTION: Brianne Vally to forward the contact details of the relevant officers for the River Thames Scheme to Councillors Larcombe and Ian Thompson.

 

In regard to the bridges across the Jubilee River, Brianne Vally believed that the removal of the Berry Hill footbridge was covered in an update a few years prior when it was being removed. She added that most bridges along the Jubilee River were under the ownership of local authorities, with the Berry Hill footbridge was under Buckinghamshire Council’s ownership and that they removed the bridge. She offered to forward to Councillor Larcombe the relevant details on the ownership and maintenance of bridges in the area.

 

ACTION: Brianne Vally to forward the relevant details on the ownership and maintenance of bridges around the Jubilee River to Councillor Larcombe.

 

Brianne Vally informed that some of the initiatives and reports which Parish Councillor Ian Thompson had shared over the years had been forwarded to the EA’s framework consultant, Jacobs, to explore potential options, particularly as the Bypass Channel was no longer happening. She also highlighted that there was an opportunity to attend the EA’s public engagement session in November 2023 to raise points with other project team members.

 

In regard to Datchet Common Brook, Brianne Vally informed that the EA’s catchment coordinator had written to Thames Water on improving the area, namely vegetation clearance. She added that recent works by RBWM around the Datchet Common Valve was an attempt to investigate the option and understand the viability.

 

In terms of contacts, Brianne Vally referred to the external stakeholder engagement group mentioned earlier in Stuart Mollard’s presentation, explaining that the EA believed that it was more appropriate to extend the engagement event so that a wider group of people could benefit. She added that it was the EA’s intention to continue with this external stakeholder engagement group and that Parish Councillor Ian Thompson was welcome to attend and have a more two-way communication. While she highlighted that she had been giving updates on the progress of the DHEFIM scheme at every Flood Liaison Group meeting in the last couple of years, she acknowledged that there needed to be a system of two-way communication whereby the Flood Group meetings were more one-way.

 

Responding to the question on money, Councillor Coe informed that the Council did not possess a positive pot on money and that it was always money which was borrowed. He offered to ask Councillor Jones, Cabinet Member for Finance, about the details of the finance with flood defence.

 

ACTION: Councillor Coe to ask about the financial details concerning flood defence.

 

Councillor Larcombe responded that the Full Council meeting during the previous evening revealed that the Borough did not have any money but rather a debt of £203 million. He then raised that the River Thames Scheme development costs had been in excess of £70 million and that nothing had been done to reduce the risks of flood defence.

 

Parish Councillor Mandy Brar (Cookham PC) asked about the Micro-Hydro scheme on the River Thames. Brianne Vally replied that her remit was in flood risk management and that she was not always cited on the EA’s assets. She then suggested that Parish Councillor Mandy Brar could email her queries to herself, and she could then forward them to the appropriate EA staff.

 

ACTION: Parish Councillor Mandy Brar to email her queries about Micro-Hydro scheme on the River Thames to Brianne Vally, who would then forward them to the relevant EA staff.

 

Brianne Vally then gave an update on the situation with the Thames Catchment:

·       In midst of the warm weather in October 2023, the Borough received only 6% of the average rainfall for October, though more rain was expected in the next few days.

·       Natural river flows had decreased at all sites. Brianne Vally highlighted that weekly water situation local area reports could be found on the gov.uk website.

·       Regarding the situation in Eton Wick, Brianne Vally referred to her responses on the subject earlier on in the meeting, though she added that she was happy to receive any more questions.

·       On the maintenance of the Jubilee River Flood Alleviation Scheme, Brianne Vally informed that a programme of maintenance activities was expected to be carried out, with some of the works taking place on the North Maidenhead Bund, including vegetation clearance. There would be some further work in which Marsh Lane and Taplow weirs were expected to be upgraded by 2024.

·       The EA were reviewing their public safety risk assessment for the Jubilee River, driven by recent fatalities that had taken place along the river.

 

Before starting her update, Natasha Gibbs, Hertfordshire North London Environment Agency (EA), informed that she was Brianne Vally’s counterpart who covered Wraysbury and Horton areas of RBWM from the Colnbrook River side. She reported that:

·       The maintenance and conveyance cuts within the Colnbrook River had been completed.

·       The EA were following up some potential blockages and overgrowth near Copper Mill Road Bridge.

·       Natasha Gibbs herself was working on some larger catchment scale modelling for the Lower Coln catchment (from the M4 to where the Coln River joined the River Thames). It was expected that an updated version of the modelling would be made available by around April 2024, thus updating the surveys on the flood risks in the area since the 2012 survey.

·       The EA was in a period of automation for its flood alerts and flood warnings, whilst it was experiencing industrial action, which was the cause of some residents receiving false flood warnings in the Colnbrook and Lower Coln. There was an issue at the EA’s Horton Mill telemetry site on the Colnbrook which was then resolved, reassuring that it was a one-off fault. The automation period was to take place until 2^nd November 2023.