a)    By Councillor Smith:

That this Council:

i)             Notes with concern how unreliable flood mapping can impede planning and cause mispricing of insurance, and:

ii)            Calls on the Environment Agency to revise its flood maps in Maidenhead to take account of evidence accumulated since the ‘Jubilee River’ flood relief scheme was commissioned in 1999, including the heavy local flooding in January and February 2014.

Councillor Smith introduced his motion. He had proposed the motion to encourage the Environment Agency to keep maps up to date. Three primary parties were affected. The first party was residents seeking insurance. A scheme had been in place since April to correct  market failure however this would only be in place for 20 years. The second party was planning authorities. Incorrect and vague maps created uncertain results if different decisions were taken at Development Control Panels and on appeal. This led to delay and expense for all concerned.  The third party was planning officers who had to deal with the situation. Simplification would help the processing of applications.

Councillor Cox stated that he supported the motion. It was correct to say the maps were deeply unreliable, considering the effectiveness of the Jubilee River for the Maidenhead area. He was aware other areas of the borough had suffered in the 2014 floods, this was why Councillor Dudley was working with neighbouring authorities on the Lower Thames Scheme. Those residents who benefitted from the Jubilee River still had problems getting flood insurance. Premiums should reflect the reduced risk but they did not as the maps were not up to date.

Councillor Hill commented that he had moved to Chandlers Quay in 2000 when the flood relief scheme had been built but was not in operation. Since then there had been floods in other areas of the borough but in Chandlers Quay no more than 2 inches of water had come in. His own insurance had reduced because of the flood relief scheme.  He made a plea to the environment agency to redraw the maps and change the criteria.

Councillor Dudley commented that the issue was costing residents a lot of money in terms of insurance. It also caused difficulties in relation to the building of extensions and new homes. The EA commented on planning applications, but with an out of date view.  This was the reason the council was working hard on the River Thames scheme, to protect residents in areas such as Wraysbury and Datchet.  He hoped that officers would put together a letter to go to both the relevant Minister and the Head of the EA setting out the contents of the motion and outlining the issues residents faced and the work the council was doing in relation to the River Thames scheme.

Councillor Saunders commented then he had been Lead Member for Planning a meeting had been held with the EA to understand why the maps had not been altered in light of the effectiveness of the Jubilee River. The explanation given had been that although it was true that the quantum of water flooding into east Maidenhead would in all probability have been substantially reduced because of the Jubilee River, it would still extend into many areas, but at a lower depth. Councillor Saunders stated that this explanation for the lack of changes to the maps would only be logical if there were a cliff in east maidenhead, which there was not.

Councillor E. Wilson arrived at 8.15pm.

Councillor Quick commented that she had been given the explanation by the EA that as the flood relief channel was man-made, it could therefore fail. The new Oldfield school planning application had been affected by the flood maps as the EA concluded the site was in Flood Zone 3 when the council knew the area was well-protected.

Councillor D. Wilson commented that the EA had invested £110 million in the Jubilee River; if it had confidence in the scheme it should be able to redraw the maps. He had been told the EA did not have the resources to undertake a review of the maps. Revised maps could free up land for future development.

Councillor Beer commented that the original maps had been drawn in a short three month period at the request of the government. The maps had always been vague and incorrect in a number of places. All communities along the river were affected by the maps, even if they had never flooded, for example in parts of Old Windsor. It was a long standing government policy that man-made defences could fail, and the insurance industry went along with it. A halfway approach was needed. The EA measured risk in 50 year and 100 year periods; the insurance industry used the level of 75 year floods, making it difficult to compare.

Councillor Smith had been very encouraged by the debate, which had benefited from local knowledge.

It was proposed by Councillor Smith, seconded by Councillor D. Wilson, and:

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That this Council:

i)         Notes with concern how unreliable flood mapping can impede planning and cause mispricing of insurance, and:

ii)        Calls on the Environment Agency to revise its flood maps in Maidenhead to take account of evidence accumulated since the ‘Jubilee River’ flood relief scheme was commissioned in 1999, including the heavy local flooding in January and February 2014.