English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal ... · English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee (RFCC) Gloucestershire County Council, Shire Hall, Westgate Street,

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee

Tuesday, 15 April 2014

1

Members of English Severn and Wye Flood and Coastal Committee Members of the English Severn and Wye Flood and Coastal Committee are invited to attend a meeting of the Committee on Tuesday, 15th April 2014 at 10:00 am. The meeting will be held at Warwickshire County Council, Shire Hall, Warwick CV34 4RL. A location plan and directions are provided overleaf. Refreshments will be available from 9:30 am and a buffet lunch will be provided. After lunch, members are invited to join us on a local site visit to Cubbington Brook. Transport has been arranged for this site visit. Please bring sturdy footwear. We expect to finish the day by 3.30pm.

Dafydd Evans West Area Manager

2

3

Directions http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/locationmap By rail Warwick Station is on the main London Marylebone and Birmingham Moor Street and Snow Hill Lines. The station is approximately a 10 minute walk away from Shire Hall. Use the footpath through Priory Park (see map), then either Barrack Street or Northgate Street to get to Shire Hall. Warwick Parkway is also on the main London Marylebone and Birmingham Moor Street and Snow Hill Lines. There is a shuttlebus that goes to Warwick town centre every 30 minutes and a taxi rank. For train times call National Rail Enquiries: 08457 484950 (24 hours). Online advanced bookings can be made at thetrainline.com or qjump.co.uk By taxi There is a taxi rank at both train stations and at the front of Shire Hall. By road Please be aware that parking is very limited in Warwick. We recommend that you use alternatives to the car whenever possible. The main routes into Warwick are:- Junction 15 off the M40 – A429 Birmingham – A4177, A425 Banbury – A425 Coventry – A46, A425 Henley-in-Arden – A4189 Leamington – A445 Leicester – M69, A46, A425 Stratford-upon-Avon – A429 There are a number of pay and display car parks within walking distance of Shire Hall.

http://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/locationmap

http://www.thetrainline.com/

http://www.qjump.co.uk/

4

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee (RFCC)

Warwickshire County Council, Shire Hall, Warwick CV34 4RL

Tuesday 15th April 2014 at 10:00am

Arrivals – Tea, Coffee from 9.30am

AGENDA

Item No.

Time Item Page No.

Lead Presenter

1

10:00 – 10:15

Welcome and Introductions - RFCC Chair/ Cllr Seccombe, (Leader WCC)

2 Apologies for Absence - RFCC Chair

3 Chair’s Announcements - RFCC Chair

4 Declarations of Interest Members to declare interests relating to any of the Agenda items

- RFCC Chair

5 Minutes of Previous Meeting To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 7

th January 2014

7 RFCC Chair

6 Matters Arising from the Minutes - RFCC Chair

7 10:15 – 10:35 Flood Events: December 2013 to February 2014 (Presentation)

- Dan Trewin Laura Palmer

8 10:35 – 10:45 Key Issues 17 Anthony Perry Emma Roberts

9 10:45 – 11:15 SuDS and SABs Approval Boards (Discussion item)

- Anthony Perry

11:15 – 11:20 BREAK

10 11:20 – 11:35

FCRM Programme 2014/15 To receive an update on 2013/14 year end outturn and progress with delivery of the current year’s programme

21 Jennie Cooper

11 11:35 – 12:05 FCRM Six Year Programme: 2015/16 to 2020/21 To receive an update on the allocation process

43 Jennie Cooper Anthony Perry Emma Roberts

12 12:05 – 12:15 Organisational Change Update (Presentation)

- Dafydd Evans

13 12:15 - 12:30 Flood Risk Management in Warwickshire (Presentation)

- Michael Green

14 12:30 - 12:45 Cubbington Flood Alleviation Scheme Overview of afternoon site visit (Presentation)

- Siphiwe Mahachi

15 12:45 – 12:50 Matters Arising from Information Papers - RFCC Chair

16 12:50 – 12:55 Any Other Business / Members Feedback - RFCC Chair

17 12:55 – 13:00 Closing Remarks - RFCC Chair

13:00 LUNCH

13:30 – 15:00 Local site visit to Cubbington Brook (Transport will be provided)

- Paul Taylor

INFORMATION ITEMS Members are asked to raise any matters arising from the Information Items under Item 15 on the Agenda or directly with Environment Agency staff

Item

Page No.

Contact for further details

A Forward Look 49 Anthony Perry (West Area) Emma Roberts (Central Area)

B Flood Forecasting and Flood Resilience report 55 Emma Ferguson

C Delivering Benefits for the Environment 63 Anthony Perry (West Area) Emma Roberts (Central Area)

D Integrated Environment Programme 71 Anthony Perry (West Area) Emma Roberts (Central Area)

E Our Role & Performance as Advisor to LPAs 75 Anthony Perry (West Area) Emma Roberts (Central Area)

F Event Calendar 81 Susan Russell

DATES OF FUTURE RFCC MEETINGS

Date Venue

Wednesday 2nd July 2014 Worcestershire County Council

Tuesday 21st October 2014 Coventry City Council

Draft minutes for approval

7

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee (RFCC)

Gloucestershire County Council, Shire Hall, Westgate Street, Gloucester, GL1 2TG

Tuesday 7th January 2014, 10:00am to 1:00pm

Attendees:

Chair:

Dr Anne Wheeler

Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) Members:

Cllr Phillip Awford – Gloucestershire County Council

Cllr Chris Williams – Warwickshire County Council

Cllr Rachel Lancaster – Coventry City Council

Cllr Philip P Price – Herefordshire Council

Cllr John Smith OBE – Worcestershire County Council

Cllr Malcolm Price – Shropshire Council

Deputies:

Graham Hodgson for Cllr Khurshid Ahmed, Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council

Steve Hollins for Cllr Richard Overton, Telford & Wrekin Council

Environment Agency (EA) Appointees

Professor John Moverley OBE

Ms Heather Shepherd

Mr John Turner

Mr Robert Willetts

Mr Colin Raven

Environment Agency (EA) Midlands Board Member:

Mr Richard Macdonald

Environment Agency (EA) Officers:

Sarah Fowler – Midlands Regional Director

Andy Wilkinson – Midlands Flood Risk Manager

Jennie Cooper – Regional Programme Manager

Dafydd Evans – West Area Manager

Anthony Perry – West Area Flood Risk Manager

Emma Roberts – Central Area Flood Risk Manager

Jo Martin – Partnerships & Strategic Overview (PSO) Team Leader

Secretariat:

Dhiren Katwa


8

Observers:

David Edwards (Shropshire Council); Michael Green, Sacha Barnes, Jagjit Mahal

(Warwickshire County Council); Matt Maginnis (Worcestershire County Council);

John Bellis; Wayne Ellis, Paul Evans (Severn Trent Water); David Graham, David

Parish, Peter Bungard, Cllr Tony Hicks, Ben Mosley, Cllr Lesley Williams

(Gloucestershire County Council); Neil Cowper (Coventry City Council); Dave Harris

(Severn Estuary Coastal Group); Rhys McCarthy (National Flood Forum); Susan

Russell, Jonathan Gurney, Fiona Keates, Sue McCarthy, Christian Wilcox

(Environment Agency).

1. Welcome and Introductions

1.1 -The Chair thanked Cllr Philip Awford and his team at Gloucestershire County Council for hosting this meeting and welcomed everyone. She introduced Cllr Philip Price, Herefordshire Council, and Richard Macdonald, EA Midlands Board member, to their first meeting.

1.2 -Cllr Philip Awford formally welcomed everyone, as did Cllr Tony Hicks,

Chairman, Gloucestershire County Council. Peter Bungard, Chief Executive,

Gloucestershire County Council, gave a brief presentation on his perspective on

Communications.

2. Apologies

Andy Eadon – EA Appointee

Alan Lovell – Chairman, Wessex Regional Flood & Coastal Committee

3. Chair’s Announcements

3.1 -The Chair circulated a summary document to inform members of the meetings

she had attended since the last English Severn & Wye RFCC meeting. The chair

gave feedback on the Bristol Channel Strategic Coastal Group meeting, FCERM

Stakeholders’ meeting, Gloucestershire NFU Severn Estuary Stakeholders’ meeting,

English Severn & Wye RFCC Local Levy meeting, Severnside IDB Liaison meeting

and RFCC Chairs meeting.

3.2 -The Chair thanked officers from the EA and from partner organisations for

their work during recent flood events including those over the Christmas period.

4. Member Declaration of Interests

The Chair announced that four declaration of interest forms were still pending and

asked members to (i) return their form to the RFCC Support Officer as soon as


9

possible (ii) declare any interests on any agenda item as and when appropriate

during the meeting.

5. Minutes of Previous Meeting (1st October 2013)

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 1 October 2013 were approved as

accurate.

6. Matters arising from Minutes of previous meeting (1st October 2013)

The Chair informed members that one action, that on her, was still pending. This was

to circulate a web-link to members which allows them to vote on the two options

available for Flood Risk Management Plans.

7. FCRM Programme 2013/14

7.1 - Jennie Cooper (EA) highlighted changes and key developments with the

capital programme since the last meeting. She advised that in addition to the budget

reductions outlined in the paper there were additional funding pressures due to the

recent flood events. Discussions with Defra were ongoing but it was possible that

further reductions would be sought. (Since the meeting Defra have advised that they

will not be seeking any further changes to 2013/14 budgets).

7.2 - Jennie Cooper referred to Appendix 2 which outlined projects that were out of

tolerance by more than 15% or where there had been a change in project outcomes.

Members were requested to approve the variances as detailed.

Decision: The Committee approved the project variances listed in Appendix 2.

7.3 - Jennie Cooper provided an update on the 2013/14 revenue programme.

Since the paper was written, there had been some changes to the forecast outturn

due to capital salaries and compensation claims. This will be managed within the

National revenue outturn

7.4 - She also advised that it was unlikely that asset management targets would be

met due to recent flood events.

7.5 - In response to a query from Cllr John Smith (Worcestershire County Council),

Anthony Perry (EA) undertook to provide the Committee with final costs and claims

associated with Kempsey once the ongoing legal process was complete.

7. 6 - Cllr Philip Awford (Gloucestershire County Council) referred to issues at

Minsterworth associated with the structural integrity of the defences. Anthony Perry

(EA) assured Cllr Awford that work was in hand to deal with both the short term and

long term issues at Minsterworth.


10

8. FCRM Programme 2014/15 and Beyond

8.1 - Jennie Cooper (EA) referred to the paper and re-iterated that the FDGiA

allocation for 2014/15 remains indicative until approved by the EA Board in February

2014. She explained that since the October meeting, the national over-programme

had reduced from £40m to £30m due to more certainty with the ongoing

programmes. For the English Severn and Wye RFCC this equated to £96k currently

un-funded. It was too soon to know what impact recent flood events might have on

the future programme.

8.2 - LLFA members were asked to vote on the November 2013 Local Levy

meeting recommendation to continue with Local Levy at its current level.

Decision: All eight Lead Local Flood Authority members/nominated deputies

supported the recommendation to continue with local levy at its current level

with no rise or reduction for 2014/15.

8.3 - Jennie Cooper (EA) proposed that the Internal Drainage Board (IDB) precepts

and foreign water contributions remain at the same level as 2013/14 for 2014/15.

John Turner (EA Appointee) asked for clarification on voting rights. The Chair said all

members of the Committee, (LLFA members and EA appointees), were entitled to

vote on this.

8.4 - Cllr Philip Awford (Gloucestershire County Council) declared that he sits on the

Board of the Lower Severn IDB.

Decision: The Committee, by way of a show of hands, supported the proposal

that IDB precepts and foreign water contributions remain at the same level for

2014/15 as those in 2013/14.

8.5 – Jennie Cooper (EA) advised that the allocation cycle, which usually runs from

April to July, would need to be brought forward to February 2014 due to the need for

it to be finalised in time for the Government’s Autumn Statement. Jennie said this

would also affect other Risk Management Authorities and that any changes would be

communicated as and when appropriate. The Chair asked for designated deputies to

be included in any correspondence, in addition to lead officers.

8.6 – Anthony Perry (EA) referred to the successful local levy meeting held in

November 2013 where members had agreed the indicative programme for 2014/15

and had accepted that a flexible approach should be adopted for future schemes.

Members had also agreed that they would consider funding some maintenance

activities on a case by case basis for local levy funded schemes in order to prolong


11

the life of the schemes. He advised that further information on this would be

presented to the Committee at a future meeting.

Action: Anthony Perry to submit any proposals for using local levy funds for

maintenance activities to a future meeting.

8.7 - Cllr Malcolm Price (Shropshire Council) provided an update on the Much

Wenlock scheme, one of the largest in Shropshire. Recently completed feasibility

work had identified that it was more complex than had been anticipated and that

estimated costs had increased to £1.3m. He advised that delivery of the scheme

would be delayed until 2015/16 in order to allow time to seek additional partnership

funding and resolve technical issues. He thanked EA officers for their assistance in

developing this scheme. Cllr Price said his Council’s Chief Executive and Leader had

given their approval to proceed with a planning application in the next 12 months.

Anthony Perry (EA) commented that although costs had increased, the Much

Wenlock scheme was still viable.

Decision: The Committee approved carrying the funding for Much Wenlock

over until 2015/16 and noted the delay in delivering outcome measures.

8.8 – Anthony Perry (EA) provided an update on land purchase at Broadway for the

construction of the Badsey Brook flood storage area. He acknowledged that

progress had been slow, but that proceeding with the land purchase would provide

greater certainty and flexibility for the rest of the scheme. It would also help to reduce

the risks included in the project costs. It is hoped that land purchase negotiations can

be finalised by April 2014.

8.9 - Cllr Philip Awford (Gloucestershire County Council) queried whether the local

community are contributing towards the scheme. Anthony Perry (EA) advised that it

was currently raising funds locally towards a £312,000 target.

8.10 – Following discussions about local land values, Councillor Philip Price

(Herefordshire Council) pointed out the importance of transparency with the land

purchase to ensure public accountability.

8.11 – Cllr John Smith (Worcestershire County Council) said he fully supported this

scheme. However, he requested assurance that the land purchase would provide

value for money. Anthony Perry (EA) said the land purchase was being negotiated

by a land agent on behalf of the Environment Agency.

8.12 -The Committee was asked to approve the purchase of land at Broadway for

construction of the Badsey Brook flood storage area.


12

Decision: The Committee supported Anthony Perry’s proposal to delegate Cllr

John Smith (Worcestershire County Council) to monitor developments, value

for money and progress on purchase of land at Broadway for construction of

the Badsey Brook flood storage area.

Action: Anthony Perry to discuss further with Cllr John Smith.

Decision: The Committee approved the funding options for the local levy

programme for 2014/15 as detailed in Appendix 1 of Item 8 on the Agenda.

9. Recent Flood Events

9.1 - This item was presented jointly by Andy Wilkinson and Anthony Perry (both

EA). Andy’s presentation provided an overview of the East Coast tidal surge event

that occurred in early December 2013 which was the most severe since 1953. At the

peak, 64 severe flood warnings were in force, (the previous maximum was 4). At

Keadby, levels on the River Trent were the highest ever recorded. More than 200

properties were flooded in Midlands Region during this event. The accurate

forecasting allowed the Environment Agency and other partners to prepare. It was

estimated that £15-20m of recovery work could be required. Work was ongoing to

prioritise this work and financial assistance was being sought from Defra.

9.2 - Anthony Perry (EA) referred to the Severn tidal surge experienced in early

January. He advised that for 2014, and the next few years, there would be a greater

frequency of higher tides than usual. He also provided an overview of preparatory

and awareness work carried out by the Gloucestershire Local Resilience Forum

since the 2007 floods. During December 2013, partner organisations had shared a

great deal of information in preparation for an exercise that was due to take place

during 2014. This work had proved to be very valuable during the recent flood

events. In particular, planning for the worst case scenario had been very beneficial,

despite some partners being doubtful about this at the time.

9.3 - Work carried out to improve the tidal defences since 1999 had proved to be

very worthwhile meaning that flooding only occurred at a few locations. Assets were

being inspected but no major problems had been identified. At Epney, levels

recorded were the highest for 20 years while at Longney and Minsterworth they were

slightly lower than those experienced in 1999.

9.4 - Social media had been widely used during the event and a lot of positive

feedback had been received. The Chair paid tribute to David Throup (EA) in

particular for his ongoing work with the media during flood events.


13

9.5 – Councillor Philip Awford (Gloucestershire County Council) thanked EA officers

for their outstanding work on the ground during the recent flood incident. He added

that there was still a concern about the maintenance of flood defences at

Minsterworth.

9.6 – Responding to Cllr Awford’s concern, Dafydd Evans (EA) highlighted that the

flood defences at Minsterworth were part of the Severn Estuary Strategy and that

work was ongoing with local communities and landowners regarding future plans.

9.7 - Cllr John Smith (Worcestershire County Council) commented that if defences

were going to be difficult to maintain, then capital should not be spent on them in the

first place. Anthony Perry (EA) said that if the defences at Minsterworth had not been

built post-1999 floods, the impact of the recent flooding may have been greater. He

noted Cllr Smith’s point and said there was a need for improved partnership working.

10. Organisational Change – impact on RFCCs

10.1 - The item on Organisational Change was led by Sarah Fowler (EA). She said

she felt privileged to be the Regional Director and thanked everyone for their

ongoing contributions to the running of the Committee. As part of her presentation,

Sarah explained the title, ‘Strategic Reviews Response Programme’, talked about

funding challenges, job cuts and the aspirations of the EA.

10.2 – Cllr Philip Awford (Gloucestershire County Council) said it was fair to say that

everybody in the room would be sympathetic towards the changes facing the EA. He

said it was important to reassure the public about incident response standards and

the statutory consultee role and asked if the EA might be losing this. Sarah Fowler

said the statutory element would remain unaffected and would still be a critical part

of the business.

10.3 – Cllr John Smith (Worcestershire County Council) acknowledged the need for

change, an aspect he said he recognised from his own local authority. He added that

provided the change process was carried out properly and carefully he had no major

concerns.

10.4 – Sarah Fowler (EA) noted Cllr Chris Williams’ (Warwickshire County Council)

remarks on the change process as fair comment. Cllr Williams said he was not

surprised by the key messages highlighted in the presentation. He asked if there was

a need for a change in the working culture at the EA. He also asked if the EA had

compared its aspirations with those of similar organisations in other countries. In

response, Sarah Fowler said the EA’s remit was very broad, as was the breadth of

operational activity. On comparisons with other countries, Sarah said this was

difficult as the EA, she believes, was the only organisation of its kind in Europe.


14

10.5 – Richard Macdonald (EA Board Member) acknowledged it was a sensitive time

for EA staff. However, he said recent flood events had shown the importance of the

work of the EA. He said the changes were driven by external factors, and he felt that

the proposed changes to the EA structure made a lot of sense. Richard added that

he had been immensely impressed at what he had seen and experienced of the EA

since becoming a board member and paid tribute to EA staff for their ongoing work.

10.6 – John Turner (EA appointee) said he was confident that the EA would continue

to do a sterling job in its new structure.

11. Key Issues

11.1 – On SuDS Approval Board’s and its implementation date the Chair proposed

that the Committee be given more time on this to better understand the issues.

Anthony Perry (EA) backed this proposal and asked LLFA members for their

thoughts. Steve Hollins (Telford & Wrekin Council) said that, though he was

somewhat concerned about the delay to the proposal, he was happy that the

discussion be postponed at this time and suggested it is discussed at the April 2014

meeting. The Chair asked members to contact Anthony Perry or Emma Roberts (EA)

directly for more information.

11.2 – On Rapid Response Catchments, Anthony Perry recapped on the

presentation given by Dan Matthews at the previous meeting. This paper proposed

piloting an innovative partnership project between the Environment Agency and the

National Flood Forum to work with other at risk communities to improve community

resilience.

11.3 – The Chair pointed out that there was no request for money being made at this

time. Instead, she was keen to get members’ thoughts, in principle, on using local

levy money to fund a post or resources to increase activity around community

engagement in rapid response catchments.

11.4 – Heather Shepherd (EA appointee) provided examples of her longstanding

work on engaging with communities at grassroots level, and explained its benefits.

11.5 – Professor John Moverley (EA appointee) gave his backing, in principle, to this

approach. However, he was of the opinion that there is no better alternative than

finding natural solutions for flooding. He provided the ‘Woodlands for Water’

approach as an example.


15

Decision: The Committee unanimously supported the approach, in principle, of

using local levy funds to support engagement work with communities in rapid

response catchments.

12. Presentation on afternoon Site Visit

12.1 -Wayne Ellis, Solutions Manager, at Severn Trent Water outlined the history

and background to Big Norman’s Pumping Station, a Severn Trent site which

members visited the same afternoon.

12.2 -Anthony Perry (EA) gave details of the Horsbere Brook Flood Alleviation

Scheme which members also visited.

13. Matters Arising from Information Papers

The Chair drew members’ attention to the following information papers which were

circulated before the meeting:

Flood Risk Management Plans – Update

Flood Forecasting and Flood Resilience report

SuDS and the SuDS Approval Board – Update

Water Bill and Future of Flood Insurance – Update

Event Calendar

14. Any Other Business/Members Feedback

14.1 - Richard Macdonald (EA Board Member) thanked the Chair for inviting him to

this meeting and said he now had had a chance to see the EA from the outside, as

well as from the inside. Again, he paid tribute to the excellent work being done by

everyone at the EA.

14.2 - Cllr John Smith (Worcestershire County Council) thanked everyone for their

excellent work and efforts during the December and January flood events.

15. Closing Remarks

15.1 – The Chair pointed out that this meeting might be the last that Andy Wilkinson

and Sarah Fowler (EA) may attend. She said she had felt fortunate to work alongside

both, appreciated their advice and guidance and thanked both for their sterling work

by way of a round of applause.

15.2 – The Chair thanked everyone for attending and for their ongoing contributions.


16

15.3 – The meeting was followed by a site visit to Horsbere Brook and Big Norman’s

Pumping Station. There were eight members, plus nine other, including EA and local

authority officers who took part in this visit.

16. Date of Next Meeting

16.1 Tuesday 15th April 2014 from 10:00am to 1:00pm at Northgate House

Conference Centre, Warwick, courtesy of Cllr Chris Williams and his colleagues at

Warwickshire County Council.

OFFICIAL

17

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee Meeting date: 15th April 2014

Item no: 8

Paper by: Area Flood and Coastal Risk Managers Subject: Key Issues

1.0 Introduction 1.1 This paper identifies key issues that are of interest to the RFCC and progress

with addressing them. 2.0 Desilting and dredging 2.1 Recent flood events, especially on the Somerset Levels and Moors, have

raised the issue of dredging as a method of flood prevention. This has led to a noticeable increase in the requests from landowners, MPs and the general public for dredging of rivers within the English Severn and Wye RFCC Area, in particular the Rivers Severn and Avon. This section covers the issues specific to our area.

2.2 Dredging and clearing channels are important parts of the Environment

Agency’s maintenance regime. In 2012/13 the Environment Agency spent £45 million nationally on keeping water flowing in channels (conveyance), which included dredging. These activities are carried out where they will improve the channel’s ability to carry increased river flows.

2.3 Historically, rivers were dredged more frequently to improve land drainage and support agricultural production. Today, Government policy and good value for money means that we focus our work where it delivers the greatest flood risk benefit. The priority is to focus on work which manages flood risk rather than work which sustains land drainage. This will mean reducing or stopping maintenance work in some “low consequence systems”, i.e. areas where the impact of flooding affects fewest people.

2.4 The Environment Agency has reviewed its maintenance programme to make

sure it continues to spend taxpayers’ money where it delivers the greatest

Recommendations The Committee is asked to: 1. Consider and discuss the key issues presented in this paper and suggest

ways in which members can contribute to these issues. 2. Make recommendations for other key issues to be included in future

papers.

OFFICIAL

18

flood risk benefit. We assess all flood risk management activities using a risk based approach and invest in those activities that will contribute most to reducing flood risk per pound of funding. We compare investment in dredging, weed control, maintaining defences, clearing blockages, or pumping water from flooded land to find the most effective use of the funds available. For some watercourses dredging would be needed year after year and can have very little effect on reducing the impact of a flood. It can also be expensive, time-consuming and not as effective as other flood risk measures.

2.5 The effectiveness of dredging in managing flood risk varies substantially for

each stretch of river, and is assessed by the Environment Agency on a location by location basis, working in close consultation with local communities.

2.6 On the River Severn in Gloucestershire, the reduction in flood levels from dredging would be negligible, due to the quantity of water which flows along it. At times of flood the River Severn passing through Tewkesbury has between 700 and 1,200 tonnes of water per second. This is 20 to 30 times more than the normal river flow levels. The channel would need to be 5 - 10 times the size it is now to reduce flood levels markedly. The river continuously transports and deposits sediment and therefore dredging provides very little extra water storage and conveyance. However, the Canals and Rivers Trust do carry out some localised desilting for navigation purposes. Historically dredging was carried out when grain was being transported up and down the river system in larger vessels but this has generally ceased due to smaller pleasure boats being used today.

2.7 The River Avon flows through Warwickshire, Worcester and Gloucestershire, predominantly in a rural environment. As with the River Severn, we do not carry out dredging for flood risk purposes as the floodplain is wide and the reduction in flood levels from dredging would be negligible. However, the Avon Navigation Trust carries out localised desilting around lock gates along the navigable sections of the River Avon.

2.8 Defra have no plans to introduce dredging nationally but it should be considered in the same way as other flood risk reduction options in that the most appropriate option is chosen on a cases by case basis. Once the Somerset Moors and Levels Action Plan has been agreed, Defra will consider any lessons that can be learned for other parts of the country.

3.0 Changes to Environment Agency Incident Response Roles

3.1 The Strategic Reviews Response Programme (SRRP) is moving the Environment Agency from a three tier (national, region, area) business model to a two tier (national and area) business model. This includes removal of the regional incident response tier from the 1st April 2014. We have been training and exercising the new roles during March to ensure we are resilient.

4.0 SuDS Approving Body (SAB) Implementation 4.1 The implementation of Sustainable Drainage Provisions (Section 32 and

Schedule 3 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010) in England is delayed. We are expecting the relevant secondary legislation to be laid in Parliament by April to enable commencement at a later date. The

OFFICIAL

19

implementation date should be confirmed as part of this. At the time of writing, the draft National Standards are out for consultation. A consultation on the charging mechanism for funding long-term SuDS maintenance is expected in March.

4.2 Defra and the Environment Agency are developing an e-learning SuDS

programme for local government that will explain the principles of SuDS, signpost local authorities to the relevant National Standards, and guidance, and set out the more complex details of the SAB role. This will go live in April, giving local authorities time to consult on it prior to the revised implementation date.

5.0 Recommendations 5.1 The Committee is asked to:

1. Consider and discuss the key issues presented in this paper and suggest ways in which members can contribute to these issues.

2. Make recommendations for other key issues to be included in future

papers. Emma Roberts Area FCRM Manager (Central) March 2014

OFFICIAL

20

OFFICIAL

21


Item no. 10

Appendix 1: 2013/14 Programme – 14th February

Appendix 2: Project Variations Appendix 3: Project Updates

Appendix 4: 2014/15 Programme Appendix 5: Rapid Response Catchments

Paper by: Regional FCRM Programme Manager Subject: English Severn and Wye Programme 2013/14 &

2014/15

1.0 Introduction 1.1 The purpose of this paper is to update the Committee on the 2013/14 capital

and revenue programme including the end of year position. It presents the latest information provided by project teams at the end of February 2014. The English Severn and Wye programme and budgets for 2014/15 have been included in the papers, to provide the committee with details for this financial year.

2.0 2013/14 Capital Programme Position 2.1 The 2013/14 English Severn and Wye RFCC programme is summarised in

Table 2.1 below. This is based on February data. A verbal update on our year end position will be provided to the committee at the meeting.

FCRM GiA EA Affordable budget £ 2,800k

PPMT forecast £ 3,227k

FCRM GiA LA Affordable budget £ 400k

PPMT forecast £ 336k

Total FCRM GiA Total funds available £ 3,200k

PPMT Forecast £ 3,563k

Local Levy Affordable budget £ 1,818k

Recommendations The English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee is asked to: 1. Note and comment on the capital programme and outcome measures for

2013/14. 2. Approve project variances listed in Appendix 2. 3. Note and comment on the 2014/15 capital programme. 4. Endorse the approach detailed in Appendix 5 to provide support to

communities at risk of flash flooding. 5. Note and comment on the revenue position and KPI delivery. 6. Note and comment on verbal updates presented at the meeting.

OFFICIAL

22

PPMT forecast £ 1,706k

Contributions Secured or expected £ 905k

PPMT forecast (as at Feb 2013) £ 952k

Totals (FCRM GiA + LL + contributions) £ 5,923k

Current total forecast (Feb 2013) £ 6,221k

Table 2.1: Budgets for English Severn and Wye RFCC 2013/14 Programme

2.2 The latest forecast indicates we are expecting to out-turn £363k over our GiA affordable budget at year end. In addition to managing this situation nationally, discussions with project teams have identified options that can be taken to ensure our target is not exceeded. National have advised us to continue delivering against our forecasts. This will help accommodate the overall national under spend.

2.3 The local levy budgets and forecast had reduced as a result of re-profiling Shyte Brook and The Beck, Mousesweet Brook into 2014/15. We are currently forecasting £112k below the budget.

2.4 Appendix 2 lists projects that are out of tolerance by more than 15% and have variances of more than £10k. The RFCC is asked to approve the formal requests to amend budgets.

2.5 There has been a reduction of houses to both OM2 and OM2b as Dinglewell,

Sudbrook and Cubbington are now forecasting their OMs in 2014/15 instead of 2013/14, there has also been a reduction is houses forecasted at Stock Green. We are still within the regional targets set for OM2 and OM2b.

Total Target

Total Forecast

Difference % Midlands

Total

OM2 419 73 -346 17% 116%

OM2B 330 64 -266 19% 114%

OM2C 18 0 -18 0% 14%

OM4 2.0 0.0 -2.0 0% 52%

OM4B 0 39 39 100% of 2014/15 100%

Table 2.1: Outcome Measure Forecasts for the 2013/14 Programme

2.6 Appendix 3 provides an update on a number of LLFA projects. 3.0 2014/15 Capital Programme 3.1 The budgets for 2014/15 are summarised in Table 3.1 below:

FCRM GiA EA

Affordable budget £810k

Allocated Funding £900k

FCRM GiA LA Affordable budget £138k

Allocated Funding £138k

FCRM GiA Total funds available £948k

OFFICIAL

23

PPMT forecast -

Local Levy Affordable budget £1,841k

PPMT forecast -

Contributions Secured or expected £1,005k

PPMT forecast -

Total (FCRM GiA + LL + contributions +GF) £3,794k

Current total forecast (as at Feb 2013) -

Table 3.1: Budgets for 2014/15 Programme

3.2 The 2014/15 RFCC programme for all funding sources and Outcome Measures associated to the projects is included in Appendix 4. The Environment Agency FCRM GiA figure has £90k allocated funding above the affordable budget for 2014/15 to assist in managing the programme flexibly, as requested by National. A verbal update on the 2013/14 year end position and any slippage into 2014/15 will be given to the RFCC at the April meeting.

3.3 Appendix 5 gives details of a request for local levy funding for a partnership

project to provide support to communities at risk of flash flooding. It is recognised that the programme for the next three years is at capacity. If agreed, this proposal would be on the basis that savings or additional budgets could be found elsewhere within the three year rolling programme.

3.4 A summary of outcome measures the English Severn and Wye programme is

forecasting to be achieved by 2014/15 are detailed below. These will be monitored and reported at future committee meetings.

Total

Target Total

Forecast Difference %

OM2 50 371 321 742%

OM2B 38 320 282 842%

OM2C 0 0 0 n/a

OM4 0.0 0.1 0.1 n/a

OM4B 0 0 0 Claimed in 2013/14

Table 3.2 Outcome Measure Targets for 2014/15 Programme

3.5 The CSR Period forecasts based on all years current targets and forecasts for

all 4 years (2011/12 to 2014/15) is included in the table below:

Total

Target Total

Forecast Difference %

OM2 18,495 20,030 1,535.5 108%

OM2B 17,481 18,526 1,045.5 106%

OM2C 2,406 2,074 -332 86%

OM4 130 113.1 -16.9 87%

OM4B 39 0 -39 100%

Table 3.3 Outcome Measure Targets for CSR Period 3.6 Overall, the Midlands region will deliver the national targets for the CSR

period for OM2, 2b and 4b. However there will be a shortfall for OM2c and OM4.

OFFICIAL

24

4.0 Flood Recovery 4.1 Following the tidal events and the high fluvial flooding throughout January and

February, we have been busy assessing and repairing damage to our defences. Initially following the 3rd January high tide, within a week we walked and asset inspected all our key tidal banks and walls on the Severn Estuary and then put in temporary fixes in to prevent further damage and flooding. Those fixes all held secure during the February high tides.

4.2 In January, we successfully secured additional Recovery Funding for 2013/14

to pay for these temporary repairs, make other minor asset repairs and to do topographical survey of the high risk areas of the Severn Estuary tidal flood banks. We have also had field services staff on the ground removing assorted debris and blockages for watercourses, including at Worcester Bridge.

4.3 We are now in the process of bidding for Recovery Funding for works in

2014/15 to make more substantial fixes to assets over the summer period. Included in the bid are works to make repairs or rebuild the Minsterworth and Rea tidal banks, the Lapper Ditch Outfall in Gloucestershire and the flood banks near Hampton Bishop in Herefordshire.

5.0 Revenue 5.1 Using February’s data, there is a 6% (£321k) overspend due to reasons

highlighted in the previous update and incident response costs. National funding has been requested and approved to manage the overspend.

6.0 Maintenance Projects Programme

6.1 The maintenance projects programme funds the following:

Intermittent maintenance projects funded through the allocation from System Asset Management Plans;

Flood incident management and Hydrometry and Telemetry projects to maintain our operational capability for flood forecasting and incident management;

Funding assigned for inspections and specialist works which cannot be assigned to a specific asset.

The summary forecast for the projects is shown in Table 6.1 below:

February 2014 £k

Initial Revenue 2013/14 Programme Funding 235

Current Revenue Programme Funding 235

Cumulative Expenditure Forecast 162

Most Likely Year End Forecast 205

Table 6.1: English Severn and Wye Summary of Revenue Project Expenditure

OFFICIAL

25

6.2 The baseline 2013/14 FCRM GiA revenue programme funding was £235k. Project delivery has been significantly affected by the winter flood events. Expenditure to date (at end Feb) is £162k. The forecast year end expenditure is £205k (87%) of the FCRM GiA available.

7.0 Frequent Maintenance Programme 7.1 Delivery has been affected by recent flood events. The frequent maintenance

programme is published on the Environment Agency website and operations teams are assessing the impact of incident response to the programme. Expenditure on the maintenance programme is currently 70% of the available FCRM GiA funding (£2,900k) for frequent maintenance.

7.2 Efficiencies realised so far include:

Reducing the amount of maintenance that is contracted out by improved

utilisation of Environment Agency operatives ;

Securing lower rates during letting of maintenance contracts. 8.0 Asset Management 8.1 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) are targets that are measured regionally,

these figures report on the performance of the Midlands region, which include both the Trent and English Severn & Wye RFCCs.

8.2 KPI 962 reports the number of assets that are at required condition. The

2013/14 target for KPI 962 is that 99.0% of Environment Agency owned assets and 98.4% of third party assets are in target condition. Table 8.1 shows the current Midlands position:

EA Assets 3

rd Party Assets

Passing Assets

Failing Assets

Total Assets

% Passing Assets

Failing Assets

Total Assets

%

Midlands Total

3,796 169 3,965 95.7% 1,913 91 2,004 95.5%

Table 8.1: Midlands February summary KPI 962

There are 94 failing defences, 75 failing channels and 91 failing structures. Area’s will be assessing and prioritising each asset and completing remedial actions to rectify where funding allows. Further inspections are being undertaken by military personnel and data added to our asset improvement plans. We can provide a full update on the situation to the committee at the July meeting.

8.3 KPI 965 is measured as the percentage of residential properties that benefit

from reduced flood risk due to assets being at the required standard. The Midlands target is for the households at flood risk due to failing assets to be less than 1,530. 4,620 of the households at risk relate to one major asset repair due to be completed by the end of the financial year. Table 8.2 shows the current Midlands position:

OFFICIAL

26

EA Assets 3rd Party Assets

Households at Risk Households at Risk

Midlands Total 8,379 332

Table 8.2: Midlands February Summary KPI 965

8.4 8,711 properties are at risk compared to a target of 1,530. This does not

include the full impact of inspections currently being undertaken post winter flood incidents.

8.5 Midlands’ targets will not be achieved as we continue going through a phase

of improving our asset data quality. Initially scheduled for completion by end of March 2014, this work will be delayed by a few months due to diversion of resource supporting the military asset inspection programme. Our position may also deteriorate as result of these inspections until we can fully review and quality assure the data.


1. Note and comment on the capital programme and outcome measures for

2013/14. 2. Approve project variances listed in Appendix 2. 3. Note and comment on the 2014/15 capital programme. 4. Endorse the approach detailed in Appendix 5 to provide support to

communities at risk of flash flooding. 5. Note and comment on the revenue position and KPI delivery. 6. Note and comment on verbal updates presented at the meeting.

Sue McCarthy Regional Programme Team Leader Tich Madzimbamuto Programming Officer March 2014

Severn : 2013/14 Programme Item No: 10, Appendix 1

Schemes in Construction

SNC001F/000A/398A Ash Brook, Church Stretton Shropshire Council CM 98 23 75 98 97.9 97.9

SNC001F/000A/149A Hearne Brook Flood Relief Works, Cheltenham Cheltenham Borough Council DEF 369 63 90 70 223 196.1 192.4

SNO000E/000A/004A Hurcott and Podmore Pools, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, WLMP Environment Agency WLMP 242 0 30 15

SNC001E/000A/261A Midlands West Reservoir Works 2 Environment Agency REC 390 237 237 232.7 202.5

SNC001E/000A/161A Severn Vale Water Management Plan Environment Agency HAB 1538 200 200 201.3 190

SNC001F/000A/396A Shyte Brook, Much Wenlock, Flood Alleviation Scheme Shropshire Council DEF 700 0 0 40 40 40 40

SNC001F/000A/010A Stock Green, Worcestershire, Property Level Protection Wychavon District Council PLP 44 39 5 44 41.3 41.3

Construction Start Planned in 2013/14

SNC002E/000A/001A Alney Island Environment Agency REC 0 16.5 17 18.7 2.2

SNC001E/000A/002A Ashleworth Quay Environment Agency REC 0 2.2 2 2.4 2.4

SNC001F/000A/611A Bennetts Road, Coventry, Surface Water Management scheme Coventry City Council SRO 95 0 0 0 0

SNC001E/000A/064A Bewdley Wet Well Chamber Desilt Environment Agency REC 5 5 5 5 5

SNC003E/000A/017A Bonds Mill Screen 2012 Floods Recovery improvement Environment Agency REC 10 11.8 12 11.2 11.2

SNC001E/000A/648A Cambridge Fish Pass Environment Agency FISH 330 232.3 86.7 319 379.9 279.2

SNC003E/000A/026A Cole Syphon Environment Agency REC 40 0 0 0 0

SNC001E/000A/312A Contribution to Deerhurst Walton Environment Agency DEF 0 0 0 0

SNC003F/000A/024A Cubbington Flood Alleviation Scheme, Warwickshire Warwick District Council SRO 850 200 776 85 1061 1061 816.5

SNC001F/000A/008A Dinglewell, Gloucester, Property Level Protection Gloucester City Council PLP 23 13 10 23 23 23

SNC003E/000A/023A Hasfield Outfall Environment Agency REC 50 12.2 12 13.6 1.4

SNC001F/000A/612A Hen Lane, Coventry, Surface Water Management Scheme Coventry City Council SRO 0 0 0 0 0

SNC001E/000A/611A Midlands Fish Passes - Construction Phase 1 - Severn Environment Agency FISH 326 133 459 487.5 456

SNC003E/000A/018A Mordiford Bridge Recondition Environment Agency REC 0 10.7 11 10 10

SNO000E/000A/175A Puxton & Stourvale Marshes, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, WLMP Environment Agency WLMP 217 66 66 57 32.2

SNC001F/000A/009A Sudbrook, Gloucester, Property Level Protection Gloucester City Council PLP 90 25 0 0 25 35 35

SNC001E/000A/609A The Beck, Mousesweet Brook, Dudley Flood Alleviation Scheme Environment Agency CM 500 193.7 100 50 344 138.7 95.8

SNO000E/000A/003A Wilden Marsh, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, SSSI Remedies Environment Agency WLMP 130 65.3 65 66.8 67.6

SNC003E/000A/024A Tredworth Grills Environment Agency REC 40 19.4 19 20.9 3.3Business Case Development 2013/14

SNC003F/000A/026A Aston Cantlow Warwickshire County Council DEF - 34.5 35 34.5 32.5

SNC001E/000A/650A Badsey Brook (Broadway, Childswickham and Murcot) FAS Environment Agency DEF 233 233 198 160.5

SNC001F/001A/012A Cherry Brook, Hope Under Dinmore, Flood Alleviation Scheme Herefordshire DEF 76 30 30 9 6

SNC003F/000A/025A Fenny Compton Warwickshire County Council DEF - 25 25 10 10

SNC001F/000A/011A Folly Brook, Eardisley, Flood Alleviation Scheme Herefordshire DEF 70 30 30 9.5 4.5

Hinton GS 25.6 26 25 0

SNC001E/000A/612A Midlands Fish Passes - Phase 2 - Severn Environment Agency FISH 190.2 280 470 417.6 280.2

SNC003E/000A/031A Midlands Fish Passes - Phase 3 - Severn Environment Agency FISH 87 13.1 13.1 26 26.3 26.3

SNC001E/000A/608A Midlands Fish Passes - Pilot - Severn Environment Agency FISH 10.7 2.7 13 13.5 13.5

SNC001F/000A/005A Northway Oak Drive, Tewkesbury Flood Alleviation Scheme Gloucestershire County Council SRO 92.5 11.5 3 15 15 0

SNC001E/000A/188A River Severn, Hempsted and Rea, Gloucester, Flood Alleviation Scheme Environment Agency DEF 3020 15 15 14.8 14.3

SNC001F/000A/004A Southfield, Cheltenham, Flood Alleviation Scheme Cheltenham Borough Council DEF 177 5 80 1 86 86 45.5

SNC001F/000A/389A Snitterfield Warwickshire County Council DEF - 50 50 50 50

SNC001F/000A/020A Snuff Brook, Bewdley, Flood Alleviation Scheme Wyre Forest DC STU 30 30 30 30 30

SNC001E/000A/649A Wellesbourne Fish Pass Environment Agency FISH 8 2 10 9.7 9.7

SNC001F/000A/601A Wesley Brook, Shifnal, Flood Alleviation Scheme Shropshire Council DEF 175 10 10 10 10

SNC001F/001A/405A Whaddon, Cheltenham, Flood Alleviation Scheme Gloucestershire County Council SRO 1761 0 0 0 80 0

Post Construction

SNC001E/000A/285A Arrow Mill Environment Agency CM 2 2 0.4 0.4

SNC001E/000A/033A Broom, R Arrow, Flood Alleviation Scheme Environment Agency DEF 5 5 5.1 5.1

SNC001E/000A/183A Charlton FRM Scheme- Merry Brook Environment Agency DEF 303.9 20 20 1.9 1.7

SNC001E/001A/003A Chelt CWC (Ph4, 5, 6 and 7) Environment Agency DEF 13703.3 50 50 58.3 46.1

SNC001E/001A/018A Daniels Brook Environment Agency DEF 946.4 100 100 51 30

SNC001E/001A/011A Horsbere Brook Environment Agency DEF 2245.9 174 174 176 55.5

SNC001E/001A/012A Kempsey Environment Agency DEF 1831.5 23 8 31 30.8 30.4

SNC001E/000A/155A Marlcliff FAS Environment Agency DEF 537.2 51 51 51 13

Pershore 24.3 25 49 34.9 29.9

SNC001E/001A/008A Powick FAS Environment Agency DEF 869.4 50 50 24.2 24.2

SNC001E/001A/010A Prestbury FAS Environment Agency DEF 2337.4 164.6 165 160.1 141.1

SNO000E/000A/055A Slad Brook FAS PAR Environment Agency DEF 257 21.1 21 21 20.5

SNC001E/001A/021A Uckinghall Environment Agency CM 4.2 17.5 22 21.7 21.2

SNC001E/001A/005A Upton Upon Severn FRM Scheme Environment Agency DEF 5429.3 65 65 61.2 61.2

Wribbenhall 7.5 8 -16.4 -16.4

Non-Construction Schemes 2013/14

SNC001E/000A/067A Communities at Risk Environment Agency CM 20 20 20 20.2 20.2

SNC003E/000A/602A Confined Space Conveyance Improvements - Severn Environment Agency REC 0 17 17 17 15

SNC003E/000A/006A Dawley Brook Screen Access Improvements Environment Agency REC 0 8.8 9 10.1 10.1

SNO000E/000A/603A Development of new ratings - Severn Environment Agency FFIM 30 7.1 7 6.4 6.4

SNO999E/000A/005A FRM Capital Salaries Environment Agency SAL - 601 601 623 603.8

SNC001E/000A/314A Hereford H&S Environment Agency REC 1445 114.5 115 114.6 114.6

SNC001E/000A/329A Improvements to NaFRA in Severn and Wye (England) Catchments Environment Agency MAP 20 8 8 7.9 7.9

SNC000E/000A/606A Incident Management CCTV - Severn Environment Agency FFIM 52.5 18 18 19.1 19.1

SNC001E/000A/647A Severn Critical Eel Tide Flaps Environment Agency FISH 185 83 83 82.6 81.6

SNO000E/000A/604ASevern Gauge Programme (Telford, Kington, Sallys, Nailsworth and

Slad)Environment Agency HT 70 81.6 82 80.1 80.1

SNO000E/000A/608A Severn Groundwater Investigation Strategy Environment Agency WR 120 14 56 70 65.8 52.8

SNO001E/000A/003A Severn Model Review and Improvements Environment Agency MAP 5 5 5 5 3

SNC003E/000A/019A Severn Stoning - Emergency Repairs to flood damaged assets Environment Agency REC 86 86 86 86 86

SNC001E/000A/644A Sowe & Gloucester FF Model Environment Agency FFIM 90 32 32 32.4 27.2

SNC003E/000A/027A Southwest Regional Coastal Monitoring Programme Teignbridge DC SMP 177 36 36 36 36

SNC001E/000A/638A Tewkesbury Tributaries Modelling and Flood Warning Review Environment Agency FFIM 32 32 32 31.9 31.9

SNC003E/000A/007A Wordsley Brook Conveyance Improvement Environment Agency REC 0 0 0 0 0

Unallocated spend 135 135 92.8 92.8

41576.3 3619.5 1980.2 330 51 573.5 6552 6221 5065.3

Funding Codes £1,651k

CM - Capital maintenance (Maintain standard of service) £1,064k

CR - Carbon Reduction £1,980k

DEF - New defences (Increasing the standard of service) £735k

HAB - Habitat improvements

FFIM - Flood forecasting and incident management

MAP - Mapping and modelling

SSSI - Site of Special Scientific Interest improvements

OM2c - Number of households in the 20% most deprived areas moved out of the significant or very significant risk bands

OM4a - Hectares of Water depandant habitat created or improved to meet Water Framework Directive objectives.

Funding

from other

EA

Functions

(£k)

Outcome Measures

OM2 - Number of households with reduced risk of fluvial flooding (Moved out of any probability category to a lower one)

OM2b - Number of households moved out of the very significant or significant risk bands

Local Levy Balance Carried Forward to 2014/15

Local Levy Allocated to Projects

Local Levy Balance from 2012/13

2013/14

Current Local

Levy

Allocation

(£k)

2013/14

Publicly

funded

Contribution

(£k)

2013/14

Privately

Funded

contribution

(£k)

2013/14

Current

FCRM GiA

Allocation

(£k)

Local Levy Income Raised

February

Expenditure to

date (£k)

PPMT project

numberProject Name RMA

Funding

code

Total

Project

Cost (£k)

2013/14

Budget

(£k)

Forecast

2013/14

Expenditure

(£k)

https://dms.asite.com/dmsa/FormViewControl?action_id=511&isUser=true&formId=432946$$eY0QEZ&msgId=746709$$vESZ8g&project_APD_folder_id=3095593$$MVKcoL&isFormDetailRequired=true&comingFrom=FORM&msgAction=undefined&caller=1&form_type_id=119820$$IaWP4e&rmft=119820$$IaWP4e&hashed_project_id=55266$$pl0p99&form_type_name=02.01%20Project%20Record%20Sheet

https://dms.asite.com/dmsa/FormViewControl?action_id=511&isUser=true&formId=432570$$gmIb8P&msgId=746238$$ycG4jY&project_APD_folder_id=3095593$$MVKcoL&isFormDetailRequired=true&comingFrom=FORM&msgAction=undefined&caller=1&form_type_id=119820$$IaWP4e&rmft=119820$$IaWP4e&hashed_project_id=55266$$pl0p99&form_type_name=02.01%20Project%20Record%20Sheet

OFFICIAL

Project Variances +/- 15% or >£10k or resulting in a change in project outcomes Item No: 10, Appendix 2

29

Project Name AFRM / Ops

Manager Project Variation Explanation Request to RFCC

Severn Vale Water Management Plan

West Area Increase of £30k FCRM GiA in 2013/14 to £200,000. Re-profiled project programme

Additional expenditure required for land management, enabling the creation of salt marsh habitat. Additional fencing required to accommodate the tenants. Project programme revised to accommodate additional works for the management and establishment of the salt marsh. Project is expected to be completed in November 2014.

Endorse an additional £30k FCRM GiA in 2013/14 and revised project programme.

Shyte Brook, Much Wenlock, Flood Alleviation Scheme

West Area Reduce £85k FCRM GiA funding for 2013/14.

Detailed design has been completed using the LA’s contribution. The £85k FCRM GiA will not be spent in 2013/14. A revised bid will be submitted for 2015/16.

Endorse a reduction of £85k of FCRM GiA to 2013/14 budget.

The Beck, Mousesweet Brook, Dudley Flood Alleviation Scheme

Central Area Carry over £227k local levy into 2014/15 and re-profile project programme.

Delays in awarding design and build contract under the Water and Environment Framework (WEM) has impacted the project delivery and the associated funding needs to be carried over into 2014/15.

Acknowledge the transfer of £227k local levy from 2013/14 to 2014/15 and re-profiled project programme.

Cherry Brook & Folly Brook Flood Alleviation Scheme

West Area Carry over £10k local levy for Cherry Brook and £15k for Folly Brook into 2014/15.

Delays completing the feasibility study for both locations mean funding will not be utilised in 2013/14, so funding has been requested to be carried over into 2014/15.

Approve carryover of £25k local levy into 2014/15.

Charlton FRM Scheme- Merry Brook

West Area Carry over £18k local levy into 2014/15. Re-profile programme delivery.

As a result of the exceptional flooding and incident management within the area, progressing work to reduce overland and surface water flows under Partnership/Collaboration Agreement has been delayed.

Approve carryover of £18k local levy into 2014/15.

Kempsey West Area Additional £23k FCRM GiA in 2013/14. An accrual was submitted at the end of 2012/13 for the contractor’s final payment but was missed during the accrual processes. It was processed during 2013/14.

Endorse an additional funding of £23k FCRM GiA for 2013/14.

Upton Upon Severn FRM Scheme

West Area Additional £65k FCRM GiA in 2013/14. Additional funding is required for 2013/14 to cover compensation and associated fees.

Endorse an additional £65k FCRM GiA in 2013/14.

FCRM Capital Salaries

Jennie Cooper Reduction in FCRM GiA allocation of £316k from the original budget of £941k.

FCRM GiA funding is provided to fund a proportion of Environment Agency staff salaries to cover the costs of working on capital projects. Time recording over the past quarter has improved. Using January’s data, we are forecasting to outturn at £625k.

Acknowledge the forecast outturn of £625k for Capital Salaries.

OFFICIAL

Project Variances +/- 15% or >£10k or resulting in a change in project outcomes Item No: 10, Appendix 2

30

Project Name AFRM / Ops

Manager Project Variation Explanation Request to RFCC

Severn Critical Eel Tide Flaps

West Area Hand back £54k FCRM GiA into 2013/14 programme.

We are proposing to defer contract award until we are clear about the funding available through the flood recovery exercise for the essential repairs to the tidal outfall structures and we are in a position to progress the works.

Endorse hand back of £54k FCRM GiA into 2013/14.

OFFICIAL

31


Item No: 10, Appendix 3

Project Updates, April 2014

1. Dinglewell, (Gloucester City Council) This is a property level protection for 6 dwellings at risk of flooding. It is being delivered by Gloucester City Council by providing passive measures (including flood doors, smart airbricks, non-return valves and treatment of brick work) to reduce the risk of flooding at a cost of approximately £23k.The scheme has had £13k of local levy funding in 2013/14. The scheme was due for completion during the financial year 2013/14, however further surveys have identified that additional properties are at risk and the number of properties benefitting from the scheme is likely to increase to 12. The additional cost due to the number of houses requiring protection will be funded by Gloucester City Council. Gloucester City Council has already completed surveys but the scheme will not be completed until Summer 2015/16, due to the scope of the project increasing.

2. Northway, Oak Drive, Tewkesbury (Gloucestershire County Council)

Following consultation with the local community and Parish Council, it has been established that the flood alleviation scheme planned at the rear of Oak Drive is not now wanted and Gloucestershire County Council will no longer require the reserved FCRM GiA funding for 2013/14 (£12k) and 2014/15 (£38k). A Variation Report is being submitted by Gloucestershire county Council.

3. Hope under Dinmore, Cherry Brook (Herefordshire Council)

At the English Severn & Wye RFCC meeting in January 2014, it was agreed that local levy funding can be used towards a feasibility study for this project to assess options and the funding needed going forward. The feasibility study was to start during 2013/14 but has been delayed until 2014/15 due to the change in the way services are procured following the award of Herefordshire Council’s public realm services contract to Balfour Beatty Living Places. This means that there was nil spend of local levy funding in 2013/14 and the request is made to re-profile the expenditure (£10k) into 2014/15, bringing total local levy required in 2014/15 to £30k. A Variation Report is being submitted by Herefordshire Council.

4. Eardisley, Folly Brook (Herefordshire Council)

At the English Severn & Wye RFCC meeting in January 2014, it was agreed that local levy funding can be used towards a feasibility study for this project to assess options, whether a scheme is viable and the funding needed going forward. The feasibility study was to start during 2013/14 but has been delayed until 2014/15 due to the change in the way services are procured following the award of Herefordshire Council’s public realm services contract to Balfour Beatty Living Places. This means that there was nil spend of local levy funding in 2013/14 and the request is made to re-profile the expenditure (£15k) into 2014/15, bringing total local levy required in 2014/15 to £30k. A Variation Report is being submitted by Herefordshire Council.

OFFICIAL

32

5. Snitterfield, Bell Brook (Warwickshire County Council) The Bell Brook Hydraulic Model has identified 37 residential properties to be at risk of flooding. The model has indicated that the onset of flooding is expected to occur during a 5% AEP event.

At Sherbourne House, the Bell Brook sinks into a culvert and remains predominately underground for 410 metres. In places it passes directly underneath residential property. The culvert is owned by 30 individual riparian owners, including the Local Authority, commercial developers and individual home owners.

Routine asset inspections have assessed the culvert to be poor condition, with defects including; undermined side walls, displaced bricks and a distorted soffit. Riparian owners have been made aware of the culvert’s poor condition. Damage to the culvert side walls Distorted soffit In partnership, the Environment Agency and Warwickshire County Council appointed Arup Consulting Engineers to produce a structural report advising on the most appropriate remedial action. In addition, an alignment survey is planned to determine the precise route of the culvert during March 2014.

Following an Initial Assessment of potential options, a diversion of the watercourse making the existing culvert redundant, appears to be the most practical long term solution. The scheme is estimated to cost £2m, providing a 100 year standard of protection. A moderation bid is currently being prepared requesting that FCRM GiA funding is prioritised to this scheme, considering the poor condition of the culvert and the risks associated with failure.

If moderation is unsuccessful, under partnership funding rules a large contribution from local stakeholders will be required. We will update the English Severn and Wye RFCC with progress at the July RFCC meeting.

Severn : 2014/15 Programme Item No: 10, Appendix 4

Contribution to Deerhurst Walton (now 2014-15) Tewkesbury Borough Council 40 40

Midlands West Reservoir Works 2 Environment Agency 1 1

Whaddon, Cheltenham, Flood Alleviation Scheme Gloucestershire County Council 50 50

Cubbington Flood Alleviation Scheme, Warwickshire Warwick District Council 100 100

Puxton & Stourvale Marshes, Kidderminster, Worcestershire, WLMP Environment Agency 50 50 100

The Beck, Mousesweet Brook, Dudley Flood Alleviation Scheme Environment Agency 127 65 192

Aston Cantlow Warwickshire County Council 100 40 140

Badsey Brook (Broadway, Childswickham and Murcot) FAS Environment Agency 522.5 522.5

Cherry Brook, Hope Under Dinmore, Flood Alleviation Scheme Herefordshire 20 20

Fenny Compton Warwickshire County Council 30 70 100

Folly Brook, Eardisley, Flood Alleviation Scheme Herefordshire 15 15

Northway Oak Drive, Tewkesbury Flood Alleviation Scheme Gloucestershire County Council 38 40 78

River Severn, Hempsted and Rea, Gloucester, Flood Alleviation SchemeEnvironment Agency 30 30

Snitterfield Environment Agency 50 50

Chelt CWC (Ph4, 5, 6 and 7) Environment Agency 56 56

Daniels Brook Environment Agency 26 26

Horsbere Brook Environment Agency 200 200

Kempsey Environment Agency 1 1

Marlcliff FAS Environment Agency 12 12

Powick FAS Environment Agency 4 4

Prestbury FAS Environment Agency 0

Uckinghall Environment Agency 41.8 41.8

Sudbrook, Gloucester, Property Level Protection Gloucester City Council 45 120 165

Severn Vale Water Management Plan Environment Agency 12.5 12.5

Mushroom Green Dam Dudley MBC 100 100

River Severn, Minsterworth FAS Erosion Protection Environment Agency 30 30

Abbey Mill Sluices Environment Agency 30 30Rural Suds Stroud DC 45 45Bewdley Property Level Protection Environment Agency 104 104Leominster FAS Environment Agency 60 60

Cambridge, Gloucestershire Flood Alleviation Scheme Lower severn IDB 23 10 33

East Waterside PLP Malvern Hills 15 20 35

Barbourne Worcester City 120 TBC 120

Wick Property Level Protection Wychavon District Council 21 8 29

Cradley Brook, Cradley, Flood Alleviation Scheme Herefordshire Council 0.5 0.5

Coal Brook, Coalbrookdale, Flood Relief Works Telford and Wrekin 10 10

Ketley Town, Surface Water Flood Alleviation Scheme Telford and Wrekin 55 550 605

Kinver, River Stour, PLP Scheme Staffordshire County Council 4.5 4.5

Pooley Lane, Moreton, Surface Water FAS Staffordshire County Council 8 8

Princethorpe, Rugby, Property Level Protection Scheme Warwickshire County Council 1 10 11

Shropshire PLP Schemes Shropshire County Council 109.2 72.1 181.3Non-Construction Schemes 2014/15

CAM PS Severn Wind Pump (Unallocated) Environment Agency 0 0

Heat Light Renewable Severn Environment Agency 19 19

Severn Rating Review Environment Agency 20 20

Gauge Programme Severn Environment Agency 30 30

Central Gauge Programme Severn Environment Agency 13 13

West Threshold Surveying Environment Agency 20 20

Severn Performance Measures Environment Agency 15 15

Buildwas Sidelooker ADVP Environment Agency 23.5 23.5

Kidderminster GS ADCP flowgauge Environment Agency 5.5 5.5

Deerhurst Ultrasonic flow gauge repairs Environment Agency 7 7

ShARC boat (revised full-size ARC boat) Environment Agency 7 7

West Blockage Modelling Environment Agency 45 45

Rugby Hazard Mapping - Swift, Sow Brook and Clifton Brook Environment Agency 40 40

Pudding Brook Flood Study Environment Agency 22 22

Ewyas Harold Flood Map Study Environment Agency 15 15

Severn Nafra Improvements Environment Agency 15 15

Severn Survey for in-house modelling Environment Agency 10 10

Orphan Reservoirs Severn Environment Agency 25 25

Highcross Ditch Outfall Access Environment Agency 45 45

Bromsgrove Channel Improvements Environment Agency 15 15

Kinver Conveyence Works Environment Agency 15 15

Severn Stoke Culvert Repair Environment Agency 35 35

Winch and Access for Ashelworth Quay Outfall Environment Agency 20 20

Severn Eel Pass Weddenburn Environment Agency 10 10

Severn Critical Eel Pass Environment Agency 50 50

1038.3 1841.7 930.1 75 0 3885.1

Local Levy Balance from 2013/14 £735k

Local Levy Income Raised £1064k

Local Levy Allocated to Projects £1841k

Local Levy Balance Carried Forward to 2015/16 £-42k

Project Name RMA

2014/15

Budget

(£k)

OM2b - Number of households moved out of the very significant or significant risk bands

OM2c - Number of households in the 20% most deprived areas moved out of the significant or very significant risk bands

OM4a - Hectares of Water depandant habitat created or improved to meet Water Framework Directive objectives.

Outcome Measures

OM2 - Number of households with reduced risk of fluvial flooding (Moved out of any probability category to a lower one)

Funding from

other EA

Functions (£k)

2014/15

Current Local

Levy Allocation

(£k)

2014/15

Publicly

funded

Contribution

(£k)

2014/15

Privately Funded

contribution (£k)

2014/15

Current

FCRM GiA

Allocation

(£k)

OFFICIAL

35


Item no: 10, Appendix 5

Paper by: FCRM Advisor, Incidents and Emergency Planning

Subject: Rapid Response Catchments – Flash Flooding

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Rapid response catchments (RRC) contain rivers and streams that will react rapidly to rainfall, and can result in extreme flash flooding posing a real threat to life. A register of communities at risk from extreme flash flooding (known as the ‘rapid respond catchment register’) prioritises these catchments according to a hazard category of very high, high, medium, and low.

1.2 The English Severn and Wye RFCC area contains 10 communities that are on the

national register. 4 of these communities are classified as having a ‘Very High’ hazard, 3 ‘High’ and 3 ‘Medium’. A schedule of these communities is provided in Annex 1.

1.3 Members will recall an introductory paper (2 July 2013, Item 14), an update on

progress and presentation (1 October 2013, Item 10) and a key issues paper proposing this full paper at the last RFCC meeting (7 January 2014). This paper outlines a proposal to build upon the work already completed within the Rapid Response Catchment communities in the English Severn and Wye RFCC area.

2.0 Progress in Coalbrookdale and Llanyblodwel 2.1 Our work so far has focussed upon 2 communities, Coalbrookdale (Telford and

Wrekin) and Llanyblodwel (Shropshire). We have completed awareness raising activities with the communities and our professional partners.

Recommendations The English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee is asked to 1. Endorse this innovative partnership approach by the Environment Agency and the

National Flood Forum to provide 2 years of support for 10 communities at risk from flash flooding.

2. Approve the request for £120k local levy funding over 2 years, subject to savings or additional budget being found elsewhere within the three year rolling programme.

OFFICIAL

36

2.2 We ‘door knocked’ specific properties and businesses at risk to deliver specific flooding information and advice and prompted further engagement through meetings and drop in sessions. We informed the LLFA Chief Executives, Councillors, MPs & Local Resilience Forum secretariats of the communities at risk in their area. We have also made contact with all local authority emergency planners and parish councils to discuss work and invite input.

2.3 We are supporting the parish councils and other community groups to develop

community flood plans. This will improve the resilience of the community, and include consideration of vulnerable groups and the potential options to improve warning time.

3.0 Proposal for Continued and Increased Engagement of Rapid Response

Catchment communities in the English Severn and Wye RFCC Area 3.1 Our work over the last 12 months has helped to demonstrate that communities can

be empowered to work in partnership with responsible authorities to minimise the impact of flooding. Our proposal is to continue and expand the work with the 10 RRC communities within the English Severn and Wye RFCC area. This will enable them to develop the expertise necessary to lead a multi-agency approach to managing their flood risk. This work will build upon the experiences in Coalbrookdale and Llanyblodwel.

3.2 It is proposed that we work with the 10 communities over 2 years using a dedicated

officer and drawing on the larger nationwide network that has been created by the National Flood Forum (NFF).

3.3 The objectives of this work are to;

Support the Environment Agency to deliver community engagement work in the 10 communities at risk of flash flooding;

Forge a working relationship with the communities and assist in developing the capacity and capability of these communities;

Support new groups to develop the expertise necessary to lead a multi-agency approach within their own community;

Develop a legacy of new ways of working into the future. 3.4 The main focus of this project is to take a community–led approach to improve flood

resilience in the RRC communities. In essence this is about piloting new approaches to building community resilience by empowering the community to lead the project. This means going beyond general awareness raising activities and increasing community understanding of flood risk to reach a position where communities are taking ownership of planning and preparing for flooding themselves.

3.5 The Environment Agency has worked with the National Flood Forum for many years

to support community engagement activities. As an independent charity the National Flood Forum can often build trust and achieve outcomes quicker than local authorities or government organisations. The approaches used by the NFF help to sustain involvement and ensure a lasting legacy for the community.

OFFICIAL

37

3.6 A detailed project plan with costs and measurable outcomes has been developed by the Environment Agency and National Flood Forum. The plan aims to work with communities to understand their risk, prepare that community and for the communities to have a plan in place so that they can respond. A breakdown of the project plan can be seen in Annex 2 and the location by location full plan is available on request.

3.7 This project can be delivered to the 10 communities for £120k over 2 years. A

breakdown of this can be seen in Annex 3. The approach to this project is scalable, and the time and cost could be adapted to deliver to fewer communities or over a greater time scales.

4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations 4.1 The purpose of this work is to go beyond general awareness raising activities and to

reach a position where the communities are taking ownership of the planning and preparing for flooding themselves.

4.2 It is recognised that the programme for the next 3 years is at capacity and if agreed

this proposal would be on the basis that savings or extra budgets could be found elsewhere within the 3 year programme going forward.

4.3 The English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee is requested

to:

1. Endorse this innovative partnership approach by the Environment Agency and the National Flood Forum to provide 2 years of support for 10 communities at risk from flash flooding.

2. Approve the request for £120k local levy funding over 2 years, subject to

savings or additional budget being found elsewhere within the three year rolling programme.

Dan Matthews FCRM Advisor Incidents & Emergency Planning Rhys McCarthy National Flood Forum April 2014

OFFICIAL

38

Annex 1

Schedule of the Rapid Response Catchments for the English Severn and Wye RFCC

Regional Flood and Coastal Committee

Name River Name Lead Local Flood Authority Hazard rating

English Severn and Wye Lydney Lyd Gloucestershire County Medium

English Severn and Wye Ruspidge Cinderford Brook Gloucestershire County Medium

English Severn and Wye Charlton Kings River Chelt Gloucestershire County High

English Severn and Wye Slad valley Slad Brook Gloucestershire County Very High

English Severn and Wye Llanyblodwel River Tanat Shropshire Council High

English Severn and Wye Much Wenlock Shyte Brook Shropshire Council Very High

English Severn and Wye Coalbrookdale Coalbrookdale Brook Telford & Wrekin Council Medium

English Severn and Wye Astley Dick Brook Worcestershire County High

English Severn and Wye Broadway Badsey Brook Worcestershire County Very High

English Severn and Wye Charlton Merry Brook Worcestershire County Very High

OFFICIAL

39

Annex 2 Project Plan: Activities for Engagement

Engagement Objectives Indicators Actions Timescale

Additional Resources known to

be required e.g. trailer

Legacy

The community to know that they are at risk. By the end of March 2016, the community has been informed about the risk associated with flash flooding. The community acknowledges the risk Work with some of the communities has already begun.

1. All members of the

community at risk have been contacted regarding their risk and given an opportunity to become involved with a community group to learn more and to deal with this issue

1. Discussions with EA, local

authority and other relevant partners to understand the context

2. Community networks

identified and contacted 3. Raising awareness through

participation in local events, working with the media, etc.

4. All high risk flooding

individuals contacted in person

5. Meeting called to raise awareness

6. End of work package

report

6 / 12 months

Trailer x 3/4 Art work – fliers – information – banners etc. Drop-ins x2/3 Community events x2

1. Knowledge of

partners’ aspirations and context

2. Links made with local networks

3. Awareness of flood risk raised with some individuals and communities

4. End of work package report

They are prepared By the end of November 2016 there is a flood group established within each community. There is a flood response

A community forum is established and the options have been presented, discussed and an agreement made. There is a flood

1. Using local leaders and

networks 2/3 internal meetings with the community held

2. Further discussions held with individuals and

12 / 18 months

Flood kits for volunteers

OFFICIAL

40




Legacy

plan which has been created in conjunction with the community and others involved in flood risk management (such as the LLFA).

response plan which has been created in conjunction with the community and others involved in flood risk management (such as the LLFA)

networks to set up a community flood group

3. ½ Multi-agency meetings held

4. Work with the community group and give with clear leadership and support, through a series of meetings (3 meetings) and discussions with key individuals, as well as partners

5. Work with the group and partners to develop a work programme and implement it (4 meetings plus meetings with partners)

6. End of work package report

They can respond By the end of March 2017 people within the community have taken individual or collective action to reduce the impact on them and their property.

1. Individuals have personal flood plans and have created a flood kit

2. The community has a flood group

3. The community has a flood plan

1. Training and support for the development of individual flood plans (3 meetings of the group, one training day and work with individuals to develop and support)

2. Acquiring, creating and distributing flood kits.

3. Single point of contact for

24 months

Flood kits Trailer for events (for town engagement with flood group) There is the possibility of third sector volunteers supporting the plan

OFFICIAL

41




Legacy

4. The EA has a single

point of contact for the community.

EA agreed.

4. Instigate an annual/6 months flood awareness day

5. End of work package and final report

OFFICIAL

42

Annex 3 Budget Breakdown – dates may vary

Q1

Jul 2015 Q2

Oct 2015 Q3

Jan 2016 Q4

Apr 2016 Q5

Jul 2016 Q6

Oct 2016 Q7

Jan 2017 Q8

Apr 2017

Staff Costs £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000 £10,000

Support Costs £5,000 £5,000 £5,000 £5,000 £5,000 £5,000 £5,000 £5,000

Balance £15,000 £15,000 £15,000 £15,000 £15,000 £15,000 £15,000 £15,000

Total £15,000 £30,000 £45,000 £60,000 £75,000 £90,000 £105,000 £120,000

OFFICIAL

43

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee Meeting Date: 15th April 2013

Item no: 11

Paper by: Programme & Area Teams Subject: FCRM Six Year Programme 2015/16 to 2020/21

1.0 Introduction 1.1 The aim of this paper is to give a forward look and overview to members on

the allocation process for 2015/16 to 2020/21. 2.0 Forward Look – 2015/16 Timetable 2.1 The flood and coastal erosion risk management grant in aid (FCRM GiA)

process and timetable for 2015/16 has changed. 2.2 The Environment Agency is developing a six year capital programme

(2015/16 to 2020/21), for inclusion in the Autumn Statement announcement in December 2014. The allocation process has been brought forward by two months to enable input and consent from the English Severn and Wye RFCC before the Environment Agency Board of Directors approves the final programme in November, three months earlier than usual.

2.3 The diagram below provides a timetable of activities for Risk Management

Authorities and the Environment Agency for 2015/16:

Recommendations The English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee is asked to: 1. Note and comment on the timetable and overview for the allocation process

for 2015/16 to 2020/21. 2. Note and comment on the proposed approach to collating the 6 year bid for

the English Severn and Wye RFCC and agree how the collated bid will be communicated to the committee prior to final submission to National.

3. Proactively engage with their Environment Agency and Risk Management Authority officers to ensure their priorities are included in the bid ahead of the April meeting.

4. Support an LLFA workshop to review indicative GiA allocation and identify priorities for Local Choices prior to the July committee meeting.

OFFICIAL

44

3.0 New 6 Year Programme (2015/16 to 2020/21) 3.1 In June 2013, the government announced the FCRM GiA funding available

for Spending Review 2013 (SR13). The agreed funding for flood defences in 2015/16 was identified as £370m, increasing to over £400m by 2020/21.

3.2 In return the FCRM capital programme will need to reduce risk of flooding to

300,000 houses between 2015/16 and 2020/21, improve capital programme efficiency by 10% and include at least 15% in partnership contributions (non FCRM GiA funding).

3.3 This is a very challenging timetable; a longer term FCRM GiA settlement from

Defra provides substantial benefits which will:

a) create stronger commitments for the government contribution to partnership funding schemes enabling talks that are more constructive with other contributors. b) enable longer term resource planning and strategic partnership development. c) identify commercial and efficiency benefits to being able to provide larger packages of work over financial years.

3.4 Since mid-February, Areas have been engaging with LLFA’s to develop a 6

year indicative programme. At the time of writing this paper, the data is not available for inclusion; the deadline for submission is 31st March 2014.

3.5 Members are encouraged to proactively engage with their Environment

Agency and Risk Management Authority officers to ensure their priorities are included in the projects submitted. We will not be covering individual project details during the April meeting so members are expected to be in support of the projects proposed in their patch.

3.6 The principles for reviewing the RFCC bid at the April meeting are as follows;

For years 1 & 2, notification of any major variances (over £10k) on local levy projects or GiA project changes to the committee approved programme in January 2014.

OFFICIAL

45

For Year 3, include projects showing contributions which have been agreed in principle. Levy balances may need to be allocated against agreed projects in the future to support delivery.

For Years 4 to 6, projects will be included showing 3rd party contributions where a funding shortfall exists. This will allow areas time to develop projects and identify external contributions. There may be a need to support some projects with levy balances in the future. The overall potential shortfall will be quantified and shared with the RFCC at the April meeting.

The overall 6 year programme will have some flexibility in-year and across years to take advantage of funding and partnership working opportunities.

3.7 In July, the English Severn and Wye Committee will have a further

opportunity to review the indicative allocation and the local choice decisions to ensure the programme aligns with the RFCC priorities. The Committee is asked to support a workshop with the LLFAs prior to the July meeting to identify priorities for their areas.


1. Note and comment on the timetable and overview for the allocation process for 2015/16.

2. Note and comment on the proposed approach to collating the 6 year

bid for the English Severn and Wye RFCC and agree how the collated bid will be communicated to the committee prior to final submission to National.

3. Proactively engage with their Environment Agency and Risk

Management Authority officers to ensure their priorities are included in the bid ahead of the April meeting.

4. Support an LLFA workshop to discuss priorities for Local Choices prior

to the July committee meeting. Sue McCarthy Regional Programme Team Leader March 2014

OFFICIAL

46

47

INFORMATION ITEMS

Members are asked to raise any matters arising from the Information Items at the

meeting or directly with Environment Agency staff.

48

OFFICIAL

49


Appendix 1: FRMP and RBMP Briefing Note

INFORMATION ITEM: A

Paper by: Area Flood and Coastal Risk Managers Subject: Forward Look

1.0 Introduction 1.1 The purpose of this paper is to provide the RFCC with a forward look and

present further information to members on the following:

Priorities for the future for the RFCC in terms of managing flood risk and how we are planning to address it.

Initiatives that are being worked on within the RFCC boundary. 1.2 This paper will inform the RFCC of the work the Environment Agency teams

are planning as well as inviting other Risk Management Authorities to do the same.

1.3 RFCC Members are encouraged to suggest items to be included in future

papers. Further details on how to contribute can be obtained from the RFCC Support Officer.

2.0 Our Strategic Overview – Identifying Communities at Risk

2.1 Previously we presented to committee the work Area teams are carrying out as part of their strategic overview role. We have been working with our internal and external partners to identify priority areas for all sources of flooding. This work includes identifying Water Framework Directive and spatial planning priorities for the future to ensure a coordinated approach in their delivery. This work is nearing completion for the whole of the English Severn and Wye RFCC Area and the results are being shared with all Risk Management Authorities.

Recommendations The Committee is asked to: 1. Note the issues presented in this paper 2. Suggest topics to be included in future papers.

OFFICIAL

50

3.0 Floods and Water Management Act (2010) Reservoir Provisions 3.1 The remaining sections of the reservoirs provisions (Schedule 4) are still to be

determined and are expected to be commenced by December 2014. Defra have briefed Ministers on this second phase, which included recommendations on how each of the specific aspects of the remaining Schedule will be taken forward. This includes a potential reduction in statutory capacity thresholds for large raised reservoirs from 25,000m3 to 10,000m3, a change in the regulation of reservoirs which are in cascade with other reservoirs, and changing the charging costs for registered reservoirs. A change in capacity threshold would require identification of up to 1,300 additional reservoirs not currently regulated. We understand Defra plan to consult on this second phase in spring 2014.

4.0 Flood Risk Regulations 2009 4.1 The Flood Risk Regulations 2009 implement the requirements of the

European Floods Directive which aims to provide a consistent approach to managing flood risk across Europe.

4.2 In December 2013 we published new and updated flood maps on our website

showing the risk of flooding from rivers and the sea, reservoirs and surface water. We are currently gathering internal and external feedback on the new maps. The maps will be reviewed, updated and modified as part of the ongoing planning cycle required under the Regulations.

4.3 At the time of writing, the current reservoir map on our website shows the

extent of flooding but does not include information on depth and velocity. We are looking to publish depth and velocity maps for reservoirs in March. They will be similar to the ones we already have for surface water.

5.0 Severn Flood Risk Management Plan 5.1 Under the Flood Risk Regulations, the Environment Agency and Natural

Resources Wales are required to prepare a Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP) for the Severn River Basin District (RBD) for flooding from main rivers, the sea and reservoirs.

5.2 LLFAs are required to develop a FRMP for significant flood risk areas which

consider local sources of flooding; surface water, groundwater and ordinary watercourses.

5.3 There are seven Flood Risk Areas in the Severn River Basin District (six are

in Wales and one in England):

Bristol

Cardiff

Caerphilly

Ebbw Vale

Merthyr Tydfil

Pontypool and Cwmbran

OFFICIAL

51

Rhondda, Cynon and Taf

5.4 The West Midlands Flood Risk Area crosses into the Severn River Basin District. Currently the intention is to report the actions that straddle the boundaries across both the Severn and the Humber RBD if possible.

5.5 At the time of writing, the seven LLFAs in England, within the Severn RBD,

with Flood Risk Areas have chosen to prepare a FRMP jointly with the Environment Agency. In addition, two LLFAs that do not have a Flood Risk Area have chosen to contribute to the joint FRMP, on a voluntary basis. These include:

Bristol City Council (statutory and voluntary)

Bath & North East Somerset Council (statutory requirement for part of the Flood Risk Area and as voluntary information for the remaining part of the council area)

North Somerset Council (as above)

South Gloucestershire Council (as above)

Somerset County Council (as voluntary information)

City of Wolverhampton (statutory and voluntary)

Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (statutory and voluntary)

Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (statutory and voluntary)

Northamptonshire County Council (as voluntary information)

5.6 All the LLFAs in Wales that fall within the Severn RBD have made the

commitment to produce separate FRMPs. 5.7 A draft scoping report has been produced for the Severn FRMP and will be

issued shortly. The scoping report sets out what flood risk planning is going on across the Severn River Basin District, the timing of specific consultations and which organisations lead on those consultations. A draft single Flood Risk Management Plan for the Severn RBD is due to go out for consultation in September 2014, ahead of the completion date of December 2015. Further details are included in the briefing note included as Appendix 1.

6.0 Recommendations 6.1 The Committee is asked to: 1. Note the issues presented in this paper.

2. Suggest topics to be included in future papers. Emma Roberts Area FCRM Manager (Central) March 2014

OFFICIAL

52

Appendix 1

3 March 2014

Aligning Flood Risk and River Basin Management Planning

Over the next two years, the Environment Agency will be undertaking considerable planning work, culminating in the publication of Flood Risk Management Plans (FRMPs) and updated River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs). Together, these plans will shape important decisions, direct considerable investment and action and deliver significant benefits to society and the environment.

RBMPs identify the state of, and pressures on, the water environment. They consider the technical and economic viability of beneficial actions, set objectives and coordinate/monitor delivery of agreed actions. In so doing they set direction and provide a transparent decision-making framework for action to maintain and improve the quality of all surface and ground water, including the sea within one nautical mile of the coast. In England, the Environment Agency is the lead organisation, and we work with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) and the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) to manage cross-border catchments.

FRMPs identify the risk from flooding and set out objectives and measures for managing that risk. In so doing, they aggregate information about all sources of flooding - and coastal erosion where appropriate - to better inform prioritisation, decision making and work programming. In England, the Environment Agency leads on flooding from rivers, the sea and reservoirs, again working with partners in cross-border catchments. Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) lead on local flood risk (surface water, ground water and non main rivers).

The two planning processes are working to common River Basin District (RBD) boundaries and many key stakeholders have an interest in both. As the plans themselves and the supporting documents/data-sets are complex, we have decided not to integrate them into a single set of consultation documents. Instead we will coordinate the engagement around the planning processes, promoting them together, cross-referencing, explaining how they relate to each other and, as far as possible, joining up our engagement of stakeholders with interests in both. We believe this is the best way to make it easy for you to participate in either, or both, consultations.

Changes in timescales

We have decided that we will launch both consultations in September, rather than in July as initially planned. This has been agreed with Defra and with NRW, which will also change consultation timescales in shared RBDs. This change will deliver a number of important benefits for both planning processes. Specifically it will mean more time to:

design a co-ordinated and balanced engagement programme for FRMP and RBMP, and improve how we are developing both alongside other related planning/programming cycles to help join up and maximise their impact;

involve key stakeholders to help inform the consultation (and supporting documents/data), and make it clearer and easier to respond to;

ensure that robust economic impact assessment can inform the RBMP consultation and ministerial decisions on ambition/priorities;

FRMP & RBMP Partners Briefing Note

OFFICIAL

53

develop objectives and measures for FRMPs, which have been delayed by our response to the recent major flooding incidents and can now be informed by what we have learned from those incidents.

It also makes more sense to launch a consultation in September than at the start of the summer holiday period.

Implications for FRMP preparation and consultation

To allow time for FRMPs to be completed, the consultation period will run for three months, from September to December 2014. We must also take account of any relevant feedback from the consultation on the updates to the RBMPs which will remain open until March 2015. We are working with SEPA to establish how best to co-ordinate consultation on the draft FRMP for the Solway-Tweed, which straddles the border between England and Scotland.

We have invited LLFAs to be partners in developing joint FRMPs and contribute information about local sources of flooding. In partnership we can bring together relevant information about all sources of flood risk into the FRMP. The majority of LLFAs have confirmed that they will be a partner in the FRMPs. We will publish a Scoping Report for each RBD which sets out which sources of flooding will be included in the FRMPs, the timescale for consultation and how the public and other interested parties can get involved in planning to manage flood risk.

We recognise that these changes to consultation timings may have implications for LLFAs and their previous decisions on partnering. We hope that it doesn’t lead to any loss of partners, but instead provides additional time for other partners to consider joining the FRMP. Our local teams will be checking-in with LLFAs to understand the impact of the change in timescales

Implications for RBMP preparation and consultation The six month RBMP consultation will now take place between September 2014 and March 2015. This change is driven by the need to develop a robust draft Impact Assessment (IA) to support the consultation and inform ministerial decisions balancing ambition and cost. The draft IA will be a single national document which outlines different options representing different priorities and varying funding levels. It is dependent on 350 catchment appraisals of costs and benefits, on which our local teams are currently working with valuable input from local stakeholders. It must therefore continue at pace, largely unaffected by the change in consultation timescales.

Contact information We welcome your feedback or questions about the FRMP and RBMP projects. Please direct comments, or queries about the FRMP project to Joanna Evans and about the RBMP project to Ben Bunting .

More information is available on our website here about the Flood Risk Regulations and Flood Risk Management Plans and here on the Water Framework Directive and River Basin Management Plans.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/135520.aspx

http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/33106.aspx

OFFICIAL

54

OFFICIAL

55


INFORMATION ITEM: B

Paper by: Regional Forecasting Team Leader Subject: Flood Forecasting and Flood Resilience Report –

January to March 2014

1.0 Flood Summary Report 1.1 Late December 2013 – January 2014

On 23rd December there was up to 50mm of rainfall recorded over the Welsh Mountains, with widespread rainfall of 25mm elsewhere. This rainfall was the first of 6 successive rainfall bands to cross the region between 23rd December and 8th January. Each rain band came from a West or South-Westerly direction, and resulted in 20-25mm of rainfall over the Welsh Mountains, and widespread 10-15mm elsewhere. In the first 10 days of January there was almost 100% of the long-term average rainfall for January received throughout the region.

Radar rainfall accumulations between 06:00hrs 23/12/13 – 06:00hrs 24/12/13. Up to 50mm recorded in West Area, and up to 15-20mm widespread in Central and East

areas.

Recommendations The Committee is asked to note the contents of this report.

OFFICIAL

56

Rising levels on the River Severn meant the Shrewsbury flood barriers were put into place on 23rd December, After further rainfall, Severnside North barriers at Bewdley were put up on 8th January. Barrier levels at Ironbridge were not quite reached, so these barriers were not required, on this occasion. The rainfall on 23rd December also meant the gates at Upton were closed until 1st January when levels receded below the thresholds. However, the lower Severn levels then began to rise again back through flood warning thresholds on 2nd January.

Between 23rd and 25th December, 30 Flood Warnings for the Severn, Wye and Avon catchments were issued. The main rivers did start to recede between 29th December and 1st January, but further rainfall between 1st and 6th January prompted renewed river level rises and the issue of a further 60 Flood Warnings for the Severn, Wye and Avon Catchments.

This graph shows water levels at Worcester, River Severn. This shows how the river rose, then receded and rose again within 2 weeks.

Between 7th January and 31st January, successive rain bands continued to cross the Midlands, predominantly from the West, which meant the issue of a further 42 Flood Warnings, predominantly in the Severn catchment and lower reaches of the River Severn.

It is estimated that approximately 7 properties flooded due to fluvial flooding. There were Flood Warnings sent to approximately 5,755 properties, and 301 properties received a Severe Flood Warning. There were an estimated 3,904 properties protected from flooding due to flood defence schemes on the Rivers Severn and Wye.

211% of the long-term average rainfall for January fell in Midlands region. The Severn basin received 209% of the long-term average rainfall, and the Wye received 212%.

OFFICIAL

57

January 2014 rainfall was more than double the normal average monthly rainfall in the Southern Midlands and South Britain (Source: The Met Office).

1.2 High Tides 3rd to 4th January 2014

In addition to fluvial flooding and heavy rainfall events, some of the highest tides for 30 years occurred on the 3rd and 4th January 2014. The bad weather added a further 1 metre of storm surge on to the already high spring tides. This meant Avonmouth reached 15m on the morning of 3rd January, which is the highest level on record for Avonmouth. On 2nd January 2014, 3 Severe Flood Warnings were issued for Westbury, Minsterworth and the Tidal Severn Estuary due to concerns of defences overtopping, public safety and the exceptionally high levels predicted.

1.4 February 2014

This shows the observed tides (blue line), and tidal forecast (green line), for Minsterworth, with the highest tide on 03/01/14.

OFFICIAL

58

This shows Gloucester was above 4 metres for the entire period between

03/01/14 – 07/01/14, with a peak of 4.2m on 06/01/14.

The high tides did cause minor overtopping of defences at Minsterworth, but there were no structural issues with the defences. This resulted in the flooding of 6 properties at Minsterworth, and the closure of the A48 for 3 hours due to flooding. A further 17 properties are estimated to have flooded due to the tidal event, and an estimated 20,000 hectares of agricultural land flooded.

1.3 High Tides 31st January On 31st January the high tides, combined with surges of up to 0.7m, meant

defences were threatened with overtopping in Minsterworth, Gloucestershire in the Severn Estuary. This, combined with the fluvial flooding and the Severn Bore, prompted the re-issue of 3 Severe Flood Warnings for the Severn Estuary area, around Minsterworth and Westbury. Several properties were flooded, defences were overtopped at high tides, and the main road through the area was flooded, as was the case earlier in the month. The tidal issues also meant the issue of the 2 Flood Warnings at Newport, for the Wye Estuary, and property flooding was reported in that area too.

1.4 February 2014 This was another very unsettled month, with numerous successive rain bands

continuing to cross the region from the West. On 1st February 25mm of rain fell over the Welsh Mountains. Then on 5th, 8th and 14th February further bands crossed the region from the West, each producing up to 50mm rainfall over the Welsh Mountains. This water made its way down to the River Severn and produced 4 successive flood peaks in the river.

OFFICIAL

59

Worcester – River levels during February 2014. Reached a peak of 5.7m on Feb 13th. This prompted the closure of the road bridge through the centre of Worcester.

Bewdley – River levels reached a peak of 5.0m on 12th February, requiring all three

phases of the barriers at Bewdley

There were 89 Flood Warnings issued throughout West Area, including the Avon catchment during February and many Flood Alerts stayed in force for the entire month. On 13th February one Severe Flood Warning was issued, due to the threat of defences overtopping at Alney Island, Gloucester. However, in the event, the water level stayed just below the top of the defences, so approximately 50 houses were protected from flooding.

West Area incident room was open for 62 consecutive days between Saturday 21st December 2013 and Friday 21st February 2014.

OFFICIAL

60

Rainfall accumulations across Midlands on 8th February 2014. The Upper Wye catchment received up to 40mm (pink), with up to 30mm (red) widespread throughout the Welsh Mountains and West Area. Locations East of Birmingham received much lower rainfall totals, with generally less than 10mm (yellow and green) received for

most of Central and East area. This was one of four similar rainfall events in February.

During February there was widespread property flooding in West Area:

County Approx. Properties Flooded

Gloucestershire 90

Herefordshire 19

Shropshire 5

Worcestershire 118

Of the total properties flooded, approximately 5% were from tidal flooding, and approximately 10% were from surface water flooding. Properties in locations such as Gloucestershire are likely to have been flooded by a combination of fluvial and tidal factors.

Other impacts from the flooding were the closure of Bewdley Bridge, Worcester Bridge, Upton Bridge and the A417 and A48 roads in Gloucestershire.

Rainfall records between December 2013 and end of February 2014, show the UK had its wettest winter since national records began in 1910. For Midlands, we received 194% of February’s long-term average rainfall for the whole region, comprising 231% for the Severn basin and 303% for the Wye basin.

OFFICIAL

61

A recent Met Office report1 suggests the abnormal quantity and size of low pressure systems crossing the southern half of the UK this winter was caused by a change in direction of equatorial winds and colder weather over the USA. These combined to exaggerate the jet stream over the UK, making it faster and moving it further south than normal for winter.

February rainfall data – Southern England and Wales received more than double

the average rainfall for February (Source: The Met Office).

1.5 March 2014 At the time of writing there were no significant flooding events in March, and the Severn basin has received only 17% of its long-term average rainfall. The Wye basin has received 14% so far.

2.0 Community Engagement & Flood Resilience 2.1 In early March we launched a new flood warning service for Kenilworth

(Warwickshire). It is the first time that Kenilworth residents will be able to receive a warning of potential flooding from the Finham Brook. We have been working closely with the Finham Brook Flood Action Group to develop a service that meets their needs. Local partners have been informed of the warning service so that it fits into their emergency plans. This is the first part of our work to develop a community flood plan with the flood action group to ensure the residents are prepared for future flooding.

1 The Recent Storms and Floods in the UK

http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/1/2/Recent_Storms_Briefing_Final_SLR_20140211.pdf



OFFICIAL

62

2.2 An automated gauge has been installed on the Coal Brook and Loam Hole Brook in Coalbrookdale (Shropshire). It is anticipated that this will deliver text messages to all local residents to inform them of a change in levels on the watercourse. A community event is being arranged to deliver a presentation to the community and to sign up the residents to receive the messages. A community plan is also being developed in the area and, once complete, will be held by the two local flood wardens. The flood wardens are also receiving the Flood Guidance Statement to give prior indication of inclement weather.

2.3 We are continuing to work in partnership with Warwickshire County Council

and the National Flood Forum in supporting the Warwickshire Pathfinder Project. As the project develops its links with the chosen communities we provide advice and guidance on establishing local flood action groups and ensuring those communities are prepared for flooding.

2.4 In Warwickshire we have met with residents from Oversley Mill Park near

Alcester who have concerns about localised flooding. By working with the National Flood Forum and other partners we are able to listen to residents’ concerns and discuss their issues.

2.5 In February we ran a ‘Boscastle’ scenario exercise at Shropshire Silver to

raise awareness to Category 1 responders and other partners of the speed at which flash flooding can occur. The exercise followed the Boscastle time line and highlighted the issues around response and realistic time issues. The exercise was well received and it is planned to run a similar exercise within Worcestershire the date of this is to be confirmed.

3.0 Recommendation 3.1 The Committee is asked to note the contents of this report. Emma Ferguson Midlands Flood Forecasting Team Leader March 2014

OFFICIAL

63


INFORMATION ITEM: C

Paper by: Susan Russell, FCRM Advisor Subject: Delivering Environmental Benefits 2013/14

1.0 Background 1.1 Flood and coastal risk management (FCRM) activities have the potential to

impact on the natural and historic environment in many ways. This can be minimised by working with natural processes and wherever possible opportunities are taken to improve and enhance the natural environment. The Environment Agency is responsible for delivering sustainable flood and coastal risk management solutions and has a range of outcomes to achieve alongside and through FCRM activities.

1.2 Our FCRM work, whilst primarily undertaken to manage flood risk, must

include measures to conserve, restore and enhance biodiversity where feasible. This is required by EU law (such as the Water Framework Directive, Habitats Directive), domestic legislation (such as the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Environment Act 1995, Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006, Eel Regulations) and policy (such as the National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Strategy for England and the England Biodiversity Strategy - Biodiversity 2020).

1.3 As far as reasonably practicable, we work with natural processes maximising

opportunities to conserve, enhance and restore biodiversity. We do this by:

Screening strategies, plans, capital projects, schemes, maintenance and flood defence consents to avoid adverse impacts;

Ensuring FCRM projects and schemes have effective mitigation and or compensation for any significant adverse impacts that can’t be avoided;

Designing projects that achieve multiple ecosystem services;

Consulting regularly with our external partners; 1.4 This report outlines some of the work carried out during 2013/14 which helped

us meet our legal obligations and contributed towards delivering the outcome measures (OMs) and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and those required by the England Biodiversity Strategy (EBS) listed in the table below.

1.5 The Environment Agency has an ambition target of creating 10,000 hectares

of new priority habitat between January 2011 and December 2020. FCRM are responsible for delivering a minimum of 5,000 hectares towards this target.

Recommendation The Committee is asked to note the contents of this report.

OFFICIAL

64

Measure Definition

OM 4a Hectares of water dependent habitat created or improved to help meet the objectives of the Water Framework Directive.

OM 4b Hectares of intertidal habitat created to help meet the objectives of the Water Framework Directive for areas protected under the EU Habitats/Birds Directive.

OM 4c Kilometres of rivers protected under the EU Habitats/Birds Directive improved to help meet the objectives of the Water Framework Directive.

KPI 766 Area of SSSI where the Environment Agency has delivered action to address adverse condition.

KPI 768 Area of priority habitat created by the Environment Agency.

EBS1A

Habitat Quality: Better wildlife habitats with 90% of priority habitats in favourable or recovering condition and at least 50% of SSSIs in favourable or condition, while maintaining at least 95% in favourable or recovering condition.

EBS1B More, bigger and less fragmented areas for wildlife, with no net loss of priority habitat and an increase in the overall extent of priority habitat by at least 200,000 ha.

2.0 Habitat Creation (OM4b) 2.1 Plusterwine/Alvington Saltmarsh Creation

During summer 2013, work started to create 39 hectares of saltmarsh on farmland near Lydney on the west bank of the Severn Estuary in Gloucestershire. The £1.2 million scheme is the first saltmarsh creation project in the upper Severn Estuary.

The work involved the removal of four sections of earth embankments to allow the higher tides to spill onto farmland and then drain off after each tide. This will create a new area of saltmarsh and will increase the potential habitat for plants and breeding birds. In addition we have also installed an eel pass on the tidal flaps of the Aylburton Pill outfall to enable eels and elvers to pass freely to access their habitats further upstream.

The Severn Estuary is of international importance for conservation and is designated as one of Europe’s most important wildlife habitats. Saltmarsh habitats are at risk from climate change and it is predicted that in the Severn Estuary alone, 300 hectares will be lost by 2030 due to sea level rises. This project is an important part of our programme to compensate for this process.

We have worked with local landowners and Natural England to develop the project and will continue to work closely with them to support the transition from current farming practices to seasonal grazing which is important to the establishment of the saltmarsh vegetation.

OFFICIAL

65

The project is being funded by Defra FDGiA and the habitat created has counted towards Outcome Measure 4b.

3.0 Habitat Improvement (OM4a) 3.1 Appropriate water level management is of key importance to achieving

favourable condition of many Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) in England. In order to meet Natural England’s conservation objectives, Water Level Management Plans (WLMPs) were originally developed for designated SSSIs across the country. The plans were designed to ensure that water levels are managed to benefit a range of needs, including conservation, fisheries, agriculture and flood risk management.

The Environment Agency, Natural England and Internal Drainage Boards are working to deliver appropriate water level management for SSSIs. At present this work is particularly targeted towards helping to maintain or achieve favourable conditions for wetland SACs, SPAs and SSSIs.

3.2 Wilden Marsh and Meadows SSSI, Worcestershire Wilden Marsh and Meadows SSSI is an extensive area of wet meadows and

woods in the floodplain of the River Stour which was designated for its rich and diverse wetland habitat. However, dredging of the River Stour and the removal of a weir in the 1970’s damaged the site’s floodplain function resulting in the degradation of the SSSI.

The Water Level Management Plan

for the site identified the actions required to bring Environment Agency led priority SSSIs into favourable condition.

During 2013 we restored a weir at

the southern end of the site which will help to maintain the required water level.

We also undertook ditch and water level improvements to restore about 12

hectares of marsh – mainly for the Marsh Orchids. 3.3 Hurcott Pool SSSI, Worcestershire This site in the floodplain of the Blakedown Brook was designated for its

wetland habitats, particularly wet woodland. For many years it has suffered from drying out due to falling groundwater levels.

In partnership with Wyre Forest District Council works to improve water level

management to restore the wet woodland have been completed.

OFFICIAL

66

3.4 Puxton Marsh SSSI Puxton Marsh is a species rich fen situated next to the River Stour, upstream

of Kidderminster in Worcestershire. Together with the adjacent Stourvale Marsh SSSI and other areas further downstream it forms part of one the most important and extensive wetland habitats in the midlands.

Historic management practices, including dredging

have left the SSSI in an unfavourable condition. We have been working with Wyre Forest District

Council, who own part of the site, and Natural England to develop a number of options to help restore Puxton Marsh to a favourable condition. It is hoped that works to re-wet the marsh will be undertaken during 2014/15.

4.0 Fish and Eel Pass Programme 4.1 Many flood risk management structures such as gauging structures, flap

gates, weirs and sluices are barriers to fish and eel migration and key reasons for the failure of many waterbodies to meet the Water Framework Directive ecological targets. A key requirement of the European Eel Regulations is to make sure that eels can get into and out of our rivers easily.

4.2 The Midlands Fish Pass programme for gauging station weirs, jointly funded

by FCRM and Water Resources, is developing fish and eel passes for priority structures over a four year programme which commenced in 2011. These structures pose a particular challenge as there is a need to develop fish passes that don’t compromise flow measurement which is critical to both FCRM and Water Resources.

4.3 During 2013/14 £768,600 was spent on the fish and eel pass programme in

the English Severn and Wye RFCC area. Details of the projects are shown below:

Gauging Station Watercourse Type Progress

Stoneleigh, Warwickshire

River Sowe In channel

Larinier & eel pass

Complete

Roddington, Shropshire River Roden Larinier bypass channel & eel

pass Complete

Hinton on the Green, Worcestershire

River Isbourne Low cost baffles Complete

Cambridge, Gloucestershire

River Cam Pre-barrage fish pass & diversion

channel Complete

Wellesbourne, Warwickshire

River Dene -

Feasibility and outline

design complete

OFFICIAL

67

Gauging Station Watercourse Type Progress

Perry Farm, Shropshire River Perry Cut notch in weir

& eel pass Complete

Holyhead Road, Coventry

River Sherbourne

Inset eel tiles Complete

Besford Bridge, Worcestershire

Bow Brook Eel pass Complete

Harford Hill, Worcestershire

River Salwarpe

Eel pass Complete

Chalford, Gloucestershire

River Frome -


design complete

Yeaton, Shropshire River Perry Eel pass Complete

Bishop’s Frome River Frome -


design complete

Offenham, Worcestershire

Badsey Brook -


design complete

Knightsford Bridge, Worcestershire

River Teme -


design complete

River Sowe, Stoneleigh, Warwickshire (In channel larinier and eel pass)

Before After

OFFICIAL

68

River Roden, Roddington, Shropshire (Larinier bypass channel) Before After 5.0 Land Management 5.1 Rural Sustainable Drainage Systems (RSuDS) Pilot Project on River

Frome catchment, Gloucestershire

Members will already be aware of the scoping study we have carried out to assess the feasibility of implementing Rural Sustainable Drainage Systems (RSuDS) across the catchment of the River Frome in Gloucestershire to address a range of environmental catchment issues. This would help to reduce flood risk and provide WFD benefits by controlling sedimentation and improving water quality.

The RFCC agreed to allocate local levy funds for 2014/15 to work in partnership with Stroud District Council to develop this initiative further. A Project Officer is being recruited by Stroud District Council to lead on this work.

6.0 Reducing Carbon Emissions 6.1 Each Region has a carbon saving plan which has been developed to identify

opportunities to reduce our total carbon footprint from our operational work. Flood risk management assets are among the largest contributors, including pumping stations, gauging stations and mobile plant. Whilst we cannot control the weather and the resulting floods / droughts, we can identify and implement improvements. This includes energy efficiency measures such as maintenance or replacement of pumps, installing renewable energy measures and reviewing pumping regimes.

6.2 During 2013/14 we have:

installed solar panels at a number of FCRM sites;

Upgraded a number of sites with LED lights and reduced heating loads;

OFFICIAL

69

installed new more efficient pumps and control system at Knowleston Place pumping station in Matlock, Derbyshire (Trent RFCC area);

6.3 There further plans to install more LED lighting and make further heating

efficiencies as well as install a wind pump at a site in East Area. 7.0 New Environmental Land Management Scheme 7.1 The Government has recently announced a new environmental land

management scheme which will provide funding for farmers and land managers who deliver benefits for wildlife, improve water quality and create woodland. The new scheme will build on what has been started under the countryside stewardship schemes.

7.2 From 2016 the existing Environmental Stewardship and England Woodland

Grant Schemes will be brought together into a universal scheme. It will be targeted so that farmers and land managers can help deliver environmental priorities specifically related to their local area, focusing particularly on increasing biodiversity.

7.3 Such agri-environment schemes can help to deliver significant benefits for

FCRM and help us to achieve some of our objectives and targets. By working closely with Natural England, we can help focus public investment in agri-environment schemes on areas that are key to achieving local FCRM objectives, as well as improving biodiversity and protecting resources. We must also make sure that proposed Environmental Stewardship management options don’t increase flood risk in their locality.

8.0 Integrated Environment Programme 8.1 From April 2014 a new Integrated Environment Programme is being set up to

help us achieve a wide range of environmental outcomes across all areas of our operational and regulatory work. The drivers for this stem from EU and domestic legislation and government policy.

8.2 Increased environmental demands and reduced resources mean we must do

things more efficiently and cost effectively. We need to achieve more multiple outcomes with every project. We need to work more with natural processes at a catchment scale so that FCRM is more sustainable and resilient in the longer term. We also need to work more effectively across the whole of the Environment Agency, with other Risk Management Authorities and partners, identifying synergies and optimising opportunities to work together to achieve all our environmental legal and policy objectives in a single integrated way.

8.3 Having a fully integrated FCRM environment programme will clearly define what we have to do by 2020, how we plan to get there and monitor how far we have got. Working more effectively with others, it will enable us to meet an increased environmental agenda in a more cost effective and efficient way.

8.4 As part of the FCRM capital settlement, we have to submit a fully costed

programme to deliver environmental benefits by October 2014. This will cover the period 2015 to 2021.

OFFICIAL

70

8.5 New Outcome Measures are likely to be introduced later this year to reflect the broader range of environmental outcomes needed to meet our statutory requirements, Defra policy commitments and undertakings in our Corporate Plan. These may include River Basin management Plan actions; resolving threats to SSSIs; extending habitat creation to include any priority habitat and inclusion of ell passage at priority FCRM sites.

8.6 Further information on the implementation of the Integrated Environmental

Programme will be provided at a future meeting. 9.0 Recommendation 9.1 The Committee is asked to note the contents of this report Susan Russell FCRM Advisor March 2014

OFFICIAL

71


INFORMATION ITEM: D

Paper by: Pete Fox, Head of Strategy and Investment Subject: Update on the Environment Programme

1.0 Background 1.1 We have a range of environmental outcomes to achieve alongside and

through our flood risk management activities. These outcomes originate from Government policy, domestic legislation and EU legislation. What we need to achieve will increase over the next few years - we will need to deliver these as efficiently as we can within limited budgets.

1.2 We need to work more with natural processes at a catchment scale so that

flood risk management is more sustainable and resilient in the longer term. We also need to work more effectively across the whole of the Environment Agency, with other Risk Management Authorities and partners—helping us meet several legislative needs including the Water Framework Directive (WFD), Habitats Directive, Floods Directive and Eel Regulations.

1.3 We have set up a new programme to deliver our outcomes called the

Environment Programme (EP). The overall aim is to make sure we get more for each pound we spend on the environment. To achieve this we are:

Clearly defining outcomes and targets through national outcome measures, the corporate plan, and through the FCRM allocation process.

Ensuring all our teams understand their roles and responsibilities for identifying opportunities and delivering outcomes on the ground.

Efficiently planning, monitoring and reporting environment outcomes, with meaningful performance indicators.

Co-ordinating, and where possible, integrating with the activities of other Environment Agency functions, with other Risk Management Authorities and external partners including Natural England and the National Trust.

Recommendations The Committee is asked to note: 1. The aims and objectives of the Environment Programme. 2. Progress with establishing the Environment Programme.

OFFICIAL

72

1.4 The EP covers both capital and maintenance programmes to make the efficiency savings we need. A change to the revenue maintenance programme is being explored to ensure it delivers the environmental benefit we are legally required to achieve and links to capital works. We are also looking afresh at our consenting processes to ensure full compliance with legislation especially for WFD. Discussions are ongoing around maintenance and consenting, so this paper will focus on the capital programme.

2.0 How the Environment Programme works

2.1 FCRM will continue to allocate capital funding to environment programme project codes in 2014/15 with additional environmental benefits being delivered through money spent on DEF (new defences) and CM (capital maintenance) schemes (e.g. compensation habitat required under the Habitats Directive).

2.2 Water Framework Directive GiA funding will be £8 million next year. Beyond

this no further funding is guaranteed but a business case will be going to Defra. Depending on the level of ambition from the second River Basin Management Plans, additional funding may become available.

2.3 From 2015/16 the EP will be part of the development of the overall six year

capital programme (2015/16 to 2020/21) to be announced in December 2014 as part of the 2014 the Autumn Statement. The programme will be agreed by the Environment Agency Board in November.

2.4 The EP capital projects will be delivered through the FCRM allocation

process; other teams across Environment Agency have committed to develop the programme with us.

3.0 Impact of the Floods on the Environment Programme 3.1 The winter floods have impacted our Area teams’ planning work significantly.

To understand the drivers for some of our environmental projects we require detailed information from River Basin Management Planning work, as well as active discussion with partners both within a catchment, but also nationally. Much of this has been impacted as Area teams work on incident and recovery roles.

3.2 Recovery work includes impacts on the environment. For example, many

wildlife sites were badly affected by the December storm surge. Discussions with Defra and Natural England are continuing. However, there is little doubt that there is a legal obligation on us to restore sites where possible or to create replacement habitat elsewhere if not.

3.3 Given the challenges from the floods we anticipate that not all the detail

required to formally approve capital projects will be available for the April round of RFCCs. So, in line with the MTP planning process, any detail not worked up for April RFCC review would be prepared as soon as possible to go into the June round of RFCC meetings and pre sub-committee meetings.

3.4 We met RFCC environmental leads in January and presented our approach

to the Environment Programme. We plan to work with the RFCC

OFFICIAL

73

environmental leads to develop the full Programme and to establish the best way to present a prioritised Programme to the RFCC.

3.5 We are asking our Area teams as a minimum for the April RFCC meetings to

provide:

A project line in the MTP for each flood alleviation scheme that contains an environmental outcome.

A project line in the MTP for each environmental outcome that has so far been developed.

Then for any environmental outcome that has yet to be worked up into detail, there should be at least one line on the draft MTP going to RFCCs in April that summarises each of the environmental areas - eels, SSSI, priority habitat or WFD actions

3.6 The EP capital projects will become part of the actions within the draft Flood

Risk Management Plans, and for WFD actions part of our initial commitment to the draft River Basin Management Plans.

3.7 The 2015/16 to 2020/21 capital programme that will be signed off for the

Autumn Statement will set out the overall OM4 outcomes we are aiming to achieve for new priority habitat, WFD actions, and action to maintain and/or improve SSSI habitats. It will also include improvements for eel passage. The agreed programme will set the level of investment and the overall scale of environmental benefit for the next 6 years. The annual planning process will refresh the programme based on the latest intelligence from ourselves and partners to ensure we deliver the best value for money.

4.0 Conclusion 4.1 This spring we are planning all our capital Environment Programme projects

for 2015/16 to 2020/21. This is driven by our environmental legal drivers and Government policy. We are working hard to ensure that this is as efficient as it can be, across FCRM as well as across the business as a whole.

4.2 This work will set our environmental capital work for the next 6 years. 4.3 Recent flooding has impacted our planning work. We are making every effort

to provide April RFCCs with as much detail as possible. Any subsequent detail will be submitted as soon as we can in April and early May.

Bill Donovan FCRM Senior Advisor Duncan Huggett FCRM Senior Advisor March 2014

OFFICIAL

74

OFFICIAL

75


INFORMATION ITEM: E

Paper by: Pete Fox, Director of Strategy and Investment Geoff Brighty, Deputy Director of Sustainable Places

Subject: Our Role and Performance as Advisor to Local

Planning Authorities

1.0 Purpose 1.1 We welcome the opportunity to update RFCCs on our role and performance

as advisor to local planning authorities in the spatial planning process, focusing on flood risk.

1.2 The recent flooding has created significant commentary about the planning

system, and particularly on appropriate development in the flood plain. This paper provides the basis and context for our statutory role, and seeks to draw out from Committees matters for consideration by National teams, as further developments to the planning system are taken forward.

1.3 We plan to bring this matter back to Committees later in 2014, as and when

those developments are known. We would like to draw on the Committees expertise about how we can work effectively with Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) and developers delivering housing and business growth.

Recommendations The Committee is asked to: 1. Note the Environment Agency’s current role in the spatial planning system

and our continued high standards of performance as a statutory advisor in the spatial planning system.

2. Discuss issues relating to the clarity of our role in advising on flood risk in

light of future changes. 3. Advise the Deputy-Director Area Manager of related matters for onward

dissemination to national teams in FCRM and E&B.

OFFICIAL

76

2.0 Environment Agency’s Role in the Planning System 2.1 We are a statutory consultee to LPAs for several types of planning application

related to our statutory duties including flood risk, protection of land and water quality and waste regulation. Our advice to LPAs helps to ensure that developments are safe and resilient over the lifetime of their development, taking climate change in account.

2.2 Guided by our statutory responsibilities and in light of both changing planning

landscape as well as our resources, we continue to review how we can advise most effectively on those development proposals where the potential environmental impacts and benefits are most significant.

2.3 We will continue to provide proportionate advice and focus on addressing the

greatest environmental risks to support delivery of sustainable development. LPAs, whose role it is to weigh up all material planning considerations, are the main decision makers although some applications and all appeals are determined by the Planning Inspectorate or the Secretary of State. We are a 'specific consultation body' for the preparation of development plan documents (usually called Local Plans). We are a statutory consultation body for Strategic Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Assessments. We also advise government departments on National Policy Statements and accompanying Appraisals of Sustainability. We are a statutory consultee for applications for development consent for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.

2.4 The Government has recently (March 2014) published Planning Practice

Guidance covering the whole of England. It has ‘stiffened’ guidance on managing flood risk through spatial planning including a reminder that National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) contains:

strict tests to protect proposed development from flooding which all local planning authorities are expected to follow;

if there are better sites in terms of flood risk, or a proposed development cannot be made safe, it should not be permitted.

2.5 Government policy does not preclude development in the floodplain, but if it

does go there, it must be ‘appropriate’ - exceptionally necessary; safe; resilient and not increase risk to others. Our advice is steered by Government policy. We do not object to development in the flood plain where government policy has been met and it is therefore ‘appropriate’. Examples include there being adequate mitigations for flood risk, including development sites protected by defences, finished flood levels of buildings raised above the expected flood levels and consideration for keeping people safe around the buildings has been made.

OFFICIAL

77

2.6 The Planning Minister replied to a question from an MP about advice he may have for LPAs and planning inspectors on the allocation of housing sites that are identified as having future flood risk. He said:

“Development in flood risk areas must be flood resistant and resilient. That policy is

very clear. I would advise inspectors and councils to follow the Environment

Agency’s advice to the letter and make sure that all development is resilient to flood

risk.”

3.0 Our performance as a statutory consultee 3.1 In 2012/13 we responded to 18,577 planning applications of which 8,637

needed detailed technical assessment on flood risk grounds. We also provided advice on 304 strategic plan documents across England. We use a ‘yes, if’ approach and try to avoid objecting if we can reach agreement with LPAs and developers.

3.2 Of these we objected to 2,608 planning applications on flood risk grounds.

Our advice is steered by Government policy. We do not object to development in the flood plain where government policy has been met. We may object if the planning application does not include sufficient information about risks to the development or elsewhere (including surface water drainage) or that the NPPF’s tests have not been met. In the majority of cases, our objection and subsequent discussions with the developer leads to missing information being provided and an improvement in development design, meaning that flood impacts are better managed. When this happens we can remove our initial objection. The much smaller number of cases where we sustained an objection related to applications where no improvement in design was made, or where missing information had not been provided.

3.3 Of the 1,932 decision notices received for planning applications where we

objected on flood risk grounds, 1,848 (96%) were decided in line with our advice, following dialogue with developers and LPAs.

3.4 Based on the decision notices we received, we objected initially to the

proposed planning for 67,465 new residential units within those planning applications. Following our advice, for over 99% of these units, the planning applications either:

didn’t proceed as they were refused in line with our advice; or were withdrawn by the developer;

were granted permission having been found to be acceptable following further investigation; or

plans were revised such that developments would be safe and properties not be at unacceptable risk of flooding.

3.5 In 2012/13 there were 508 residential units/homes within planning

applications that were granted permission despite a sustained objection from the Environment Agency. For 491 dwellings we were ‘fully overruled’ (48 planning applications), 17 ‘partially overruled’ (5 planning applications). In

OFFICIAL

78

some instances planning permission had been granted with conditions which may have partially overcome our concerns, but not enough for us to withdraw our objection. These residential units were in schemes granted planning permission against our sustained objection but they haven't necessarily been built.

3.6 Government (DCLG) statistics show that in 2011 (latest information) 93% of

new dwellings were built outside areas of high flood risk. 4.0 Changes to how we advise on flood risk in future 4.1 As part of its Red Tape Challenge on spatial planning, the Government has

focussed on rationalising planning policy, the guidance it provides and the role of statutory advisors to the planning system. Government intends to consult on its proposals although it is not clear when this might happen. We will continue to advise on flood risk as part of our wider role as advisor on environmental aspects within our remit. However we will need to reprioritise our effort due to reduced government funding.

4.2 Around 30% of planning application consultations we comment on for flood

risk reasons currently relate to surface water drainage. As part of the Floods and Water Management Act 2010, the responsibility for managing surface water drainage issues has been clarified as sitting with the Lead Local Flood Authority.

4.3 Our approach to providing planning advice on flood risk issues on which we

do not lead is to fulfil our role in line with our Strategic Overview and through strategic engagement. In practice this means highlighting obvious risks but leaving the detail for others to comment on and resolve.

4.4 Over time we expect our planning comments on surface water drainage to

reduce, reflecting the roles and responsibilities set out in the Act and becoming consistent with how we respond to other local sources of flood risk.

4.5 Sustainable Drainage provisions in Schedule 3 of the Floods and Water

Management Act enable a SuDS Approval Board (SAB) to be established. Once in place the SAB will perform a variety of tasks, including assessing the technical merits of drainage systems proposed for new development proposals.

4.6 The implementation of Sustainable Drainage Provisions in Schedule 3 of the

Flood and Water Management Act (2010) in England has been delayed (previously expected on 1st April). A revised implementation date has not been announced, but Ministers have committed to lay enabling instruments by April and an implementation date will be known at this time.

5.0 Summary 5.1 The Regional Flood and Coastal Committee is asked to:

1. Note the Environment Agency’s current role in the spatial planning system and our continued high standards of performance as a statutory advisor in the spatial planning system.

OFFICIAL

79

2. Discuss issues relating to the clarity of our role in advising on flood

risk in light of future changes, and

3. Advise the Deputy-Director Area Manager of related matters for onward dissemination to national teams in FCRM and E&B.

Rob Westcott E & B Manager Andrew Coleman E & B Senior Advisor Aaron Dixey FCRM Senior Advisor March 2014

OFFICIAL

80

OFFICIAL

81


INFORMATION ITEM: F

Subject: Events Calendar 2014 Members are asked to note the dates of future meetings: 2nd July 2014 RFCC meeting and site visit, Worcestershire 21st October 2014 RFCC meeting and site visit, Coventry

OFFICIAL

82

Documents

English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal ... · English Severn and Wye Regional Flood and Coastal Committee (RFCC) Gloucestershire County Council, Shire Hall, Westgate Street,