Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member for Economy, Environment and Transport

The Cabinet Member for Communities and the Environment informed Members that Staffordshire County Council had three key roles within flood risk management: as a Category 1 Emergency Responder (Civil Contingencies Act 2004) with the responsibility to assess the risk of, and plan for, emergencies; as a Highways Authority; and as a Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) responsible for preparing a Local Flood Risk Management Strategy.

The County Council worked closely with a number of partners, including the Environment Agency, who carried out forecasting and warning, managed flood risk from main rivers and had an operational role on these watercourses. District and Borough Council’s were also Category 1 Responders with a key role in emergency preparedness, response and recovery at a district and borough level. They had a specific role in evacuation and should have plans in place to provide temporary accommodation. Water companies were another key partner who responded to and sought to alleviate flooding from the sewer network.

Members received details of local key considerations around Leekbrook in Staffordshire Moorlands and around Burton-upon-Trent. Burton-upon-Trent had relatively flat land in the Trent Valley and extensive areas of the town were within the floodplain. In contrast Leekbrook had a relatively steep Pennine catchment that responded rapidly to intense rainfall. Pockets for potential flooding were also found around the County.

Members received details of the work undertaken before, during and after any flood to minimise impact and maximise recovery. 

Work continued in partnership with the Environment Agency and the Staffordshire Civil Contingencies Unit (CCU) to improve preparedness for severe flood events and Members received details of the work undertaken. In addition to this Members were informed that it would be beneficial to host a Staffordshire Flood Summit involving key partners.

Whilst Members felt the concept of a flood summit was good in principle, it would need to have clear outcomes. Members also raised concerns over the potential cost of such an event and they were assured that the costs would be kept low and the event organised in consultation with the Portfolio Holder. It was suggested that engaging the public in the summit would be beneficial as well as informing the public of the issues pertinent to Staffordshire. Whilst it may be difficult to make this a completely public event consideration could be given to how the public could engage with the summit. The possibility of webcasting was put forward, with the public being able to forward their comments on the issues under debate. Members were also informed that the summit could consider issues of communication, co-ordinated working between agencies and address lessons learned from previous flooding incidents.

Flood defence schemes were funding from either local levy or directly from Central Government through the Environment Agency. There was a complicated formula to consider the cost benefit of each proposed scheme, with a six year rolling programme for considering flood defence schemes. Schemes were prioritised, with those preventing flooding of homes prioritised over businesses, and with farm land being a lower priority again. Staffordshire currently had 13 schemes under consideration.

Gully emptying was an area of concern for the Select Committee. A comprehensive review of Staffordshire gullies had been undertaken over the last two to three years. Staffordshire had over 190,000 individual gullies and the review had helped identify those that required more frequent emptying due to silt deposits, and those that could be emptied more infrequently.  Members were also concerned that surface road dressing exacerbated the issue, suggesting that 25% of chippings were washed into the drains. However the general highways drainage system was not designed to cope with severe flood water and therefore during intense rainfall flooding may occur irrespective of the gully emptying programme. In cases of a flash flood the sheer volume of water could block the gully and create flooding.

Clarification was given on the term “100 year flood event”, which referred to there being a 100 chance per year of there being a severe flood. The Select Committee were also informed that  the Environment Agency were giving consideration to whether this ratio was still appropriate.

As a preventative measure it was suggested that both the Government and the Environment Agency  work with farmers and landowners to allow dredging of drains and rivers. Concern was that rivers had been allowed to silt up for some time and this aggravated the likelihood of flooding. The maintenance of drainage was the responsibility of the individual landowner. However Members heard that in some instances farmers and landowners were encouraged to slightly block their drains as part of the “Slow the flow” flood defence scheme. In the case of severe rainfall this scheme expected the partially blocked drains to slow the water and reduce flood damage downstream. A similar scheme was being introduced on the river Dove, where fish stocks were also being improved.

Communication was a key area of concern shared by Members. Whilst Members understood there were a number of agencies responsible for differing water courses, it was unhelpful for members of the public to be passed from one agency to another when raising a concern. The Flood Line helped address this, giving a single contact point for registering concerns. This could be an area for further consideration at the proposed flood summit.

RESOLVED – That:

a)    the preparedness of the County Council for a severe flood event be noted;

b)    the next steps the County Council are taking to further improve preparedness for a severe event are supported, with emphasis placed on the importance of gully emptying and effective communication with local members on the programme of work; and

c)    the proposal to host a Staffordshire Flood Summit be supported, stressing the need for the summit to be outcome focussed and giving consideration to public involvement.