Agenda item

To receive an update on works to reduce flood risk and the Council’s Six Priority Flood Alleviation Schemes.

Consideration was given to an update presentation in respect of reducing flood risk and the Council’s six priority Flood Alleviation Schemes (FAS). The presentation was delivered by Regeneration and Environment officers including the Assistant Director of Community Safety and Street Scene and the Head of Highways and Flood Risk. The presentation summarised the background of previous updates to IPSC related to flood alleviation and reducing flood risk, outlining continued progress in line with the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (LFRMS) and described works undertaken since the 2019 floods. The priorities of the LFRMS were:

•       Community focus and partnership working

•       Sustainability

•       Risk Based Approach

•       Proportionality

•       Multiple benefits

The presentation included a description of the Connected by Water engagement programme, which facilitated discussions about flood risk across the region to promote strength and resiliency regionally. Connected by Water worked with Parish councils and in other communities, to consider what could be provided to local areas to help them jump start with flood reduction during an event before the drainage teams arrive. A success was described involving the deployment of hydro-sacks to the location with an action plan in place. Connected by Water also shared good practice. Local events in Whiston, together with Environmental Agency (EA) colleagues, an event was hosted around flooding. Information is very important to communities. Ongoing and future needs for works across the Borough were described. Upcoming actions for work to reduce the flood risk across the Borough were planned, including continuing work on communications and engagement, and ongoing delivery of Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFA) works. Further plans to update the Council’s website regarding maintenance works of gullies were also outlined. The practice of the team was to go into areas of the Borough to check gullies ahead of heavy rainfall.

In discussion, Members requested details of how to get in touch with the engineer contact for Yorkshire Water. Details were offered by officers with the invitation that Yorkshire Water is happy to have a conversation with Members.

Members were pleased to see ongoing work on community resilience and the development of collaboration with Parish Councils. Members requested assurances around the frequency of gully clearing, noting that some gullies seem to have the same problem year on year and are reported in between, leading residents to believe that these had been missed. The response from officers noted the possibility of people being able to see when gullies are cleared. Of the roughly 45000 gullies, there was a hierarchy for cleaning, with high priority gullies cleaned four times a year. The Service requested Members to flag any gullies of concern. The Service would provide an indication of when the gullies were last cleaned, and when these would be cleaned again. Mechanical sweepers were regularly deployed. Gullies flagged by councillors were prioritised. Members requested a rolling update of when gullies are being cleaned.

Members expressed interest in the potential to slow the rate of watershed by implementing a tactical scheme of tree planting. The response from the Cabinet Member for Social Inclusion noted the representations made to regional bodies leading projects that were far away from the people who get flooded. The opportunity to plan tree planting was all part of the plan to reduce the impact where people live and where businesses operate.

Members expressed interest in more information around local projects and how joined up was the thinking among all the areas throughout the region. The response from the Cabinet Member for Social Inclusion noted the relevancy of the Civic Contingencies Act. The Service worked closely with all partners, including the MET office to respond to incidents.

Can we see where the lorries have been, this is live tracker, can we do this with gritters as well. Will provide live info around gully flushes. Better allegations. The gritters already have trackers. The supervisors checked the system to see where the next destination was. It’s available to officers and we can have a conversation around whether than information can be shared with Members to be able to see where the gritters have been,

Further clarification was requested regarding funding secured versus funding identified but not secured. The response from officers noted that, since the previous update, the Service had secured another 7 million pounds. There was a further 17.1 million pounds that sat within all government accounting that Rotherham could receive access to utilise. It was good news that that money was there, because it meant that 17 million of the 19.5 million had been identified. 52 million was the target, but prices were rising so the target could shift.

Members requested more information around whether there would be any priorities at risk if there were no business case and the funding could not be secured as planned. The response from officers noted that, when the Service started the process in 2019, there was no funding. Then, when Rotherham provided £5.8 M, the Service had schemes ready to go. The government would only give the money if they had confidence that the land application issues were all resolved. The Service had shown that they can deliver projects, which gives confidence. The rail sector had contributed substantially to build defences near a vulnerable rail station. Partners come back to us with what they can contribute, which means we are at a different place than when we started.

Members requested further information around plans to address the tendency during a flooding event for areas of the Borough, such as Brinsworth, to become landlocked. The response from officers noted that the river comes over the top of the road network in these areas, causing problems for network access.

Members requested further clarification of the Service’s ability to secure these sections of the highway. The response from officers noted that triggered pumps on our network were not out of the question. Soakaways were a potential remedy, if the land could absorb the runoff. Using the area as a chamber for pumping water away was also a consideration, as this was is a well-used area. Further pumps and associated flood reduction apparatus in use were identified by the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment.

Members requested assurances that the schemes were on schedule. The response from officers and the Cabinet member noted that the Service was speaking with landowners. At next update it was expected that the Service would be able to provide detail about what the 6 projects will look like.

Members requested further clarification around how many smaller projects would also be delivered in the meantime. The response from officers and the Cabinet Member noted that the programme was accessible so that there was funding available to deliver the small and medium sized projects. The Service will continue to do that as these projects become available. Several example projects were given. Catcliffe had been nationally recognised in 2007 after which, much work was done to install a nonreturn valve. Previously, water from the river came backwards, causing flooding. This had been resolved by a telemetry-operated solution. The Council have six large diesel pumps, which pump the surface water that cannot get out to the river over to the river. Solutions in Rotherham Town Centre were designed to give more effectiveness and resiliency than relying on these 6 diesel pumps.

Resolved:-

1.    That the report be noted and that the next update be submitted in 12 months.

2.    That the work in communities to promote flood resilience be endorsed, particularly emphasising the protection of homes and businesses at risk of flooding.

3.    That the projects identified be implemented as moneys become available, and that consideration be given to how best to prioritise delivery amid rising costs.

4.    That the publication of real-time data around gully clearance be prioritised for delivery.