Essex Flood Partnership Board

Committee Room 1, Wednesday, 20 09:30 County Hall, April 2016 ,

Membership

Cllr Roger Hirst Essex County Council

Cllr Mick Page Essex County Council Cllr Kay Twitchen Essex County Council Deborah Fox Essex County Council John Meehan Essex County Council Lucy Shepherd Essex County Council Peter Massie Essex County Council Graham Verrier Environment Agency Viv Stewart Environment Agency Mark Dickinson Thames Water Jonathan Glerum Anglian Water Paul Hill Essex County Fire and Rescue Service Cllr Richard Moore Borough Council Cllr Wendy Schmitt Council Cllr Tony Sleep Brentwood Borough Council Cllr Ray Howard Borough Council/ECC Cllr Neil Gulliver Chelmsford City Council Cllr Tim Young Borough Council Cllr Will Breare-Hall Council Cllr Mark Wilkinson District Council Cllr Andrew St Joseph District Council Cllr Keith Hudson District Council Cllr Nick Turner Council Cllr Martin Terry Southend on Sea Borough Council Cllr Gerrard Rice Council

Cllr Susan Barker District Council

Page 1 of 40 For information about the meeting please ask for: Lisa Siggins 03330134594 / [email protected]

Page 2 of 40 Essex County Council and Committees Information

This meeting is not open to the public and the press, although the agenda is available on the Essex County Council website, www.essex.gov.uk From the Home Page, click on ‘Your Council’, then on ‘Meetings and Agendas’. Finally, select the relevant committee from the calendar of meetings.

Please note that an audio recording may be made of the meeting – at the start of the meeting the Chairman will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being recorded.

If you have a need for documents in the following formats, large print, Braille, on disk or in alternative languages and easy read please contact the Committee Officer before the meeting takes place. If you have specific access requirements such as access to induction loops, a signer, level access or information in Braille please inform the Committee Officer before the meeting takes place. For any further information contact the Committee Officer.

Page 3 of 40 Pages

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Minutes 200116 7 - 14 To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 January 2016.

3 Declarations of Interest To note any declarations of interest to be made by Members in accordance with the Members' Code of Conduct

4 Delivering flood protection: update on delivery of the countywide programme To receive a presentation from Flood Risk Management Authority leads (Essex Lead Local Flood Authority, Environment Agency, Essex Highways, Anglian Water etc) on progress of scheme delivery over the past year.

5 Statutory SuDS planning role 15 - 18 To receive a report (EFPB/08/16) from Kat Goodyear, ECC SuDS Manager analysing Essex County Council’s response to its statutory surface water drainage role.

6 Procurement and Pipeline Projects 19 - 26 To receive a report (EFPB/09/16) from Lucy Shepherd, ECC Lead Local Flood Authority Manager on the programme of works for 2016/17 and packaging opportunities agreed with the Environment Agency.

7 community resilience and Canvey Lake 27 - 30 To receive a written report (EFPB/10/16) from John Meehan, ECC Acting Head of Environment and Flood Management and Deborah Fox, ECC Head of Commissioning Sustainable Environment:Protection on the progress from the Multi-agency Task and Finish Group.

Page 4 of 40 8 RFCC business 31 - 40

 To welcome Paul Hayden, RFCC Anglian Eastern Chairman.  To receive a report (EFPB/11/16) and accompanying appendix from Deborah Fox, Head of Commissioning, Sustainable Environment: Protection on the latest RFCC updates.  To welcome Julie Ellis, ECC Director of Integrated Commissioning: Devolution to consider the potential impacts of devolution on managing flood impacts.

9 Any Other Business

10 Date of Next Meeting To note that the next meeting of the Board will be on Thursday 16 June 2016 at 9.30am in County Hall Chelmsford

11 Optional Information Session Thames Estuary: TEAM2100 An information session on the strategy, funding and options for protection of the Thames estuary

Page 5 of 40

Page 6 of 40 20 January 2016 Minutes 1

Minutes of a Meeting of the Essex Flood Partnership Board held at County Hall, Chelmsford, at 9.30am on 20 January 2016

Present:

Name Organisation Cllr Roger Hirst Essex County Council (Chairman) Cllr Susan Barker Uttlesford District Council Mr Chris Carpenter Essex County Council Mr Qasim Durrani Epping Forest District Council Mr James Ennos Tendring District Council Mr Jonathan Glerum Anglian Water Ms Ian Haines Council Cllr Ray Howard Castle Point Borough Council/ECC Cllr Keith Hudson Council Mr Stuart Jarvis Castle Point Borough Council Mr Oladipo Lafinhan Essex County Council Mr Keith Holden Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Mr John Meacham Essex County Council Cllr Mick Page Essex County Council Mr Peter Rose Essex Highways Ms Nicky Spurr Essex County Council Cllr Andrew St Joseph Maldon District Council Ms Lucy Shepherd Essex County Council Mr Lee Stevens Thurrock Council Ms Viv Stewart Environment Agency Ms Natasha Taylor Essex County Council Mr Graham Thomas Essex County Council Cllr Nick Turner Tendring District Council Mr Graham Verrier Environment Agency Mr Rob Wise RFU Cllr Tim Young Thurrock Council

Ms Lisa Siggins Essex County Council Democratic Services

1. Apologies

Apologies for absence were received from:

Deborah Fox – ECC Mark Dickinson – Thames Water Cllr Richard Moore – Basildon DC Cllr G Rice – Thurrock Cllr W Schmitt – Braintree Peter Massie – ECC Paul Hayden - RFCC

Page 7 of 40 2 Minutes 20 January 2016

2. Minutes

The Minutes of the meeting of the Board held on 1 October 2015 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

3. Declarations of Interest

No declarations were made at this point.

4. Holland-on-Sea – Flood Defence Scheme

The Board received a PowerPoint Presentation and a video clip from Cllr Nick Turner and James Ennos – Tendring District Council on the successful completion of the joint funded Sea Defence scheme at Holland-on Sea, which protects over 3000 homes. The scheme started on 22 July 2014 and was completed on 1 October 2015 with the first beaches open to the public on 24 January 2015.

The Board congratulated Cllr Turner, Mr Ennos and Tendring District Council and funding partners on an excellent piece of work that came in under budget and completed early.

5. Essex Property Level Protection Scheme

The Board received a report (EFPB/1/16) by Oladipo Lafinhan Flood Partnerships Funding Co-ordinator on the progress made with increasing the number of homes to be protected by through the Property Level Protection(PLP) grant in 2015/16 and 2016/17.

Mr Lafinhan advised that Essex County Council introduced a PLP scheme on 19th September 2015. This grant scheme is already a major success story with 184 applications received thus far.

Aquobex were commissioned to deliver the pilot PLP grant scheme in 2015/16. The contract states that first 50 applications will be screened, and of these 20 properties would be fitted with PLP, if they comply with the schemes criteria. £100k was allocated from the 2015/16 capital budget to protect 20 properties up to a value of £5k per property.

Further to the pilot scheme, arrangements are currently underway to proceed with a tender process for the commissioning of a new supplier to deliver the 2016/17 PLP scheme.

The Board were advised that the PLP grant contract has been increased to protect 50 homes in 2015/16 in order to better address the volume of interest expressed.

A discussion followed which included the following:  Top up payments Page 8 of 40 20 January 2016 Minutes 3

 Installation times  Different options of protection offered to applicants  Suitability of protection provided  Management costs

The Board Agreed:

1.1. The approach to reconciling the delivery of PLP to individual residential properties, whilst adhering to the £5000 PLP grant threshold per property.

1.2. That those applicants who have carried out previous PLP work on their properties would not receive retrospective grants. Any additional work required, would be subject to recommendations from the PLP survey.

1.3. To increase the target to protect at least 60 homes through the PLP grant scheme in 2016/17.

A further update will be brought back to the Flood Board at the April 2016 meeting.

6. RFCC Introduction & Update

The Chairman gave apologies on behalf of Paul Hayden the RFCC Eastern Region Chairman. The Board then received an update report (EFPB/2/16) from Deborah Fox, Head of Commissioning Sustainable Environment Protection, which was presented by Graham Thomas, Head of Planning and Environment on the latest RFCC updates.

Mr Thomas gave details of the current position regarding the annual Local Levy setting and of new projects in Harlow that have been added to the Thames programme. The Board were updated about the Coast Path in Essex with Graham Verrier of the Environment Agency providing clarification regarding maintenance costs and the position regarding the public consultation. It was stressed that ECC should ensure that a response is made on its behalf.

It was Agreed that:

1. A report on the potential impacts of devolution on managing flood impacts is brought to the April Meeting of the Board. 2. The Partnership Board shares any intelligence with their Chairman at the Partnership Board meeting on:  Deliverability of the regional investment programmes.  Any changes to local funding requested

The report proposed a further issue for the Board’s consideration regarding keeping the RFCCs sighted of Essex schemes not seeking FDGiA for visibility of numbers of properties protected. However Viv Stewart of the EA advised that this was in fact being delivered in practice.

Page 9 of 40 4 Minutes 20 January 2016

7. Flood Risk Management Plan

To Board received a report (EFPB/3/16) from Lucy Shepherd Lead Local Flood Authority Manager on the Essex Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP), prepared by the Environment Agency.

Ms Shepherd advised that ECC had a duty to produce a Flood Risk Management Plan (FRMP) by 22 December 2015 in accordance with the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 and the Flood Risk Regulations 2009. This has now been completed and has been published by the Government thereby fulfilling ECC’s legal requirements.

This requirement is due to the ‘South Essex’ area being designated as one of ten ‘Flood Risk Areas’ within the UK at significant risk of flooding from local sources (surface water, ground water and ordinary watercourses). The level of risk attached is support by the evidence derived from local sources (Surface Water Management Plans) which estimates 50,000 homes are at risk of flooding in Essex.

In August 2014 this Council agreed to produce a joint FRMP for the Anglian region in collaboration with the Environment Agency. Our joint FRMP covers all forms of flood risk and coastal erosion management for the Anglian Region (including input from other Lead Local Flood Authorities).

The Chairman thanked the EA for their encouraging comments in the report in respect of ECC’s input.

The Board Agreed:

To receive the finalised FRMP report approved by the Essex Flood Partnership Board in January 2015, and published by Government.

8. Environment Agency's Programme Update and Report Main Rivers Variations in Essex

The Board received a verbal report from Graham Verrier Area Flood Risk Manager Environment Agency on pending changes to the Environment Agency and what this means in Essex. Mr Verrier also provided report (EFPB/4/16) on the 2015/16 programme for Demaining of Rivers within Essex .Mr Verrier explained that maintenance efficiencies can now be invested.

Councillor Howard raised an issue concerning responsibility of surface water which was clarified by Peter Rose of Essex Highways and the EA. Councillor Hudson raised a particular issue within his district and it was confirmed that Graham Verrier will liaise with Lucy Shepherd in this respect.

The Board Noted:

1 The Environment Agency’s role in maintaining the Main River Maps and the process followed. 2 The current river changes and reasons for these Page 10 of 40 20 January 2016 Minutes 5

3 The future changes for Essex, and

9. Scrutiny Report on Third Party Responsibilities and Flood Enforcement

The Board received a report (EFPB/5/16) from Cllr Walsh Chairman of the Task & Finish Group of the ECC Place Services & Economic Growth Scrutiny Committee. The Scrutiny Committee work looked at the County Council work as both the Lead Local Flood Authority and Highway Authority in relation to third party responsibilities and flood enforcement. Councillor Walsh commended the report to the Board thanking all those involved therewith, stating that it was both a health check and important resource.

It was Agreed that:  A link to the ‘ditch maintenance guide’ referred to by Cllr Walsh, would be circulated to Board Members following the meeting.

Lucy Shepherd Lead Local Flood Authority Manager also confirmed that ECC’s website was up to date containing useful information.

10. Flood Capital Programme – Partnership Grants Allocations 2015/16

The Board received a report (EFPB/6/16) from Lucy Shepherd Lead Local Flood Authority Manager on the submitted Partnership Grant proposals and received officer recommendation on which scheme the Partnership Grant should support in 2015/16.

Ms Shepherd explained that ECC agreed in August 2015 to set-a-side £400k of its Flood Prevention Capital Programme to provide a Partnership Programme Grant for other local authorities, businesses, landowners and partner organisations who are committed to delivering flood prevention schemes in the year the grant offer is made available.

ECC launched the Partnership Grant funding opportunity in September 2015 and set up a web-page as illustrated in the above mentioned report. ECC invited applications from a wide range of organisations the deadline for applications was set as 1 December 2015 and in total ten expressions of interest were received.

In discussion Councillor Turner raised a particular issue within his district which Councillor Page advised that he has information on and will liaise with Councillor Turner.

The Board Agreed:

1 To recommend the schemes identified as “green” in the Appendix to report EFPB/6/16 be supported through the allocation of Partnership Grant in 2015/16, these being:

 The Essex Fire & Rescue Service  Sturmer Flood Action Group  Chelmsford City Council

Page 11 of 40 6 Minutes 20 January 2016

 To support the funding bid from Alphamstone & Lamarsh Parish Council subject to confirming the project is capable of being completed by 31 March 2016.

2 For those schemes identified as “amber” in the Appendix to report EFPB/6/16 further work is required to either refine the bid, or apply for the Partnership Grant either next year or the year preceding year when the flood alleviation scheme is to be delivered.

3 Those schemes identified as “red” in the Appendix to report EFPB/6/16 are not supported, as they do not align with the objectives of the Partnership Grant and/or there are more suitable alternative sources of funding available.

11. Land Drainage Enforcement Update

The Board received a verbal report receive a verbal report from Natasha Taylor Head of Legal Services on the progress made to put in place the Essex Flood Partnership Boards Land Drainage Enforcement Policy Memorandum of Understanding to ensure a consistent and transparent land drainage enforcement approach is applied by all local authorities.

Ms Taylor confirmed that there were three different levels of engagement available to Local Authorities that the following had already signed up to the following phases:

Phase 1- Braintree DC; Maldon DC; Tendring DC and Colchester BC Phase 2 - Chelmsford City Council Phase 3 – Rochford DC.

Basildon, Castle Point and Harlow District Councils have indicated that they will be signing up to the process but it is not yet known to which phase.

Brentwood and Uttlesford District Councils have indicated that they do not wish to sign up to the process. Councillors Barker – Uttlesford DC and Hirst – Brentwood DC confirmed that they will make further enquiries in their respective Districts in this respect.

Negotiations with Epping Forest DC (who have a separate Memorandum of Understanding) are in the final stages of negotiation.

12. Capturing the Economic Benefit of Local Flood Alleviation Schemes’

The Board received a report (EFPB/7/16) from Lucy Shepherd Lead Local Flood Authority Manager on the economic impact of flooding drawing on the work undertaken by universities and the Environment Agency.

Ms Shepherd gave an overview of the report to the Board advising that there had been some confusion and contradiction in the advice received thus far.

The Board Agreed that  Officers will continue to try and resolve economic benefit challenges in partnership with Environment Agency colleagues and Middlesex University. Page 12 of 40 20 January 2016 Minutes 7

 If a solution cannot be found, the Chairman of the Essex Flood Board should write to the Chief Executive of the Environment Agency and Treasury to seek advice on how the problem is being addressed at a national level.

13. Any Other Business

The Chairman agreed to consider an additional item raised by Councillor Howard in respect of a flooded highway in his district. Councillor Howard explained that there are difficulties due to the lack of cooperation from the landowner with the enforcement team not able to make any proper progress. The Chairman advised that this issue should be looked into by Lucy Shepherd and Natasha Taylor who should liaise with Councillor Howard to consider this matter further.

14. Dates of Future Meetings

Resolved:

That future meetings of the Partnership Board be held on the following dates:

 Wednesday 20 April 2016  Wednesday 16 June 2016  Wednesday 13 October 2016  Wednesday 19 January 2017

(All meetings to begin at 9.30am and take place at County Hall, Chelmsford)

The meeting closed at 11.50 am.

Chairman 20 January 2016

Page 13 of 40

Page 14 of 40

Report to Essex Flood Partnership Report Number EFPB/08/16 Board Date of meeting: 20 April 2016

Title of report: Statutory SuDS planning role: a year in facts and figures Report by: Kat Goodyear Enquiries to: John Meehan/Kat Goodyear

1. Purpose of report

1.1. To provide an update to the Essex Flood Partnership Board on the surface water statutory consultee role for major planning applications undertaken within the Flood and Water Management Team.

2. Recommendations

2.1. Note the various responsibilities and challenges going forward.

3. Background

3.1 ECC as Lead Local Flood Authority has been a statutory consultee in relation to surface water since 15th April 2015 on planning applications for major developments. These include developments for 10 or more dwellings, where the commercial floorspace being created is 1000sq.m or more or the site area is greater than 1ha.

3.2 As a consultee we are required to provide a substantive response to any consultation received by Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) within 21 days.

3.3 From consultations received up to 14th March, extrapolated to 14th April 2016 to allow for a full year’s data, we have received approximately 750 consultations. Roughly two thirds of these are new sites and one third are re- consultations when further information is submitted in relation to applications we have initially objected to.

3.4 ECC has adopted the ECC SuDS Design Guide which sets out the policy which submissions should comply with. We have produced Outline and Detailed Drainage Design Checklists which set out the information that should be submitted at various stages of the design. We have a pre-application service in place which can now be submitted and paid for online. All of the above are available at www.essex.gov.uk/flooding. 3.5 Kat Goodyear will deliver a presentation at the Board Meeting to explain the various roles and responsibilities, the facts and figures and the challenges faced.

Page 15 of 40 4. Data

4.1 Figure 1 below shows the approximate trend of the consultations received from different Local Planning Authorities (LPAs). Clearly the LPAs with larger geographical areas or less dense populations generally result in more consultations being received.

Figure 1- Number of consultations per local planning authority

4.2 Figure 2 below shows the approximate number of consultations relating to different types of planning application.

Figure 2- Number of consultations per type of application

4.3 There is not a noticeable trend in the number of consultations received during different times of the year. There are slight drops in the numbers during some of the summer months.

Page 16 of 40 4.4 During the past few months we have also recorded the type of application; this is presented below in Figure 3.

Figure 3- Number of consultations per category of application

5. Pre-application service

5.1 Since 15th April 2015 we have also had a pre-application process in place. To date we have received 33 pre-application requests. We have been able to respond to these within the internally set 28 day timescale.

6. SuDS Adoption

6.1 ECC adopted its SuDS (sustainable drainage systems) Adoption Policy in June 2015. This allows for adoption of the site-wide SuDS where they provide significant betterment to an existing or modelled flooding problem. It is voluntary for the applicant and ECC and the onus would be on the applicant to provide evidence as to the betterment.

6.2 The adoption agreement would have to be accompanied by a commuted sum to cover initial maintenance costs, payable by the developer.

6.3 We have not received any applications for SuDS Adoption to date and the Policy is due to be revised in June this year. It is currently proposed to make the position on adoption of Highway SuDS clearer.

6.4 Most SuDS that ECC review are adoptable by a private Management Company appointed by the developer.

Page 17 of 40 7. Learning from past year

7.1 The most notable challenges during the year have been:  Government did not allow for transitional arrangements for applications previously considered by the Environment Agency which has resulted in ECC objecting and the applicant saying this is unreasonable- the LPA must ultimately decide whether it is reasonable to retrospectively apply ECCs criteria or not and we have developed an informative to attach to all responses to clarify this.  Sites under 1 hectare are not required to produce a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) so ECC have objected where there is no drainage information. Applicants were reluctant to provide any but eventually we have negotiated that submission in line with the Drainage Checklists mentioned above, as opposed to a full FRA, would be acceptable.  The National Planning Policy Framework said SuDS should be given priority for sites in areas at risk of flooding. The Ministerial Statement made in December 2014 updated this to require SuDS on all major developments. However, many of the small and medium sized developers in particular have continued to propose traditional piped drainage systems with underground tanks, which ECC have objected to until a scheme which priorities SuDS (which by their nature also provide water quality and amenity/biodiversity benefits) can be demonstrated.

7.2 Challenges going forward include the need to try and more tightly control the construction of SuDS in line with approved details and ensure the long term maintenance of SuDS, which are currently controlled by conditions imposed on any planning permission granted.

Page 18 of 40

Report to Essex Flood Partnership Report Number EFPB/09/16 Board Date of meeting: 20 April 2016

Title of report: Procurement and pipeline projects: the feasibility challenge Report by: Lucy Shepherd Enquiries to: John Meehan/Lucy Shepherd/Marc Inman

1. Purpose of report

1.1. To provide an update to the Essex Flood Partnership Board on procurement and the new programme for 2016/17. To give an overview of our feasibility approach to date and future opportunities in working with the Environment Agency.

2. Recommendations

2.1. Note the complexity and challenges of the feasibility stage and promote strong partnership working at a local level in order to keep all interested parties informed.

3. Procurement

3.1. As part of Essex County Council’s £19m 6 year programme we have sought specialist consultant support.

3.2. Specialism’s are required at various stages of project development. Firstly feasibility and optioneering, then detailed design and pre-construction information, and finally any scheme construction itself.

3.3. Three options were readily available to Essex County Council. These are simplified as follows:

a. Procurement from Marketplace suppliers and competitive tender process on the ECC ‘Ariba’ system.

b. Procurement from WEM suppliers and competitive tender process on the ECC Ariba system.

c. Procurement waiver to modify the existing Essex Highways contract and deliver via a Task Order to supplier Jacobs.

Page 19 of 40

3.4. After an initial review, new work packages have been awarded to Jacobs. However, some individual projects have also been procured using the WEM framework, either because they had already commenced in some form prior to the capital programme, or they are stand-alone projects which cannot be packaged.

3.5. A review is currently looking at the advantages and disadvantages of both Jacobs and WEM framework procurement methods, along with and other satisfaction criteria.

4. Programme build and site selection 2016/17

4.1. Appendix 1 shows an indicative programme for the 2016/17 capital spend. This includes projects planned at all three stages of feasibility, design and construction during the next financial year.

4.2. The prioritisation matrix shown in Figure 1 was agreed by the Essex Flood Partnership Board in 2015, this has been used to select the new priority flood sites coming forward onto the programme this year.

4.3. At this stage the timelines for delivery are indicative and may be subject to change.

4.4. It should also be noted that we have over-programmed within the delivery phase to allow for any risks or delays. Those schemes in bold will be delivered first, moving onto others as soon as resources allow, but not committed to this financial year.

4.5. A presentation into the challenges faced at the early stages of project delivery will be presented by Lucy Shepherd at the Flood Partnership Board meeting. Case examples will be used to explain successes and challenges last year, covering topics such as public perception and measuring outcomes as a project evolves.

5. Working with the Environment Agency

5.1. Working with the Environment Agency we have identified 10 feasibility study projects which can be delivered as part of a package of works using their National Capital Programme Management Service (NCPMS).

5.2. This package of work will be funded from RFCC Local Levy contributions. Normally costing in the region of £50k-£70k for Essex County Council to deliver at the Lead Local Flood Authority, this will both provide us a saving and create efficiencies for both organisations working in partnership.

5.3. Graham Verrier will provide more information on this initiative at the Flood Partnership Board meeting. Page 20 of 40

6. Appendices and Links

6.1. Indicative programme of schemes under the Capital Programme for 2016/17.

Page 21 of 40 Page 22 of 40

Figure 1 Prioritisation Matrix for Capitial Programme Schemes

Page 23 of 40

APPENDIX 1 Indicative Capital Programme 2016/17

Essex County Council - Flood Mitigation Programme

KEY Feasibility Optioneering Detailed Design Tender Period Construction BOLD Text - priority scheme

Apr- May- Jul- Aug- Oct- Nov- Dec- Mar- Scheme District Lead Contact Engineer Support 16 16 Jun-16 16 16 Sep-16 16 16 16 Jan-17 Feb-17 17 OPTIONEERING & FEASIBILITY (Est) HAR2 Harlow Kingsmoor Harlow Lucy Shepherd TBC HAR3 West Passmores Harlow Lucy Shepherd TBC BAS8 Laindon Basildon Lucy Shepherd TBC BAS15 Chalvedon Felmores Basildon Lucy Shepherd TBC ROC7 Ashingdon Rochford Lucy Shepherd TBC COL2 The Hythe Colchester Lucy Shepherd TBC COL3 Colchester Town Colchester Lucy Shepherd TBC COL1 Old Heath Colchester Lucy Shepherd TBC BAS14 Barstable Fryerns Basildon Lucy Shepherd TBC HAR10 Nettleswell Harlow Lucy Shepherd TBC BAS21 Bromfords Basildon Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency COL7 Mile End Colchester Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency CHE10 Great Baddow Chelmsford Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency COL8 Parson’s Heath Colchester Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency BRENTD Brentwood station Brentwood Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency FIR Station Road Maldon Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency LRFMS Castle Braintree Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency LRFMS Sible Hedingham Brainatree Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency ROC9 Little Wakering Rochford Lucy Shepherd Environment Agency Page 24 of 40 CAS6 Canvey Island IUD Castle Environment Environment Point Agency Agency

Apr- May- Jul- Aug- Oct- Nov- Dec- Mar- DESIGN & WORKS PACKS (Est) 16 16 Jun-16 16 16 Sep-16 16 16 16 Jan-17 Feb-17 17 CAS3 East Thundersley Castle Dave Chapman TBC Point ROC1 Rayleigh West Rochford Dave Chapman TBC HORNC West Horndon Brentwood Dave Chapman TBC BAS4 Sunnymede Basildon Dave Chapman TBC ROC6 Rayleigh East Rochford Dave Chapman TBC HAR6 Brays Grove Harlow Dave Chapman TBC CAS2 New Thundersley Castle Dave Chapman TBC Point HAR2 Harlow Kingsmoor Harlow Dave Chapman TBC HAR3 West Passmores Harlow Dave Chapman TBC BAS8 Laindon Basildon Dave Chapman TBC BAS15 Chalvedon Felmores Basildon Dave Chapman TBC ROC7 Ashingdon Rochford Dave Chapman TBC COL2 The Hythe Colchester Dave Chapman TBC COL3 Colchester Town Colchester Dave Chapman TBC COL1 Old Heath Colchester Dave Chapman TBC BAS14 Barstable Fryerns Basildon Dave Chapman TBC HAR10 Nettleswell Harlow Dave Chapman TBC New1 TBC New2 TBC New3 TBC New4 TBC New5 TBC New6 TBC New7 TBC New8 TBC New9 TBC New10 TBC

Apr- May- Jul- Aug- Oct- Nov- Dec- Mar- WORKS & SUPERVISION 16 16 Jun-16 16 16 Sep-16 16 16 16 Jan-17 Feb-17 17 FIR Kennel Lane, Great Burstead Basildon Dave Chapman Ed Clarke FIR Church End Lane Runwell Ph Chelmsford Dave Chapman Ed Clake 2 FIR Mill Road, Foxearth Braintree Dave Chapman Highways FIR Messing Contribution Colchester Dave Chapman Highways ROC4 Hockley Rocford Dave Chapman TBC CAS3 East Thundersley Castle Dave Chapman TBC Point ROC1 Rayleigh West Rochford Dave Chapman TBC

Page 25 of 40 HORNC West Horndon Brentwood Dave Chapman TBC BAS4 Sunnymede Basildon Dave Chapman TBC ROC6 Rayleigh East Rochford Dave Chapman TBC HAR6 Brays Grove Harlow Dave Chapman TBC CAS2 New Thundersley Castle Dave Chapman TBC Point HAR2 Harlow Kingsmoor Harlow Dave Chapman TBC HAR3 West Passmores Harlow Dave Chapman TBC BAS8 Laindon Basildon Dave Chapman TBC BAS15 Chalvedon Felmores Basildon Dave Chapman TBC ROC7 Ashingdon Rochford Dave Chapman TBC COL2 The Hythe Colchester Dave Chapman TBC COL3 Colchester Town Colchester Dave Chapman TBC COL1 Old Heath Colchester Dave Chapman TBC BAS14 Barstable Fryerns Basildon Dave Chapman TBC HAR10 Nettleswell Harlow Dave Chapman TBC

Page 26 of 40 EFPB/10/16

Essex Flood Partnership Board Report: Canvey Island community resilience and Canvey Lake

20 April 2016

To receive a report from John Meehan, Acting Head of Environment and Flood Management and Deborah Fox, Head of Commissioning, Sustainable Environment: Protection on the progress by the Canvey Island multi-agency task and finish group with a focus on community resilience and Canvey Lake.

Background to the Canvey Island 6 Point Plan.

Representatives from Canvey Island’s flood partnership in Essex met with the Water Minister in November 2015 and presented him with a £25 million action plan to increase long-term resilience and reduce the risk of future flooding.

A 17-strong multi-agency delegation secures long-term funding pledge from Government. Credit: Clark Smith-Stanley at [email protected]

The Multi-agency partnership includes Anglian Water, Essex County Council, Castle Point Borough Council, Essex County Fire and Rescue Service and the Environment Agency.

The 6-Point Plan, which would be delivered over the next ten years, outlines six key areas for action and explores possible infrastructure projects, technologies and community-led solutions. The evidence base includes a new innovative Integrated Urban Drainage Study.

The plan is in response to a significant surface water flood incident on 20 July 2014, when a ‘Wembley Stadium’ of water fell on the Island. The partnership’s objectives are raising awareness of flood risk, and increasing the resilience of Canvey Island’s communities and businesses to flooding. Since the incident:

 Partners have surveyed over 5,000 gullies and 2,500 manholes.  Over 1,800 defects were found in the drainage system.

Page 27 of 40  Partners have spent around £300,000 on jetting and CCTV surveying on 3.6km of the drainage network.  Over £2 million has been spent updating the island’s infrastructure since 2013.

The partnership has been under significant government gaze following a set of recommendations issued by the Government’s Chief Scientific Advisor in 2014.

At the November 2015 meeting, Water Minister Rory Stewart voiced clear commitment and identified up to £3.4 million in contribution to this critical infrastructure from Defra. He said: “This is an impressive example of people working together. The 6-point plan looks amazing. This is a high priority. I am an advocate. We’d like to take this model around the country.”

Partner agencies are now looking to work with Defra and DCLG officials to run through the details of the 6-Point Plan and determine what funding streams might be available to facilitate delivery. The 6-Point Plan and more information on the multi-agency partnership can be found at www.canveyflood.co.uk.

Canvey Resilient Communities Programme

The partnership’s direct connection to communities is leading to better flood awareness.

The aim is for communities on Canvey Island to feel safe, that their community is strong enough to manage and recover from flood impacts and they may contribute to the guardianship of flood assets.

The objectives are:  To honour our commitments on communities and communications, following the severe flood incident in July 2014.  To ensure people are aware of, and act upon, individual riparian (landowner) responsibilities.  That people choose to take positive steps e.g. to develop a flood action plan and emergency flood kit and keep drains clear of debris.

This will be done by informing, educating and engaging local communities on Canvey Island.

We are committed to:  Building a community communications plan  Implementing behavioural change campaigns  Enabling people to lead in keeping the local water environment clean and clear  Seeking changes in planning policy e.g. to increase source control measures in new buildings.

By way of examples, the National Flood Forum (NFF) and Essex County Fire and Rescue Service mobilised their local volunteer networks in 2015 to raise the awareness of flood risk and the steps that individuals can make to reduce this risk. A number of behavioural change campaigns were also rolled out on the Island in 2015.

Canvey Island Town Council has been working with Essex County Council to identify and map the open watercourses on Canvey Island, which form a vital part of the drainage network. This is helping the Lead Local Flood Authority to meet its statutory duties in an innovative community-led way see here.

Page 28 of 40 Further highlights to date include:

 The September 2015 Canvey Fire Station Open Day, which attracted over 200 visitors to view options including free property level solutions.  In November 2015, The Environment Agency extended direct warning service made calls to all people on Canvey that are EE mobile customers.  In December 2015, multi-agency colleagues spent an afternoon with year five and six students educating them about flood risk. The school hall was used to hold an engagement event for parents and those affected by the CCTV works.  The March 2016 Love your Lake event attracted several hundred visitors.

200 residents on Canvey Island discussed local resilience with multi-agency partners in September 2015. Credit: Deborah Fox

Activities will continue in 2016 with an emphasis on enabling people to lead their own local solutions backed up with practical support such as free property level protection.

Canvey Lake One of the six points and critical to the drainage of Canvey Island is Canvey Lake. Storm water is pumped to the lake in times of heavy and numerous Anglian Water pipes lead into the Lake.

The ECC Lead Local Flood Authority team successfully worked with the Environment Agency to utilise £30,000 funding from the Agency to commission a scoping study to explore the flooding issues resulting from the lake’s condition.

The overall objective was to produce a flood risk management appraisal in line with Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management – Appraisal Guidance (FCERM-AG), which will appraise a wide range of options. This will result in the delivery of a PAR to Essex County Council that gains approval from statutory stakeholders and LPRG. Suggested options should focus on improving capacity of Canvey Lake to reduce flood risk. Current proposed options include but are not exclusive to:

1. De-silting the lake 2. Re-profiling the existing lake 3. Extending the lake west occupying as much of the greenspace as possible 4. Re-profiling the western parkland to absorb flood storage 5. Examine the impact of modifying the outfall to Hilton Pumping Station, so as to a. lower the normal retained water level of the lake. b. decrease the discharge when the water levels increase (e.g a tilting weir or simply a lower outlet cill level).

Page 29 of 40 The appraisal should assess the impacts for a range of flood events utilising the Canvey Island IUD for 1 in 10, 30, 40, 75 and 100 surface water flood events including allowances for the impact of climate change.

Capita won the commission and an Initiation meeting has taken place on the lake with officer of ECC and EA. Capita are now pulling together all the documentation relating to the lake with a view to giving an initial progress report.

Love your Lake Event

An event of the Canvey Resilient Communities programme was the Love Your Lake Family fun day funded by ECC and organised by Thames 21 in partnership with Canvey Town Council on the 30th March.

Members of ECC’s Environment Team, Lead Local Flood Authority team along with Essex Civil Protection and Emergency Management and the Environment Agency attended. It was a great success with a couple of hundred people attending. The event was also attended by local MP Rebecca Harris, Cllr Ray Howard and members of the Canvey Island Town Council.

Activities on the day which were organised and staffed by Thames 21, included pond dipping (which proved to be extremely popular), feeding the birds by the lake, a water pollution game along with a variety of arts and crafts. It soon became clear that many of the children had not had the opportunity for this type of ‘hands on’ experience before, and how much they were thoroughly enjoying and learning from it.

There were also a number of stands providing a range of information to raise awareness about different aspects of the lake or life close to it. Canvey Island Town Council provided valuable background information and local knowledge about the Lake. The Environment Agency, excited visitors with an opportunity to see at first hand some of the living creatures including crayfish, that can be found in rivers in Essex, and to learn about the a variety of creatures, known as ‘invasive species’ which have been brought to Essex by ships from other countries and are now causing a variety of damage, either to other native species or to river banks.

Essex Civil Protection & Emergency Management also had a stand where they provided information and a variety of educational material about what to do in an emergency and how to be prepared for one.

Page 30 of 40 EFPB/11/16

Essex Flood Partnership Board Report: RFCC business 20 April 2016

Abbreviations: EA - Environment Agency LLFA - Lead Local Flood Authority RFCC - Regional Flood and Coastal Committee RMA - Risk Management Authority (See annex 1) SWMP - surface water management plans FCERM - Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management.

This is a standing item. It is to be noted that this Partnership Board update falls between the scheduled rounds of RFCC meetings. The next round is in July 2016.

1. Strengthening partnership with RFCCs

1.1 The Chairman will welcome Paul Hayden, Chairman of Anglian Eastern RFCC to the meeting. The Regional Flood and Coastal Committee (RFCC) is a committee established by the Environment Agency under the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 that brings together members appointed by Lead Local Flood Authorities (LLFAs) and independent members with relevant experience for three purposes:

 to ensure there are coherent plans for identifying, communicating and managing flood and coastal erosion risks across catchments and shorelines  to promote efficient, targeted and risk-based investment in flood and coastal erosion risk management that optimises value for money and benefits for local communities  to provide a link between the Environment Agency, LLFAs, other risk management authorities, and other relevant bodies to engender mutual understanding of flood and coastal erosion risks in its area.

For more information and a boundary map, see: https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/anglian-eastern-regional-flood-and- coastal-committee

1.2 The Thames RFCC invited its members to think 25 years ahead at an event at Lambeth Palace on 17 March. A general theme was working in partnership.

The Partnership Board is invited to comment on key points arising in discussion in a grouping for Luton, Central Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Essex colleagues:

 The group discussed whether there would be any benefits in working more closely together on specific strategic objectives.  Thames Water identified population growth as the major risk. As a regulated business they need to demonstrate how any investment would benefit customers. They consider that it would be better to work with partners to implement measures in the upper catchment rather than increase capacity in the existing system.

Page 31 of 40  The LLFAs identified that obtaining data from Thames Water was a major issue; this was in contrast to the collaborative approach adopted by Anglian Water. Thames Water agreed that there was a need to work more closely together.  It was noted by all that deficiencies in the existing drainage network pose a major challenge. New development was seen as key to improving the situation. All agreed that national guidance to encourage developers to do more than maintain the status quo was required.  The group agreed that within the area future projects were likely to be relatively small in scale to address localised issues. Lots of small improvements could achieve significant benefits.  The group would welcome examples of the catchment approach to flood risk management that were from lowland agricultural land. It was noted that land management grants do not fit well with flood risk benefits. More work should be done with Defra to address this situation.  There are opportunities to join up management flood risk with wider benefits such as green infrastructure.

As agreed at the workshop the intention is for local partnerships to reflect on the workshop discussions at their next meetings and provide feedback to the RFCC Chair on what they consider the priorities to be ahead of the RFCC meeting in July. At the same time the partnerships and members are asked to consider and comment on the themes that are emerging and should be built into our longer term approach.

Themes emerging are: a. That it is important to adopt a catchment wide approach to managing flood risk and encourage partnerships to look beyond their boundaries for solutions. For example, water storage areas in the upper catchment will play an important role in the next generation of flood schemes as the likelihood of extreme weather increases. b. Slowing the flow of water is a critical catchment wide theme. This will involve working with developers to promote sustainable drainage in urban areas and with land managers and their funding bodies to promote land uses and practices that attenuate flow in smaller rural catchments. c. Major projects along the Thames will continue to be a feature of the programme. d. At the other end of the spectrum, communities will be put at the heart of projects to manage flood risk for villages with a number of properties at high risk. e. The value of floodplain in the Thames catchment should be promoted and celebrated. Undeveloped floodplain forms a crucial part of defences that should be more widely understood and its capacity may be increased. f. In urban environments where space is at a premium and land values are higher, opportunities to reduce risk will rely on integrated projects that deliver multiple benefits on open space or as part of redevelopment. The current drive to develop housing on brownfield land should be matched by a concerted effort to ensure Risk Management Authorities work together strategically to Page 32 of 40 identify opportunities and to promote integrated solutions with planners, developers and transport/utility providers. Sharing information and planning ahead are key to making this happen. Communities will be encouraged to consider the standard of protection they are willing to accept and the economic business case for improving flood resilience. These principles apply across the spectrum of urban areas. g. Redevelopment provides an opportunity to reconnect communities with their rivers and to open up culverted channels. It may be possible to set development back from the water’s edge and to benefit from the economic uplift of an attractive riverside environment. h. Alignment and a more strategic, forward looking approach should be ongoing themes at future partnership meetings. There are always going to be challenges with aligning funding streams and processes, but the way to address this is through working together at an early stage of planning for programmes and projects. Efficiencies can be achieved by agreeing which Risk Management Authority should lead delivery of each integrated project.

2. Developing the regional investment programmes

RFCCs consented the regional programmes for 2016/17 at the end of January 2016. The programme was refreshed in March 2016. At time of writing, the Government was refreshing the national programme with an additional £700 million of projects in the north of England.

92 schemes in the are set to receive a £193 million share of the £2.3 billion capital investment announced. It is anticipated that this will protect 17,134 properties across the region. The new phase one flood defence scheme at the Thames Estuary is worth over £62 million. A printed spreadsheet of the full 2016/17 consented programme for Greater Essex will provided at the Partnership Board meeting. The 17 schemes are set to receive almost £17 million in the six-year programme.

An appended briefing by the Environment Agency titled ‘Key FCRM messages for Essex County Council’ provides an update on the key projects, technical and legislative advances. It features detail on the following projects:

 Canvey Island Drainage Network Appraisal & Works  , Feering and Kelvedon Flood Alleviation Scheme  Heybridge Flood Alleviation Scheme.

3. Greater Essex Devolution

In September 2015, councils across Greater Essex submitted a joint bid to Government setting out their ambition for devolved powers. It was signed by all 15 authorities, including Essex County Council and unitary authorities Southend and Thurrock.

The ambition is for Greater Essex to become the fastest growing UK economy outside that delivers the opportunity of a high quality standard of living for our residents, with increased and accelerated local and national dividends which are re-invested into world-class public services and infrastructure.

Page 33 of 40 The Partnership Board is asked to consider what devolution means for managing the impacts of flooding for residents and businesses. What might be better delivered at a more local level?

4. For the Partnership Board’s consideration

In order to inform RFCC members of the Partnership Board’s wishes, it is proposed that:

I. The Partnership Board reflects on the key points in 1.2 and provides feedback to the Thames RFCC Chair on what they consider the priorities to be ahead of the RFCC meeting in July. At the same time, considers and comments on the themes that are emerging and should be built into our longer term approach.

II. The Partnership Board considers the potential for delivering more at a local level in 3 and provides feedback to the Chairs of the three RFCCs.

III. The Partnership Board shares any intelligence with their Chairman at the Partnership Board meeting on:

 Deliverability of the regional investment programmes.  Any changes to local funding requested.

This would enable the Chairman of the Partnership Board to have an informed overview of challenges and to relay any concerns to the July RFCC meetings.

IV. The Partnership Board invites a full presentation from the Environment Agency on the implications of the Government’s investment programme in Greater Essex at its next meeting.

5. Other RFCC business for noting

a. The Environment Agency has completed a review of the 22 Essex-based Community at Risk projects within the six-year capital investment programme. Six further communities have been considered using the Agency’s models. As a result of reviewing its flood models, new projects may be added into the six-year capital investment programme. The review key findings were as follows:

 Three communities were found not to be at any flood risk and will be removed from the six-year capital investment programme.  Colchester, Rawreth and Rawreth Shot and West Horndon were identified as being at risk of flooding from either ordinary watercourses or surface water.  20 communities at risk will continue to be led by the Agency in partnership with other Risk Management Authorities (RMAs).

b. The Environment Agency will be using the same boundaries and same plan as Natural England from July 2016. The Environment Agency will merge its existing Essex, Norfolk & Suffolk area with the existing Cambridgeshire & Bedfordshire area. This new area will be much bigger geographically and a new name is yet to be agreed. RFCC boundaries will remain unchanged; these can only be changed by the Secretary of State or government.

Page 34 of 40

Annex 1: Essex Risk Management Authorities

The key stakeholders in Essex that have responsibilities around flooding are detailed below:  Essex County Council (as Lead Local Flood Authority)  Thurrock Council (as Lead Local Flood Authority)  Southend-on-Sea Borough Council (as Lead Local Flood Authority)  Anglian Water  Thames Water  Basildon Borough Council  Brentwood Borough Council  Chelmsford City Council  Epping Forest District Council  Maldon District Council  Tendring District Council  Neighbouring Lead Local Flood Authorities (Hertfordshire County, Cambridgeshire County and Suffolk County plus the London Boroughs of Havering, Redbridge, Waltham Forest and Enfield)  Highways England  Braintree District Council  Castle Point Borough Council  Colchester Borough Council  Harlow District Council  Rochford District Council  Uttlesford District Council  Environment Agency (Anglian and Thames Regions).

All of these authorities are known as ‘Risk Management Authorities’ under the 2010 Flood and Water Management Act and have the following duties:  Duty to be subject to scrutiny from Lead Local Flood Authorities’ democratic processes.  Duty to co-operate with other Risk Management Authorities in the exercise of their flood and coastal erosion risk management functions, including sharing flood risk management data.  Power to take on flood and coastal erosion functions from another Risk Management Authority when agreed by both sides.

Page 35 of 40

Page 36 of 40

Essex FCRM Highlights

Key FCRM messages for Essex County Council 17 March 2016

This briefing provides an update on the key projects, technical and legislative advances within FCRM influencing the Essex County Council area.

Six-year capital investment programme

1. Canvey Island Drainage Network Appraisal & Works We have begun work with our National Capital Programme Management Service to investigate the feasibility of potential options to mitigate the existing non-tidal flood risk regulated by all Risk Management Authorities (RMAs). This options appraisal will focus on key locations where severe flooding was experienced in July 2014. As this work progresses we will work with partners to ensure all RMAs develop a better understanding of the viability of the options in question, with a view to developing a business case to deliver a partnership project on the ground. Any of the options progressed to a business case will be subject to the existing partnership funding principles. We aspire to appoint a consultant in April 2016 to begin the revised modelling work and provide the evidence base to assess the impacts of such mitigation options within 2016/17.

2. Coggeshall, Feering and Kelvedon Flood Alleviation Scheme We are continuing to focus on the potential locations for flood storage upstream of Coggeshall on both the River Blackwater and Robins Brook. The current favoured option is a Hybrid Option consisting of a combination of measures including flood storage, tree planting within the floodplain, and Property Level Protection (PLP) measures for properties at the highest risk of flooding. The estimated cost of the Hybrid Option is £1.9m, which is eligible for £900k Grant in Aid (GiA) and the remaining £1m must be obtained from local contributions and partnership funding. We are currently completing an update and calibration of our River Blackwater and Robin’s Brook models. This will improve the outputs of the study to ensure we identify the maximum benefits relative to the scheme costs. Our next step is to refine the potential locations for storage, update the costs of various measures and seek the necessary contributions. We will be organising further public meetings in spring 2016 to provide updates on progress or constraints.

3. Heybridge Flood Alleviation Scheme Maldon District Council (MDC) are leading on the delivery of a Flood Alleviation Project as an infrastructure requirement linked to a large strategic housing development in the northeast of Heybridge in Essex. Until very recently, it was proposed that all of the flood risk management infrastructure on the development site would be fully funded by the developer. MDC held recent discussions with the developer over the viability of housing mix delivery taking into account the costs of planned infrastructure requirements including the flood alleviation scheme. MDC may now need to pursue supplementary sources of funding from partners to support infrastructure delivery. MDC are leading an options assessment leading to a Business Case to support an application for a Flood Defence Grant-in-Aid contribution. Discussions are continuing with ourselves over the potential for us to operate and maintain the defences post construction. It is anticipated that this might be achieved through a legal agreement and through commuted sum arrangements.

Page 37 of 40 www.gov.uk/environment-agency

1 of 3

4. Future Year Projects – Communities at Risk Initiative (Appendix 1) We have recently completed a review of the 22 Community at Risk projects within the six-year programme as well as identifying potential new project locations. These were originally identified in 2012/13 using a previous version of our National Flood Risk Assessment (NaFRA) data. This latest review has used more recent data including from revised flood models and has generated updated partnership funding calculations. The review has detailed:  670 residential properties moved from “Very Significant” or “Significant” to “Moderate” flood risk  The average raw partnership funding score is 44%  Many of these communities have multiple sources of flood risk, some surface water only.  The total contribution required from partners and stakeholders is £8.9M Our next steps include discussions with partners around communities with multiple sources of flooding with a view to establishing joined up solutions and updating the six-year programme with this revised information. We will also discuss those communities were only surface water flood risk has been identified to help inform partner’s pipeline of future projects. Technical update

1. Flood Risk Management Plans (FRMP) Following the flooding experienced in December we took the decision to delay the publication of all the FRMPs. It is important they provide an accurate reflection of the risk in a catchment and that they took account of the recent flooding. The plans covering areas affected by this winter’s floods have now been updated to include information on that flooding. All the plans are due to be published on GOV.UK before the end of March 2016. The River Basin Management Plans have been published at the flowing link https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/river-basin-management- plans-2015

2. New business case template for FCERM grant applications From April 2016, risk management authorities (RMAs) will use the new Five Case Model business case template (or short form) to apply for flood risk management grant-in-aid funding for schemes. We published the new forms and templates on GOV.UK at the end of February. RMAs must use the business case template for projects with capital costs of more than £2 million and the short form for less than £2 million. RMAs need to submit an Outline Business Case (OBC) for technical approval and grant-in-aid funding to either the National Project Assurance Service or the Large Projects Review Group as appropriate.

3. Updates to climate change allowances (Appendix 2) On 19 February we published ‘Flood risk assessments: climate change allowances’ on gov.uk. It replaces the guidance Climate Change Allowances for Planners. We have also completed a technical update to the document ‘Adapting to Climate Change: Advice for Flood & Coastal Erosion Risk Management Authorities’, also now available on gov.uk. The changes to this document have been minimal and are reflective of the most up to date climate change science.

4. Open Data & Updated Flood Map for Surface Water We have made contact informing of our proposal to make the updated Flood Map for Surface Water Open Data and to clarify use rights by the end of February 2016. We acknowledge that Essex County Council had expressed concerns in signing this licence. We have decided to postpone publication as Open Data for a month so we can manage the issues raised nationally by Lead Local Flood Authorities. We are now aiming to make the dataset Open on 4 May but as of from 1 April 2016 the dataset will be available under licence (as now) but free of charge. This is independent of us making the data Open.

Page 38 of 40 www.gov.uk/environment-agency 2 of 3

Legislative update

1. Area Boundary Changes (Appendix 3) We will be using the same boundaries and same plan as Natural England from July 2016. Defra have said that they want these aligned areas to be focused on river catchments, as the building blocks that make up the landscape, but with the flexibility to adapt to local council and local priorities when needed. We will develop a 14 area model. These areas will place catchments as the building blocks, but will respect Local Council boundaries. As part of our move to 14 areas we will merge our existing Essex, Norfolk & Suffolk area with our existing Cambridgeshire & Bedfordshire area. This new area will be much bigger geographically and a new name is yet to be agreed. We can’t change our RFCC boundaries; these can only be changed by the Secretary of State or government. The high level time line, working with Natural England, is as follows:  By July 2016: agree area names and announce to our external partners, stakeholders and customers.  By December 2016: started work on developing our local Defra plans.  By April 2017: moved to the 14 Areas, including: o testing our incident readiness; o clarifying any differences between our operational approaches & our public facing boundaries.

2. Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) The Flood Defence Consenting (FDC) regime is being incorporated into the Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR) as set out by government in the Water Act 2014. We are continuing to work to put the new regime and charges for permitting for flood risk activities in place. These will take effect from 6 April 2016. The reasons for the move are:  in response to the Government’s Red tape Challenge  for us to focus out efforts on the highest risk activities and also  to save us and our customers time and money Highlights of the EPR changes include:  Application fee 2016/17 £170 for first activity , £40 for each additional activity  Applications now made via our National Customer Contact Centre rather than locally  4 tiered ‘risk-based’ approach to permits: o Exclusions - “excluded flood risk activities” are not regulated at all o Exemptions - “exempt flood risk activities” but are registered with us o Standard rules permits for “standard facilities” o Bespoke permits for all other flood risk activities Our consultation on the proposed charges for permitting for flood risk activities for 2016-17 closed on 14 February. We are collating the responses and feedback which will inform our current and future proposals. Our Essex Partnerships & Strategic Overview team are currently receiving national, and administering local, training in the new EPR procedures.

Page 39 of 40 www.gov.uk/environment-agency 3 of 3

Page 40 of 40