DOCSLIB.ORG

Written Evidence Submitted by Witham and Humber Drainage Boards (FLO0007)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Written Evidence Submitted by Witham and Humber Drainage Boards (FLO0007) Written evidence submitted by Witham and Humber Drainage Boards (FLO0007) Summary and objective Recent events have brought the challenges of managing flood risk back to national attention, and climate change means these events are likely to become more frequent. Building on the previous Committee’s interim report on coastal flooding and adaptation to climate change, this inquiry would focus on the Government’s approach to managing the risk of inland flooding in England. The inquiry will also consider evidence received and questions raised during the coastal flooding inquiry. Terms of reference 1. Are the current national and local governance and co-ordination arrangements for flood and coastal risk management in England effective? 2. What lessons can be learned from the recent floods about the way Government and local authorities respond to flooding events? 3. Given the challenge posed by climate change, what should be the Government’s aims and priorities in national flood risk policy, and what level of investment will be required in future in order to achieve this? 4. How can communities most effectively be involved, and supported, in the policies and decisions that affect them? 5. With increasing focus on natural flood management measures, how should future agricultural and environmental policies be focussed and integrated with the Government’s wider approach to flood risk? 6. How can housing and other development be made more resilient to flooding, and what role can be played by measures such as insurance, sustainable drainage and planning policy? House of Commons EFRA Committee Floods Inquiry Terms of reference – Consultation Response to Questions 1-6. 1. Are the current national and local governance and co-ordination arrangements for flood and coastal risk management in England effective? This response is submitted on behalf of the 4 Internal Drainage Boards which work in a voluntary partnership under S11 of the Flood & Water Management Act [2010] collectively known as ‘Witham & Humber Drainage Boards’, but retaining their independent status as 4 separate and local Land Drainage, Water Levels and Flood Risk Management Authorities [i.e. North East Lindsey IDB, Upper Witham IDB, Witham First District IDB and Witham Third District IDB]. The 4 IDBs are 4 of 112 IDBs nationally. Structurally, since the Pitt Review [2007] following extensive heavy rainfall events and flooding, there has been considerable clarification and improvement nationally and locally in governance responsibilities for water and flood risk management in what may appear to the public as a ‘crowded land scape’. The Flood & Water Management Act [2010] assisted with this and the introduction nationally of Lead Local Flood Authorities [LLFAs] and the requirement for the LLFAs to produce a JOINT Strategic Plan supports a coordinated and joint approach to water levels and flood risk management [indeed to the management of water from all sources – be that tidal inundation, fluvial, surface water or ground water]. In Lincolnshire for 3 of the 4 IDBs here this means the LLFA responsibility sits with Lincolnshire County Council and the second iteration of a Joint Strategy was approved in February 2020, having been developed in a collegiate way using the well-established partnership architecture of the Lincolnshire Flood Risk Management & Drainage Partnership [which includes representation from, for example, the Upper Tier Authority in 1 Lincolnshire County Council, the 7 District Councils, the Environment Agency, relevant Water Company representation like Anglian Water Services, Local Resilience Forum input for emergency planning, voluntary sector input via the Canal & Rivers Trust etc]. For our North East Lindsey IDB, the Board relates to two Unitary Authorities, namely North Lincolnshire Council and North East Lincolnshire Council. The Board is a full member of North Lincolnshire Council’s Flood Risk Management Board. Under the leadership of the Environment Agency, the IDBs are linked into the Anglian [Northern] RFCC structure which is the IDB mechanism for accessing Grant in Aid funding for significant capital schemes. It is helpful that local scheme sign-off thresholds have been raised to £250,000 but undoubtedly for small-scale public bodies like IDBs, the current Partnership Funding calculator mechanism is complex and bureaucratic for accessing minor improvement schemes at catchment scale, which is where IDB schemes are focused. Many of the circa 60 Pumping Stations in the 4 Boards’ drainage districts protect prime agricultural land, indeed these were schemes developed post-WW2 in recognition of the need to meet increased food production targets. Whilst the IDBs maintain these Pumping Stations and other flood defense structures, some are now reaching the end of their life-cycle and the current funding mechanism which awards points and grant in aid monies largely in line with number of properties better flood protected does very little to recognise the value of prime agricultural land and its economic value to achieve food production targets. Unless the scope of this funding formula is broadened there is a very real risk that existing and ageing flood defense assets will not be adequately maintained in the medium term. In short, whilst IDBs understand the investment in flood protection via RFCCs and the emphasis on better protecting homes, there is a need for increased investment to wider criteria including protection of agricultural land and agri-business. We would also highlight the differences in national policy approach between the UK and, say, the Netherlands. Listening to the Delta Commissioner present in February 2020 there is more emphasis on flood prevention in the Netherlands’ national policy than in the UK, where we appear to be more reactive to flood events [which is evidently not a cost effective way of managing flood risk] and also now placing policy emphasis on flood resilience rather than prevention.. There also appears to be longer-term planning in the Netherlands, with a 14-year Delta Plan, which provides better planning and investment certainty. The Delta Commissioner is obliged to account annually for progress on implementation of the Plan and Report to Parliament, which arguably keeps national focus upon and accountability for Flood Risk Management. A similar focus should be considered for the UK. There are also publicly published ‘Standards of Protection’ in the Netherlands, reviewed every 6 years. The UK should consider committing to defined national standards of flood protection and investing in such which we suspect would bring comfort to may communities adversely affected by Autumn 2019 and early 2020 flood events. Turning to our local flood risk management and the adequacy or otherwise of this: On balance yes, these arrangements are adequate within the national constraints just outlined. The reason for this is based on the availability of technically competent and experienced officers as well as the strength of the local voluntary partnership arrangements for flood risk management in Lincolnshire. The 4 IDBs do not see justification for an additional administrative tier or governance at a RFCC level with the creation of, say, a Lincolnshire Rivers Authority akin to the separate precepting body established in Somerset as the Somerset Rivers Authority [which may suit the partnership architecture in Somerset]. The bodies already involved like the RFCC, LLFA, EA, DCs, Water Companies, IDBs etc contain enough local representation with the presence of appointed members supported by technical officers form the FRMAs. Adding 2 another layer of governance or administration will only spread resource more thinly, increase bureaucracy and potentially increase administrative costs. With respect to the local response to a high rainfall or tidal event: At times yes, the arrangements for emergency response and then recovery are adequate. This is especially so when the various criteria/thresholds are met and local Emergency Planning LRF architecture invokes TCG/SCG. This system works well for the organisations involved. Indeed, for the type of rainfall or tidal inundation event incident being managed it can provide a clear line of responsibility and accountability. In the heat of an event, it is important that stakeholder expectations are reasonable and informed, based on evidence. In Lincolnshire, North Lincolnshire and North East Lincolnshire, IDBs are involved in the response phase and management of a high rainfall event, tidal/coastal event, and where appropriate, pollution incidents. This is a good thing and should be encouraged as the Boards provide a sizeable portion of the operational and management of land drainage and flood risk management within the County of Greater Lincolnshire, outside of the main river system maintained by the Environment Agency, and in such events very local knowledge is imperative. However, the effectiveness of the incident response system is diminished by several local factors: i) During times of LRF event activation, the TCG is resource hungry, with little flexibility for involvement. If you sign-up as an organisation [or group of organisations as are the IDBs, honorary cat 2 responders] you are expected to comply with all the systems requirements and procedures. During flood events this is very difficult for small public bodies such as IDBs as their very limited resources are required to ensure the Boards’ core functions are maintained. Therefore, the Lincolnshire Boards operate a system of mutual aid and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Lincolnshire Flood Risk and Drainage Management Framework
    AGENDA ITEM NO: 6 BOSTON BOROUGH COUNCIL REPORT TO CABINET 2nd June 2010 SUBJECT: LINCOLNSHIRE FLOOD RISK AND DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK PORTFOLIO HOLDER: COUNCILLOR RICHARD DUNGWORTH – REGENERATION, PLANNING, SPORT AND CULTURAL SERVICES REPORT BY: HEAD OF PLANNING AND STRATEGY Reason For Report: Following the introduction of the Flood & Water Management Act the Council is being asked to adopt a Lincolnshire Flood Risk and Drainage Management Framework. This is required in order to enable the provisions and requirements of the new Act to be properly implemented and co-ordinated throughout Lincolnshire, building on the extensive partnerships and close working already carried out between all the various agencies and bodies responsible for flood response, management and planning. Summary: The report advises the Cabinet of the development of a new partnership framework to provide improved co-ordination of flood risk management in Lincolnshire and to meet the requirements of the Flood and Water Management Act which was granted Royal Assent on 8th April 2010. The Act will implement several key recommendations of Sir Michael Pitt’s Review of the Summer 2007 floods. The new governance framework, with Lincolnshire County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority, will build on existing good practice established through existing local drainage groups, and increase the capacity of partners to provide a consistent and co-ordinated approach to flood risk management across Lincolnshire. Recommendation(s): That Cabinet: a) adopts the Lincolnshire Flood Risk and Drainage Management Framework as laid out and detailed in Appendix B of this report and in line with similar agreements being put in place by other Lincolnshire Councils and partner agencies b) allows for confirmation of details of representation on the partnership groupings by the framework Strategy Group Reasons for Recommendations: To prepare for the requirements set out in the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Walkover Habitat Survey Welton Beck, Lincolnshire November 2016
    Walkover Habitat Survey Welton Beck, Lincolnshire November 2016 Contents Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 5 Catchment Overview .................................................................................................................................... 5 Habitat Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Old Man’s Head Spring (SK 99687 79449) to Ryland Bridge (TF 01893 79957) ........................................ 6 Ryland Bridge (TF 01893 79957) to A46 Market Rasen Road (TF 02961 79508) .................................... 17 A46 Market Rasen Road (TF0296179508) to Barlings Eau confluence (TF 05179 79366) ...................... 26 Opportunities for Habitat Improvements ................................................................................................... 34 River re‐naturalisation projects .............................................................................................................. 34 Channel narrowing .................................................................................................................................. 37 Pool creation ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lincolnshire Local Flood Defence Committee Annual Report 1996/97
    1aA' AiO Cf E n v ir o n m e n t ' » . « / Ag e n c y Lincolnshire Local Flood Defence Committee Annual Report 1996/97 LINCOLNSHIRE LOCAL FLOOD DEFENCE COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 1996/97 THE FOLLOWING REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED UNDER SECTION 12 OF THE WATER RESOURCES ACT 1991 Ron Linfield Front Cover Illustration Area Manager (Northern) Aerial View of Mablethorpe North End Showing the 1996/97 Kidding Scheme May 1997 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 136076 LINCOLNSHIRE LOCAL FLOOD DEFENCE COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT 1996/97 CONTENTS Item No Page 1. Lincolnshire Local Flood Defence Committee Members 1 2. Officers Serving the Committee 3 3. Map of Catchment Area and Flood Defence Data 4 - 5 4. Staff Structure - Northern Area 6 5. Area Manager’s Introduction 7 6. Operations Report a) Capital Works 10 b) Maintenance Works 20 c) Rainfall, River Flows and Flooding and Flood Warning 22 7. Conservation and Flood Defence 30 8. Flood Defence and Operations Revenue Account 31 LINCOLNSHIRE LOCAL FLOOD DEFENCE COMMITTEE R J EPTON Esq - Chairman Northolme Hall, Wainfleet, Skegness, Lincolnshire Appointed bv the Regional Flood Defence Committee R H TUNNARD Esq - Vice Chairman Witham Cottage, Boston West, Boston, Lincolnshire D C HOYES Esq The Old Vicarage, Stixwould, Lincoln R N HERRING Esq College Farm, Wrawby, Brigg, South Humberside P W PRIDGEON Esq Willow Farm, Bradshaws Lane, Hogsthorpe, Skegness Lincolnshire M CRICK Esq Lincolnshire Trust for Nature Conservation Banovallum House, Manor House Street, Homcastle Lincolnshire PROF. J S PETHICK - Director Cambs Coastal Research
    [Show full text]
  • River Witham the Source of the 8Th Longest River Wholly in England Is
    River Witham The source of the 8th longest river wholly in England is just outside the county, Lincolnshire, through which it follows almost all of a 132km course to the sea, which is shown on the map which accompanies Table Wi1 at the end of the document. Three kilometres west of the village of South Witham, on a minor road called Fosse Lane, a sign points west over a stile to a nature reserve. There, the borders of 3 counties, Lincolnshire, Rutland and Leicestershire meet. The reserve is called Cribb’s Meadow, named for a famous prize fighter of the early 19th century; at first sight a bizarre choice at such a location, though there is a rational explanation. It was known as Thistleton Gap when Tom Cribb had a victory here in a world championship boxing match against an American, Tom Molineaux, on 28th September 1811; presumably it was the only time he was near the place, as he was a Bristolian who lived much of his life in London. The organisers of bare-knuckle fights favoured venues at such meeting points of counties, which were distant from centres of population; they aimed to confuse Justices of the Peace who had a duty to interrupt the illegal contests. Even if the responsible Justices managed to attend and intervene, a contest might be restarted nearby, by slipping over the border into a different jurisdiction. In this fight, which bore little resemblance to the largely sanitised boxing matches of today, it is certain that heavy blows were landed, blood was drawn, and money changed hands, before Cribb won in 11 rounds; a relatively short fight, as it had taken him over 30 rounds to beat the same opponent at the end of the previous year to win his title.
    [Show full text]
  • Advisory Visit River Witham, Marston, Lincolnshire April 2015
    Advisory Visit River Witham, Marston, Lincolnshire April 2015 1.0 Introduction This report is the output of a site visit undertaken by Tim Jacklin of the Wild Trout Trust to the River Witham, Marston, Lincolnshire on 16th April, 2014. Comments in this report are based on observations on the day of the site visit and discussions with Ken Ordish (landowner representative) and Matthew Parr (Environment Agency Fisheries Technical Officer). Normal convention is applied throughout the report with respect to bank identification, i.e. the banks are designated left hand bank (LHB) or right hand bank (RHB) whilst looking downstream. 2.0 Catchment / Fishery Overview The section of river visited is located just to the east of the village of Marston, about 6km north of Grantham, Lincolnshire, at Mill Farm (National Grid Reference SK9015543020). Approximately 1 km of river was inspected, with the weir at Mill Farm in the middle of the reach. The upper Witham flows off oolitic limestone geology in the Lincolnshire and Rutland Limestone Natural Area (www.naturalareas.naturalengland.org.uk/Science/natural/profiles%5CnaProfile38.pdf), hence is a calcium-rich, lowland river. The Witham around Grantham supports a trout fishery and many sections are controlled and managed by Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section (GAAFFS). The reach immediately upstream of the section visited is controlled by GAAFFS. Over recent centuries, and particularly the last 100 years, the once naturally meandering river channel of the Witham has been straightened, deepened, widened, impounded and embanked as part of fluvial engineering schemes designed to reduce flood risk and improve land drainage.
    [Show full text]
  • Upper River Witham: Great Ponton Version 1.1 (14.02.14)
    River Habitat Enhancement Case Studies Upper River Witham: Great Ponton Version 1.1 (14.02.14) Location: Great Ponton, Lincolnshire (c3.5km south of Grantham) Upstream Grid Ref: SK929304 Length: 675m Completion Date: End February 2013 Cost: Fords: £11K, Fencing and willow layering £6.8K: Total £17.8K (this does not include the first phase undertaken in 2008) Partners: The scheme was implemented by the Environment Agency with the co-operation and agreement of the adjacent landowner (Stephen Jackson). Grantham Angling Association Fly Fishing Section (GAAFFS) assisted with site selection and landowner negotiations. © Steve Brayshaw © Steve Summary of Techniques: Channel narrowing and flow deflection using woody debris augmented by willow layering; ford refurbishment and riverside fencing to reduce sediment inputs. Location Map © Crown Copyright 2013. OS Licence number 100026380. Background The Upper River Witham rises west of South Witham and flows for more than 65 km northwards through Colsterworth, Great Ponton, Grantham, Long Bennington, Bassingham and North Hykeham towards Lincoln. More than 165 km of river and tributary streams drain the c573 km2 catchment. The landscape of the catchment is varied in character, ranging from the livestock-dominated limestone valleys upstream from Grantham, through the mixed farming terrain of the middle reaches, to the flat-lying arable farmlands downstream from Long Bennington. Over recent centuries, and particularly the last 100 years, the once naturally meandering river channels have been straightened, deepened, widened, impounded and embanked to reduce flood risk and improve land drainage. These modifications, together with catchment land management practices, have contributed to a decline in river corridor habitat quality.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 the UNIVERSITY of LINCOLN the Behaviour and Ecology of Adult
    THE UNIVERSITY OF LINCOLN The behaviour and ecology of adult common bream Abramis brama (L.) in a heavily modified lowland river A Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Christopher John Gardner B.Sc. (Hons) September 2013 1 CONTENTS Publications and outputs 5 List of tables 6 List of figures 7 Acknowledgements 12 Abstract 13 1. Rivers, fish and human interventions 15 1.1 General introduction 15 1.2 Objectives 17 1.3 A ‘natural’ lowland riverine ecosystem 17 1.4 Anthropogenic impacts on lowland riverine ecosystems 18 1.5 Fish ecology and rivers 21 1.6 Common bream ecology 23 1.7 Studying spatio-temporal behaviour of fishes with telemetry techniques 29 1.8 Proposed study 33 2. The ecology of the lower River Witham 35 2.1 Objectives 35 2.2 The lower River Witham 35 2.2.1 Background 35 2.2.2 History 36 2.2.3 Catchment and land use 39 2.2.4 Water quality 39 2.2.5 Biological quality 40 2.2.6 Flow regime and flood events 41 2.2.7 Water level management 43 2.2.8 Trent-Witham-Ancholme water transfer scheme 43 2.2.9 Morphology 43 2.2.10 Habitat assessments 45 2.2.11 Barriers to fish migration 49 2.2.12 River uses 49 2.2.13 Conservation 49 2.2.14 Fishery assessments 50 2.2.15 Water Framework Directive classification 57 2.3 Discussion 57 2.3.1 Water quality 57 2.3.2 Biological quality 58 2.3.3 Habitat assessments 58 2.3.4 Fishery assessments 58 3.
    [Show full text]
  • National Rivers Authority Anglian Region
    /V^i^c/AA^ |£ct 1 3 ^ l i T H £ ■ s • m V i !J 1..I < 1 ® E n v ir o n m e n t Ag e n c y NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE ANGLIAN REGION Kingfisher House. Goldhay Way, Orton Goldhay, Peterborough PE2 5ZR v ; NRA National Rivers Authority Anglian Region JANUARY 1996 KEY DETAILS Area 1370 km2 WATER QUALITY Population 97,673 General Quality Assessment of Rivers Ground Levels Maximum 120m ODN GQA Grade Km Minimum -lm ODN A 0 Highest Recorded Tide 5.75mODN B 0 C 14.1 ADMINISTRATIVE DETAILS D 56.2 County Councils Lincolnshire E 25.1 District Councils North Kesteven F 0 South Kesteven East Lindsey Estuary Quality: Witham Haven 11km CEWP South Holland Grade A Borough Councils Boston Navigation British Waterways WATER RESOURCES AVAILABILITY Authorities (R Witham) 17.2 km Ground Water All availaBle resources are fully Port of Boston (Witham, committed. Haven) 10.6 km Surface Water Surface water is generally availaBle NRA Anglian Region - Northern during the winter period. At other Area times there is scope for development utilising resources which can Be Water Company Anglian Water Services Ltd made availaBle By taking advantage Major S.T.W Boston of river transfer schemes. Sleaford Anwick Internal Drainage Witham 4th FLOOD PROTECTION Boards Black Sluice Length of Statutory Main River 240km Witham 1st Length of NRA Tidal Defences 22km Skegness Length of NRA Sea Defences 20km SETTLEMENTS (> 3000 population) FISHERIES Boston 23200 Sleaford 14000 Length of cyprinid fishery 219km Length of salmonid fishery 4km Fishtoft 5300 Ruskington 4800 CONSERVATION Kirton 3900 Cranwell 3300 Sites of Special Scientific Interest 13 Sites of Nature Conservation Interest 28 UTILITIES Nature Reserve 12 East Midlands Electricity Scheduled Ancient Monuments 65 British Gas, East Midlands NAVIGATION British Telecom, PeterBorough District Navigation Structures 4 Operational Locks 10 Non-operational Locks Front Cover: Maud Foster Mill CONTENTS Page Number 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The London Gazette, November 22, 1864. 5633
    THE LONDON GAZETTE, NOVEMBER 22, 1864. 5633 of the old River Witham and Barlings Ban, such And to deepen, widen, and alter, or remove, and works commencing at or near the junction of the . rebuild all other locks, bridges, sluices, milldams, old River Witham with the River Witham, in the '( staunches, floodgates, tunnels, haling paths, works, said parishes of Bardney and,, Branston or one and conveniences upon the said River Witham, of them, near Horsley Deeps Lock, and ter- ioutk Delph, the old River Witham, Barlings Eau, minating at or near Barlings Abbey Ruins, in the Jillinghay Skirth, Horncastle Navigation, and said parish of Barlings, and to widen, deepen, £yme Eau, or Sleaford Navigation respectively, scour, and otherwise improve or alter the tribu- >etween 'the respective commencements and termi- tary streams, drains, and watercourses falling into nations of the works hereinbefore mentioned; the old River Witham and Barlings Eau, between o alter the level of the top water therein, to alter those points, all which works are intended to be he level of and to stop up, alter, divert, or other- made and maintained from, in, through, or into the wise interfere with, either temporarily or perma- parishes, townships, and places following, or some nently, all'turnpike roads, public carriage roads of them, that is to say, Barlings, Stainfield, or other roads or ways, haling-paths, drains, Fiskerton, and Bardney, in the parts of Lindsey, streams, canals or railways, which it may bo and Branston, in the parts of Kesteven, in the necessary to interfere with for the purposes of the .county of Lincoln.
    [Show full text]
  • Agenda Cabinet
    AGENDA CABINET MONDAY, 10 OCTOBER 2005 10.30 AM COUNCIL CHAMBER, COUNCIL OFFICES, ST PETERS HILL, GRANTHAM Duncan Kerr, Chief Executive CABINET Councillor Mrs. Linda Neal (Leader/ Portfolio: Strategic MEMBERS: Partnerships), Councillor Peter Martin-Mayhew (Deputy Leader/Portfolio: Community Safety), Councillor Terl Bryant (Portfolio: Resources & Assets), Councillor Ray Auger (Portfolio: Healthy Environment), Councillor Paul Carpenter (Portfolio: Access and Engagement), Councillor Mrs Frances Cartwright (Portfolio: Organisational Development) and Councillor John Smith (Portfolio: Economic) Cabinet Support Lena Shuttlewood tel: 01476 406119 Officer: e-mail: [email protected] Members of the public are entitled to attend the meeting of the Cabinet at which key decisions will be taken on the issues listed on the following page. Key decisions are marked *. 1. Apologies 2. Minutes To approve the record of the Cabinet meeting held on 5th September 2005. (attached) 3. Declarations of Interest (if any) CATEGORY A PRIORITIES: 4. *SKDC Action Plan for Dealing with Anti-Social Behaviour Report number DCS28 by the Director of Community Services. (attached) 5. *Town Centre Action Plan: Consultation Draft Report of Representations received and Proposed Changes Report number PLA533 by the Head of Planning Policy & Economic Regeneration. (attached) EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC It is anticipated that, in accordance with Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public may be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business because of the likelihood that otherwise exempt information, as described in paragraphs 8 and 9 of Schedule 12A of the Act, would be disclosed to the public. 6. Bourne Core Area Redevelopment Proposals: Update Report number PLA531 by the Head of Planning Policy & Economic Regeneration.
    [Show full text]
  • (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Flood and Drainage Management
    County Offices Newland Lincoln LN1 1YL 3 December 2015 Flood and Drainage Management Scrutiny Committee A meeting of the Flood and Drainage Management Scrutiny Committee will be held on Friday, 11 December 2015 at 10.00 am in Committee Room One, County Offices, Newland, Lincoln LN1 1YL for the transaction of the business set out on the attached Agenda. Yours sincerely Tony McArdle Chief Executive Membership of the Flood and Drainage Management Scrutiny Committee (11 Members of the Council and 7 Other Voting Members) Councillors C L Strange (Chairman), Mrs V C Ayling (Vice-Chairman), A M Austin, C J T H Brewis, A Bridges, M Brookes, R G Fairman, J R Marriott, C R Oxby, C Pain and R A Renshaw Other Voting Members District Councillors: R Austin, Boston Borough Council I G Fleetwood, West Lindsey District Council D Jackson, City of Lincoln Council Mrs F M Martin MBE, East Lindsey District Council J Money, North Kesteven District Council B Russell, South Kesteven District Council M D Seymour, South Holland District Council FLOOD AND DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE AGENDA FRIDAY, 11 DECEMBER 2015 Item Title Pages 1 Apologies/Replacement Members 2 Declarations of Members' Interests 3 Minutes of the previous meeting of the Flood and Drainage 5 - 14 Management Scrutiny Committee held on 4 September 2015 4 Announcements by the Executive Councillor, Economic Verbal Development, Environment, Planning and Tourism and Report Senior Officers (Economy and Place) 5 Wrangle Sea Banks 15 - 18 (To receive a report by Mark Welsh, Flood Risk and Development Manager, which enables the Committee to consider the Wrangle Sea Banks scheme, for which the Witham Fourth District Internal Drainage Board is the lead agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Lincoln Policy Area Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Volume
    Lincoln Policy Area Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Volume One: Non-Technical Summary FINAL REPORT February 2010 The Lincoln Policy Area Partners JBA Office JBA Consulting Magna House South Street Atherstone Warwickshire CV9 1DF JBA Project Manager David Pettifer Revision History Revision Ref / Date Issued Amendments Issued to Initial Draft Report September 2009 Toby Forbes-Turner (1 copy) Greg Smith (1 copy) Toby Forbes-Turner (1 copy) Final Draft report November 2009 Greg Smith (1 copy) Toby Forbes-Turner (9 Final Report February 2010 copies) Greg Smith (1 copy) Contract This report describes work commissioned by The City of Lincoln Council, on behalf of The Lincoln Policy Area Partners. The City of Lincoln Council ‟s representative for the contract was Toby Forbes-Turner. Matthew Hemsworth of JBA Consulting carried out this work. Prepared by ....................................................................... Matthew Hemsworth BSc MSc Assistant Analyst Reviewed by ...................................................................... Karen Shuttleworth BEng Senior Engineer Purpose This document has been prepared as a draft report (initial stage) for The City of Lincoln Council. JBA Consulting accepts no responsibility or liability for any use that is made of this document other than by the Client for the purposes for which it was originally commissioned and prepared. JBA Consulting has no liability regarding the use of this report except to The City of Lincoln Council. 2009s3710 FINAL SFRA Volume 1 Non Technical.docx i Acknowledgments JBA would like to thank all those at Lincoln City Council, the Environment Agency and IDB's who provided information and data to support this project. Their assistance is gratefully acknowledged. Copyright © Jeremy Benn Associates Limited 2010 Carbon Footprint 388g A printed copy of this document will result in a carbon footprint of 305g if 100% post- consumer recycled paper is used and 388g if primary-source paper is used.
    [Show full text]