FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT STRATEGY CONSULTATION 2013

COMMITTEE CONSIDERATIONS

No Source Comments/Notes

1 Cllr Richard Leppington Email from Cllr Leppington Non committee member One of my constituents has asked me to ask the following question at the Environment and Communities County Councillor for Scrutiny Committee on 23 July 2013: -. Blakeney and Bream Is the Environment Agency happy to work with the farmers and villagers of on the basis of a “make do" flood defence option for the Awre Peninsula?

2 Cllr Tony Blackburn Letter from Mr William Alexander (Chairman Frampton on Severn Parish Council ) to Cllr Tony (Committee member) Blackburn – 9 June 2013

County Councillor for Firstly, thank you for attending your first parish meeting at Frampton on Severn which we hope you found Hardwicke and Severn useful. With regard to the revised Severn Estuary Strategy Document, we would comments as follows:

1) We are very grateful that Severn Voice took up the challenge back in 2011 and were successful in persuading the Environment Agency to carry out the consultation along acceptable lines.

2) With regard to Frampton on Severn parish, we are pleased that the accountability and ownership question of the to Canal has been resolved, and that the Canals & Rivers Trust and the Environment Agency will work together to ensure the continued status of the canal banks as protection for our village.

3) We are most concerned however for our neighbouring villages where maintenance of river defences is dependent on “when funds allow”. This maintenance should be entirely and 100% down to the Environment Agency to fund and maintain appropriately at all times and not left to chance.

4) We are pleased that no work to private landowner’s property can be carried out without their approval and this situation must be ongoing.

5) And most important of all – continual monitoring must take place not only at Frampton on Severn but in the whole of the Severn Voice area to ensure that the facts presented are supported by scientific evidence. 3 Cllr John Cordwell Draft minutes from the Severn Estuary Partnership meeting – 15 May 2013 Committee Member NFU Severn Estuary Stakeholders RH (Gloucestershire NFU Severn Estuary County Councillor for Stakeholders) Wotton Under Edge It was noted that during the last year, the Glos NFUSES have become a leading forum for issues associated with the Severn Estuary in Gloucestershire.

It was noted that Glos NFUSES has published a recent report, Gauging the tide, which RH suggested was a critical review of the current level of methods used to assess and manage flood risk in the upper Severn estuary. A copy of the report is available on the Severn Estuary Partnership website: http://bit.ly/1b8CqUr It was noted that some of the report’s recommendations are already being taken forward, including those related to:

A Tide gauge data; A Monitoring of existing well-established managed realignment; A Possible inclusion in the Southwest Strategic Regional Coastal Monitoring Programme which currently stops at Sharpness/; and A Long-term on site monitoring of erosion at specific locations.

It was noted that a sub-group of Glos NFUSES has been working with the Environment Agency in connection with the latter's Severn Estuary Flood Risk Management Strategy, to improve communication between local stakeholders and the Environment Agency. See Appendix One: http://bit.ly/14z540R

Severn Estuary Flood Risk Management Strategy 2013 Consultation VD gave a short presentation outlining the EA’s 2013 SEFRMS consultation.

Having recognised that the 2011 consultation could have been better, VD pointed out that the 2013 consultation would be more inclusive and would include:

A An offer of choices, not compulsory purchase A No ‘lines on maps’ A Actual monitoring and not relying on computer models A Better communications with affected communities

It was also noted that the EA had made technical changes using UKCP09 medium predictions (a 70cm rise rather than the 1m previously used). VD pointed out that this would mean less predicted coastal squeeze and associated habitat compensation. A copy of this presentation can be viewed at: http://bit.ly/11uvkZ1 4 Cllr Tony Blackburn Letter from Parish Council to Mr Quarrier Severn Estuary Partnership – 17 June 2013 (Committee member) Managing Flood Risk on the Severn Estuary Gloucestershire County Councillor for Hardwicke and Severn The Arlingham Parish Council has instructed me to write to you regarding the new consultation on Managing Flood Risk on the Severn Estuary Gloucestershire.

The Council considers that the EA’s criteria for establishing the business case for investment in flood defences remains fundamentally flawed and should be rejected for the following reasons

• It relies upon current asset value at a point in time with an unrealistic and inappropriate gearing ratio of over 20:1. Clearly there is a business case for investment at a significantly lower ratio. • A business case calculation should factor in the contribution the assets defended (businesses, agricultural land and residential property) makes to Gross Domestic Product over the lifetime of the flood defence. At the very least the investment requirement compared to the national and local tax take on that economic output should be evaluated so as to properly demonstrate the return for UK plc. The Council sees no evidence within the consultation proposals that proper business planning principles will inform decisions. • The EA’s formula is a crude method of rationing budget. It is not based on the principle of sound business planning. It will lead to ill-advised investment decisions that will do long term damage to the UK economy. • In short these proposals are akin to a property owner leaving a hole in their roof in an attempt to save money

The consultation document contains a section headed “Ongoing Local Discussions” which says that the EA will work with others “…….to explore further what could be achieved by working in partnership to maximise maintenance with the funding that is available each year.” Having waited for over a year for a revised consultation document it is far from acceptable to provide such little detail. Detailed proposals on this with a worked example should have been provided. Insufficient work has been done prior to consultation to develop this approach.

The consultation document does not reassure the Parish that owners of properties that may be affected by this proposal will be fully compensated for the reduction in asset value that would result from these EA proposals. The absence of reassurance on this fundamental issue for local residents is concerning.