Public Document
GREATER MANCHESTER PLANNING & HOUSING COMMISSION
DATE: Thursday 19 March 2020
TIME: 2.00 – 4.00pm
VENUE: GMCA - GMCA Boardroom GMCA Boardroom, GMCA Offices, Churchgate House 56 Oxford Street, Manchester M1 6EU
LOCATION: A location map and transport choices are available at the end of this agenda.
WIFI: Network: One Connect Password: iJnqP2=Hj!
AGENDA
1. WELCOME, INTRODUCTION AND APOLOGIES
2. CHAIRS ANNOUNCEMENTS AND URGENT BUSINESS
3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST 1 - 4
To receive declarations of interest in any item for discussion at the meeting. A blank form for declaring interests has been circulated with the agenda; please ensure that this is returned to the Governance & Scrutiny Officer at the start of the meeting.
4. MINUTES 5 - 12
To consider the approval of the minutes of the meetings held on 24 January 2020
5. A BED EVERY NIGHT UPDATE 13 - 16
Report of Molly Bishop, Strategic Lead, Greater Manchester Combined Authority
6. GREATER MANCHESTER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME (GMIP) 17 - 24
Presentation of Andy Bedford, GM Infrastructure Programme Lead, TfGM BOLTON MANCHESTER ROCHDALE STOCKPORT TRAFFORD BURY OLDHAM SALFORD TAMESIDE WIGAN
7. GREATER MANCHESTER FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE HIGH RISE TASK 25 - 50 FORCE UPDATE
Presentation of Jenni Seex, Head of Protection, GMFRS
8. CAPITAL FLOOD RISK INVESTMENT PROGRAMME AND FUTURE 51 - 70 FUNDING
Presentation of Helen Telfer, Planning and Growth Lead, Sustainable Places Team and Nick Pearson, Senior Advisor, Partnerships and Strategic Overview Team, Environment Agency
9. STORM CIARA AND DENNIS 71 - 76
Report of Jill Holden, Flood and Water Programme Mananger, GMCA
10. FUTURE MEETINGS
Thursday 23 July 2020 2.00 – 4.00pm Friday 23 October 2020 2.00 – 4.00pm Friday 22 January 2021 2.00 – 4.00pm Tuesday 23 March 2021 10.00 – 12 noon
For copies of papers and further information on this meeting please refer to the website www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk. Alternatively, contact the following Governance & Scrutiny Officer: [email protected] 0161 778 7009
This agenda was issued on Wednesday 11 March 2020 on behalf of Julie Connor, Secretary to the Greater Manchester Combined Authority, Churchgate House, 56 Oxford Street, Manchester M1 6EU
2
Planning and Housing Commission 19 March 2020
Declaration of Councillors’ interests in items appearing on the agenda
NAME: ______
Minute Item No. / Agenda Item No. Nature of Interest Type of Interest
Personal / Prejudicial /
Disclosable Pecuniary Personal / Prejudicial /
Page 1 Page Disclosable Pecuniary Personal / Prejudicial /
Disclosable Pecuniary Personal / Prejudicial /
Disclosable Pecuniary Agenda Item 3
PLEASE NOTE SHOULD YOU HAVE A PERSONAL INTEREST THAT IS PREJUDICIAL IN AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA, YOU SHOULD LEAVE THE ROOM FOR THE DURATION OF THE DISCUSSION & THE VOTING THEREON.
QUICK GUIDE TO DECLARING INTERESTS AT GM GROWTH BOARD MEETINGS This is a summary of the rules around declaring interests at meetings. It does not replace the Member’s Code of Conduct, the full description can be found in the GMCA’s constitution Part 7A. Your personal interests must be registered on the GMCA’s Annual Register within 28 days of your appointment onto a GMCA committee and any changes to these interests must notified within 28 days. Personal interests that should be on the register include: Bodies to which you have been appointed by the GMCA
Your membership of bodies exercising functions of a public nature, including charities, societies, political parties or trade unions. You are also legally bound to disclose the following information called DISCLOSABLE PERSONAL INTERESTS which includes: You, and your partner’s business interests (eg employment, trade, profession, contracts, or any company with which you are associated) You and your partner’s wider financial interests (eg trust funds, investments, and assets including land and property). Any sponsorship you receive. Page 2 Page FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THIS INFORMATION IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE
STEP ONE: ESTABLISH WHETHER YOU HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA If the answer to that question is ‘No’ – then that is the end of the matter. If the answer is ‘Yes’ or Very Likely’ then you must go on to consider if that personal interest can be construed as being a prejudicial interest. STEP TWO: DETERMINING IF YOUR INTEREST PREJUDICIAL?
A personal interest becomes a prejudicial interest: where the well being, or financial position of you, your partner, members of your family, or people with whom you have a close association (people who are more than just an acquaintance) are likely to be affected by the business of the meeting more than it would affect most people in the area.
the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgement of the public interest.
FOR A NON PREJUDICIAL INTEREST FOR PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS YOU MUST YOU MUST Notify the governance officer Notify the governance officer for the meeting as soon as you realise you have a prejudicial interest (before or during for the meeting as soon as you the meeting) realise you have an interest Inform the meeting that you have a prejudicial interest and the nature of the interest Inform the meeting that you Fill in the declarations of interest form have a personal interest and the nature of the interest Leave the meeting while that item of business is discussed
Fill in the declarations of Make sure the interest is recorded on your annual register of interests form if it relates to you or your partner’s interest form business or financial affairs. If it is not on the Register update it within 28 days of the interest becoming apparent. TO NOTE: YOU MUST NOT: You may remain in the room participate in any discussion of the business at the meeting, or if you become aware of your disclosable pecuniary Page 3 Page and speak and vote on the interest during the meeting participate further in any discussion of the business, matter participate in any vote or further vote taken on the matter at the meeting If your interest relates to a body to which the GMCA has appointed you to you only have to inform the meeting of that interest if you speak on the matter.
This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 4
PLANNING AND HOUSING COMMISSION MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 24 JANUARY 2020
COMMISSION MEMBERS
Mayor Paul Dennett GM Portfolio Holder – Chair Councillor Linda Robinson Rochdale Council Councillor Derek Antrobus Salford CC Jane Healey Brown Arup Matthew Harrison Great Places Housing Association
INVITED MEMBERS
Councillor Joanna Midgley Assistant Executive Member for Housing and Regeneration, Manchester CC Councillor Kevin Proctor Executive Member for Housing and Strategic Planning, Trafford Council
ADVISORS
Helen Telfer Environment Agency Derek Richardson Greater Manchester Ecology Unit Roy Hymas Natural England
SUPPORT OFFICERS
Lindsay Dunn GMCA Chris Findley GM Planning Lead Steve Fyfe GMCA Planning & Housing Team David Hodcroft GMCA Planning & Housing Team Jill Holden GMCA Anne Morgan GMCA Planning & Housing Team Steve Rumbelow GM Housing, Homelessness and Infrastructure Lead Chief Executive Lucy Woodbine GMCA Planning & Housing Team
01/20 WELCOME, INTRODUCTIONS AND APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillor Ged Cooney (Tameside), Councillor Suzanne Richards (Manchester CC) and Councillor Hannah Roberts (Oldham)
02/20 CHAIRS ANNOUNCEMENT AND URGENT BUSINESS
The Chair introduced both Ben Dosanjh and Matt Townsend to the Committee who were observing the meeting as part of their graduate training programme. Both are employed at Salford CC.
Page 5 03/20 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no declarations of interest made in relation to any item on the agenda.
04/20 MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD 12 SEPTEMBER 2019
The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2019 were presented for consideration.
RESOLVED/-
That the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2019 be approved.
05/20 PLANNING AND HOUSING COMMISSION REVISED TERMS OF REFERENCE
Members were advised that the Joint GMCA and AGMA Executive Board approved the revised terms of reference for the Planning and Housing Commission on 28 June 2019. The revised terms of reference had previously been presented for approval by the Planning and Housing Commission on 12 September 2019.
It had been highlighted that despite private sector engagement being recognised, it appeared that membership did not include a representative from the private sector Panel. It had also been advised that the reference to the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) should be corrected to Homes England (HE).
The Commission had agreed that the proposed amends would be completed and the revised terms of reference presented at the next meeting of the Planning and Housing Commission. These would then be presented to the Joint GMCA and AGMA Executive in June 2020 for approval.
It was reported that membership should include a representative from the GM Housing Providers Group. It was agreed that this would be amended to reflect the addition and the revised Terms of Reference would be presented to a future meeting of the Planning and Housing Commission.
RESOLVED/-
1. That the Planning and Housing Commission Terms of Reference be noted. 2. That membership of the Commission be amended to include a representative from the GM Housing Provider Group. 3. That the revised Terms of Reference be presented to a future meeting of the Planning and Housing Commission.
06/20 GM HOUSING MARKET MONITOR JANUARY 2020
Lucy Woodbine, Principal, Planning and Housing Research, GMCA provided members with an overview of housing market data in Greater Manchester. The data included published Government and local data.
The data pack and presentation provided an overview of the following areas;
GM Population o Historic population trends Page 6 o Spatial distribution of population o Population change 2016-2036 o Household incomes o Spatial distribution of household incomes GM Housing Stock o Tenure mix o Tenure change o Spatial distribution of tenure o Dwelling type o Council tax bands o Empty homes o Net additional dwellings o Completions Housing market – sales and private rents o Residential prices o Residential sales o Private rent Social Housing o Social Housing Registers o Right to Buy trends o GM Housing Provider Stock o Social housing stock Homelessness o Homeless decisions in Greater Manchester o Rough sleepers
Members thanked the Planning and Housing Research Team for the helpful overview and update. In discussion members considered affordability and the makeup of those living in high rise city centre apartments in both Manchester and Salford. The Commission requested further information with regards to the demography and income groups of those living in city centre apartments in order to gain a more thorough understanding of urban density and services required.
It was clarified that the 2021 census along with other lower level information sets, such as child and housing benefit data could provide records which would help attain evidence to understand GM population concentration. It was agreed that further research would be undertaken and an update reported to the Commission.
Going forward, the Commission requested the information which was presented on GM Housing Association stock, be provided by group structure. It was confirmed and agreed that this could be provided. It was further suggested that if required, data on social housing demolitions and swap transfer could be incorporated.
Members considered the data provided on housing starts and requested a breakdown of housing completions which had been funded from Section 106 monies. It was advised that this information was available and would be included as part of the next GM Housing Market Monitor.
The Chair highlighted the commitment to deliver at least 50,000 additional affordable homes by 2037 and suggested that a dashboard of progress from across all localities be included going forward.
Members discussed the impact of the issues faced by residents in cladded high rise properties. The Chair advised he had attended the GM High Rise Taskforce Page 7 quarterly resident’s forum the previous evening, where the issues faced by residents were highlighted. He informed the Commission that he had recently written to the Secretary of State calling for a ban on flammable cladding systems and an overhaul of the planning system to put fire safety at the heart of building design and construction. It was suggested that an update on the work undertaken by the GM High Rise Taskforce be provided to the GM Planning and Housing Commission.
The Commission raised concern with the growing elderly population, shortfall of accommodation and impact on social care budgets. It was advised that work had been undertaken in conjunction with the Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Partnership to ensure that the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF) was profiled to need, this included an additional 15,000 of supported housing for older people.
In summary the Chair clarified the Commission required further detail with regards to the demographics of city centre high rise in both Manchester and Salford. Furthermore, additional data on the progress made against the target of 50,000 affordable homes by 2037 including those funded through section 106 receipts. It was suggested that supplementary material with regards to the plans to develop integrated housing designed to respond to the challenges of social care be provided.
RESOLVED/-
1. That the Greater Manchester Housing Market Monitor be noted. 2. That further consideration be provided to include detail with regards to the demographics of city centre high rise in both Manchester and Salford in future Greater Manchester Housing Market Monitor updates. 3. That information on GM Housing Association stock be provided by group structure. 4. That a breakdown of housing completions funded by section 106 receipts be included as part of the next GM Housing Market Monitor update. 5. That a dashboard be developed which includes progress on the affordable homes target across all localities in future Greater Manchester Housing Market Monitor updates. 6. That an update on the work undertaken by the GM High Rise Taskforce be presented to a future GM Planning and Housing Commission meeting. 7. That further detail developed in the GMSF which respond to housing need be included in future Greater Manchester Housing Market Monitor updates.
07/20 GM FLOOD AND WATER MANAGEMENT REVIEW
Jill Holden, Flood and Water Programme Manager, GMCA provided the Commission with a review of the current organisational arrangements which had been established to support the delivery of flood and water management activity across Greater Manchester.
The fluvial and surface water risks across GM were outlined to members. The impact and costs of flooding in GM along with funding to date and opportunities to align further funding and investment in GM were provided. Members were informed that twelve Regional Flood and Coastal Committees (RFCC) had been established by the Environment Agency to agree investment priorities and approve the flood and coastal investment programme. Page 8
Flood and water governance changes and the benefits of the proposed approach were summarised. It was suggested that greater alignment was required between economic and infrastructure growth, therefore, stronger links should be made between the GM Strategic Infrastructure Board and the Planning and Housing Commission. It was advised that Greater Manchester had 3 political members on RFCC who were representative of Greater Manchester. It was proposed that the Planning and Housing Commission would be a conduit for RFCC members who should be invited to attend future meetings.
In discussion the Commission considered the importance of the local levy. It was suggested that a future update could be provided which demonstrated schemes which had benefited from the maximisation of investment from the local levy.
In summary, it was agreed that an annual update on the overall work programme and activities with regards to flood risk management, would be presented at a future meeting. Members would provide further consideration on the maximisation of the levy and the local budget contributions towards the investment programme. It was suggested that an update be received at a future meeting on the Regional Flood and Coastal Committees timetable for investment decisions and an overview from the Environment Agency (and United Utilities) on the existing flood risk management programme for Greater Manchester.
RESOLVED/-
1. That the report be noted. 2. That the GM representatives on the Regional Flood and Costal Committee be invited to attend future meetings of the GM Planning and Housing Commission. 3. That it be agreed that an update be received at a future meeting on: the Regional Flood and Coastal Committees timetable for investment decisions and overview from the Environment Agency (and United Utilities) on the existing flood risk management programme for Greater Manchester overview of schemes in GM which had benefited from maximization of the local levy annual report on water management 4. That an annual update on the overall work programme and activities with regards to flood risk management, be presented at a future meeting.
08/20 BIODIVERSITY NET GAIN IN GM: UPDATE ON PROGRESS
Roy Hymas, Senior Adviser, Planning and Net Gain, Natural England provided a presentation which provided an update on biodiversity net gain in GM since the last meeting of the Planning and Housing Commission.
It was advised that further engagement with Local Planning Authority’s (LPA) had taken place to better understand the current position of each along with strengths and weaknesses and opportunities for embedding biodiversity net gain.
Members were advised that the LPA action plan was one part of a GM-wide roadmap for biodiversity net gain to help deliver a strategic Nature Recovery Network for the city region. An overview of the action plan themes and next steps were provided. Page 9
Derek Richardson, GM Ecology Unit provided an outline of the work being undertaken by the GM Ecology Unit. Members were requested to consider the work, emerging themes along with issues and opportunities.
The Commission welcomed the presentation and initiatives to embed biodiversity net gain in GM. The mechanisms to deliver net gain from Section 106 receipts was requested. It was advised that there were opportunities to influence the financial contributions from Section 106 legal agreements to contribute to biodiversity net gain and management of green space.
It was recognised that GM Housing Providers had obligations to provide more sustainable housing and as such estates could be enhanced to offset against zero carbon and improve the environment.
The Commission considered how to become proactive on strategic investments and the opportunities under the GMSF and local development plans. It was confirmed that biodiversity net gain was part of the viability for the GMSF and formed part of the discussions with government on infrastructure.
Members discussed local development schemes that had a desirable impact on biodiversity net gain and it was suggested that case studies to illustrate this should be incorporated to highlight viability of biodiversity metrics. It was agreed that further feedback on development projects would be provided to the Commission. Furthermore, case studies were considered helpful to engage and assist in preparing developers prior to the mandatory introduction of the requirement for developments to achieve minimum 10% net gain. A brief overview of the Ignition project that aims to develop innovative financing solutions for investment in Greater Manchester’s natural environment was provided.
Future pooling of biodiversity net gains to improve health and wellbeing outcomes were considered. It was suggested that an update report should be prepared and presented to both GM Wider Leadership Team and GM Leaders to demonstrate the significant strategic gains for GM in the wider context of infrastructure.
RESOLVED/-
1. That the update be noted. 2. That case studies be presented to developers to highlight successful biodiversity projects. 3. That the future pooling of budgets be further considered. 4. That a future update be provided to the GM Wider Leadership Team and GM Leaders.
09/20 ‘A BED EVERY NIGHT UPDATE’
The item was deferred to the next meeting.
RESOLVED/-
That the update be deferred to the next meeting.
Page 10
10/20 HOUSING STRATEGY UPDATE
Steve Fyfe, Head of Housing Strategy, GMCA provided an update on progress in implementing the GM Housing Strategy.
Members were informed that GMCA approved the Greater Manchester Housing Strategy in June last year, and requested an implementation plan be developed to steer and track progress in the delivery of the complex and wide-ranging agenda set out in the Strategy.
It was agreed that a copy of the implementation plan, which sets out activity in the period up to the end of December 2019, and current and future action would be circulated to Members.
RESOLVED/-
1. That the update be noted. 2. That the implementation plan be circulated to Planning and Housing Commission members.
11/20 GREATER MANCHESTER SPATIAL FRAMEWORK (GMSF) UPDATE
Anne Morgan, Head of Planning Strategy, GMCA provided a verbal update on the Plan for Homes, Jobs and the Environment – Greater Manchester Spatial Framework (GMSF). The Commission were advised of the process, the key issues raised during the consultation and the next steps.
RESOLVED/-
That the update be noted.
12/20 TOWN CENTRE UPDATE
The item was deferred to the next meeting.
RESOLVED/-
That the update be deferred to the next meeting.
13/20 DATES OF FUTURE MEETINGS
Thursday 19 March 2020 2.00 – 4.00pm Thursday 23 July 2020 2.00 – 4.00pm Friday 23 October 2020 2.00 – 4.00pm Friday 22 January 2021 2.00 – 4.00pm Tuesday 23 March 2021 10.00 – 12 noon
The meetings will take place in the Boardroom at Churchgate House
Page 11 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 5
GREATER MANCHESTER PLANNING AND HOUSING COMMISSION
Date: 19 March 2020
Subject: A Bed Every Night
Report of: Molly Bishop, Homelessness Strategic Lead, Greater Manchester Combined Authority
PURPOSE OF REPORT
This report provides an update on work undertaken on the emergency rough sleeper programme ‘A Bed Every Night’ (ABEN).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Members are asked to:
note the update provided; note that a report will be taken to Greater Manchester Combined Authority on 27 March 2020 to confirm the funding envelope for Phase 3 and detail the contributions necessary to achieve this
CONTACT OFFICERS
Molly Bishop, Homelessness Strategic Lead, Greater Manchester Combined Authority [email protected]
Page 13
1.0 UPDATED PROGRESS SNAPSHOT
2.0 PHASE 3 DEVELOPMENT
2.1 As well as providing an invaluable source of accommodation and move on support to over 3000 people, ABEN has supported a 37% reduction in rough sleeping across Greater Manchester over the last 2 years.
2.2 The A Bed Every Night Interim Report 2020 demonstrates key areas of benefit in the current service and highlights scope for continued improvement. This has informed development focus on the following key areas:
Consistency and quality assurance; access, accommodation, support and move on options are consistent across GM at a high level, and customers and stakeholders can be clear on what to expect from the service
Place based integration with existing support infrastructure; wider support from public and community organisations is embedded effectively to promote recovery and re-connection
Specific cohort based accommodation and support; for those with No Recourse to Public Services, multiple and complex needs, young people and women
Page 14
Enhanced health support pathways; maximising referral and access into specialist health support (e.g. Chapman Barker Unit1)
Integrated data and reporting regime; aligning A Bed Every Night data regime with existing systems to enhance quality and impact of data
2.3 Development meetings with Local Authorities have taken place to scope the opportunities for development within these areas and to shape a new specification and commissioning process.
2.4 Wider consultation will be carried out with key stakeholders over the course of the next month to finalise the specification, and lead into the commissioning process from April 2020.
3.0 INVESTMENT PHASE
3.1 Since its inception ABEN has benefited from a joint investment approach that recognises an urgent humanitarian crisis. It is expected that Phase 3, from July 2020 to June 2021, will require a £6m envelope. Investment conversations are ongoing with key stakeholders to secure this.
3.2 It should be noted that GMCA may receive monies through a range of additional identified funding streams over the period of Phase 3:
MHCLG Winter Provision: GMCA is already in dialogue with MHCLG regarding the annual Cold Weather Fund. GMCA will be seeking an overall GM allocation to invest into ABEN (as the GM approach to Severe and Emergency Weather Provision).
Government Spending Review: GMCA has consistently communicated to Centre Government departments that additional funding is needed for ABEN and that a match funded national contribution is required to enable Greater Manchester to end rough sleeping as per Government targets.
3.3 A report will be taken to Greater Manchester Combined Authority on 27th March 2020 to confirm the funding envelope for Phase 3 and detail the contributions necessary to achieve this.
1 Chapman Barker Unit is a Tier 4 Alcohol and Substance Misuse detox provision – work is ongoing to secure a referral pathway from ABEN and Housing First into this provision.
Page 15 This page is intentionally left blank GREATER MANCHESTER GREATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME MANCHESTER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME Page 17 Page Agenda Item 6
Planning and Housing Commission - 1 March 2020
1 What is GMIP? GREATER MANCHESTER Ground-breaking plan to ensure GM has strategic infrastructure to meet its ambitions INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME
What is GMIP?
GMIP is the ground-breaking Greater Manchester Infrastructure Programme: o GMIP is a natural evolution of the GM Transport Fund: GM’s ambitious plan to take a wider approach to strategic management and delivery of all of its infrastructure needs, not just transport. Page 18 Page o We want GMIP to be a multi-year, multi-decade investment programme, co-funded by Government and GM, to deliver the transport and economic infrastructure GM needs to realise its full economic potential and play its full part in rebalancing the national economy, delivering inclusive growth and achieving carbon neutrality. o The Vision for GMIP 18 months from now is to deliver an in-principle 10 year capital and revenue funding settlement with Government sufficient to deliver all the economic infrastructure GM needs to 2025-30... o …with ongoing arrangements to continue funding and delivering GM’s strategic infrastructure beyond that with a programme that pioneers a fundamentally new way to fund and deliver infrastructure at a city region level.
2 What is GMIP? GREATER MANCHESTER Ground-breaking plan to ensure GM has strategic infrastructure to meet its ambitions INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME
What is GMIP trying to achieve?
Equipping Greater Manchester with the strategic infrastructure it needs to meet its ambitions: o Closing the GVA gap with the rest of the country through employment and productivity growth, ensuring that this growth is inclusive, with all residents contributing and benefitting from GM’s success,
o 19 Page Over the next two decades (by 2040) GM needs to attract and accommodate 200,000 new jobs, an additional 300,000 people and over 220,000 new homes, o Delivering the 2040 Transport Delivery Plan to give GM world class connections that support long-term, sustainable economic growth and access to opportunity for all, and enabling 600,000 more daily trips on GM’s transport system, o Working towards the long-term vision of a carbon-zero GM by 2038.
3 What is GMIP? GREATER MANCHESTER Ground-breaking plan to ensure GM has strategic infrastructure to meet its ambitions INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME
How much could GMIP deliver? o Transport Fund 1 reached around 0.5% of GVA (£300m) per year over ten years. o Initial estimates suggest that the 2040 Transport Strategy requires around 1% pa of GVA (£600m p.a. today, and more in the future as GM grows), around £15bn by 2045. This is twice the investment rate achieved under TF1. Page 20 Page o It would also involve sustaining this rate for 25 years – more than twice as long as was achieved under Transport Fund 1. o To deliver the housing and employment growth identified in GM’s Spatial Framework of over 200,000 new jobs and at 220,000 new homes by 2040, and help to deliver a zero carbon GM by 2038, transport will not be the only consideration. Work underway to define the size of the ask, but could be a programme of around £20 billion. o Discussions continuing with Government on local contributions.
4 What infrastructure will GMIP deliver? GREATER MANCHESTER GMIP has two arms: strategic influencing and direct funding & delivery of infrastructure INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME
The table below shows how the two arms of GMIP (strategic influencing of infrastructure delivered by others and direct funding and delivery of infrastructure schemes by GM) align to the infrastructure types within the Infrastructure Framework.
Infrastructure Type
• Roll out of full • Strategic road • Influencing of fibre networks and rail projects UU and EA • National energy and 5G by • Influencing and delivered by investment and GMIP role is mix and national policy setting for • Influencing of Highways closer alignment decarbonisation providers and delivery of green UU investment influencing and England and with GMCA / direction of of grid Network Rail Government / blue and closer Page 21 Page District planning infrastructure by alignment with infrastructure • Retrofit of • Major national • Co-ordination of & development third parties, GMCA / District existing digital projects delivered by projects (e.g. • Joint working developers and planning & commercial and with major others HS2, NPR) groups on flood infrastructure development residential stock infrastructure protection with providers • EV take up by providers (e.g. UU and EA private sector UU and ENWL)
• Public Estate schemes for • Delivery of • Site energy efficiency • Potential for site transport infrastructure / generation interventions on • Site • Site schemes by schemes GMIP role is full fibre / 5G infrastructure infrastructure • Low carbon TfGM and involving new direct funding and once national schemes schemes housing & Districts within supply roll-out involving flood involving green delivery of interventions on Transport infrastructure or programmes are risk and and blue infrastructure sites Delivery Plan innovative clearer and any drainage infrastructure solutions to schemes • Transport gaps interventions provision • Transport harvest surface interventions on established schemes for water decarbonisation sites / modal shift
5 Draft Scheme Prioritisation Being Explored
Draft appraisal metrics for informing the prioritisation process GREATER MANCHESTER INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME
Prioritisation maximises impact on levelling up, subject to the whole programme meeting programme minima. Lead Metric – Levelling Up Programme Minima – Inclusion and Environment
GM GVA per capita Metric Minima 1 – Inclusivity Net impact GVA per capita per £ of cost, Better than [average] improvement in economic opportunity for [x%] most disadvantaged adjusting for differences in household incomes households as a whole (treated as 11th virtual district). † and cost of living (including housing). Economic opportunity defined as access by sustainable transport (public transport and Page 22 Page Means £1 of additional wages equal to £1 of active modes) to earnings opportunities and cost of living adjusted. reduction in housing costs/reduction in fuel bills.
plus Minima 2 – Geographic balance
An income weighting which means £1 of No GM district to get less than [x%] of the average % improvement in economic wage/saving to a less well off household scores opportunity . † higher than the same saving to a better off one (using Green Book method). Measured at the district level, with economic opportunity defined as for minima 1 but using all mode accessibility, which means it reflects a district’s car ownership levels.
Measured on a per-capita basis to better align to Green Book, as it nets out displacement. Minima 3 – Environment and health GMIP must [enable zero carbon development by 2028] reduce [accumulated CO2 † Schemes appraised based on their mature emissions] to support delivery of zero carbon in GM by 2038, and improve [air quality]. impact (20 years out from the final year of investment), and their whole-life public cost Means although other programmes deliver the bulk of the 2038 target, GMIP will contribute impact (i.e. net of third party income / revenue) and not move GM away from zero carbon trajectory.
† The precise measurements for the minima binding constraints will be agreed following development of baseline economic analysis 6 How is GMIP Funded? GREATER MANCHESTER Ground-breaking plan to ensure GM has strategic infrastructure to meet its ambitions INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMME o Households and consumers ultimately fund all new infrastructure. This occurs through a variety of channels. Government funded infrastructure is paid for via tax. Infrastructure paid for in this way is covered in the ‘fiscal remit’ of the National Infrastructure Commission. o Infrastructure funded by the private sector is paid for through bills and charges paid by households, businesses, consumers and the public sector (for example water and gas bills). o
Page 23 Page The government has given the National Infrastructure Commission a long term funding guideline for public capital expenditure, the ‘fiscal remit’. The Commission “must be able to demonstrate that its recommendations for economic infrastructure are consistent with, and set out how they can be accommodated within, gross public investment in economic infrastructure of between 1.0% and 1.2% of GDP in each year up to 2050”. o We understand the scale of the challenge we have; we know it will require local contributions which will be challenging. We are in discussions with Government on local contributions. As these conversations progress will bring a further update to PHC.
7 This page is intentionally left blank GM High Rise Task Force Overview Page 25 Page Agenda Item 7 March 2020 GM High Rise Task Force: Context
• Created by the Mayor following the fire at Grenfell Tower • Chaired by Paul Dennett, City Mayor of Salford and GMCA Housing Page 26 Page Lead • Purpose is to oversee the response across Greater Manchester and co-ordinate activity to ensure no similar incident occurs within GM • Ensure services are prepared to respond in the event of a large scale incidents • Ensure the safety of residents in high rise buildings, provide reassurance and develop new ways of approaching fire safety GM High Rise Task Force: Members
• All ten Local Authorities • Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service • Social Housing Providers
Page 27 Page • Representatives of Managing Agents • Civil Contingencies Unit • Electricity North West • NHS & Public Health England • Universities GM High Rise Task Force Work Page 28 Page GMFRS Activity
• All high rise residential buildings were pro-actively inspected • Full audits undertaken on 495 buildings in the months following Grenfell • Action Plans issued where appropriate for the housing provider / managing Page 29 Page agent to review and update the fire risk assessment and identify the nature of cladding materials • Where notified that the cladding was ACM and / or failed a Government test or another system which posed a significant risk of external fire spread the Government required interim measures to be considered and where necessary implemented – this approach has also been applied to other non-compliant systems • No prohibition notices to date but this cannot be ruled out The GM Approach to inspection and regulation • Resident safety is the primary consideration • Focus on ensuring that where necessary immediate action is taken to
Page 30 Page mitigate the risk and longer term strategies are in place • Monitoring of interim measures to ensure they are robustly managed • Support and reassurance for residents – attending residents meetings, responding to complaints • Working with housing providers to minimise costs – utilising a procurement framework for fire alarms and retrospective installation of sprinklers • Where all work is undertaken providing written confirmation to landlords to share with residents – reassurance that their building is safe Work with Housing Providers & Managing Agents • Inspections of Building • Action plans • Interim Measures - Assurance Visits Page 31 Page • Enforcement as a last resort • Fire Safety Alerts – sharing advice notes • Supporting intervention with residents • Balcony Fire Safety • Bonfire safety • Closure letters • Flat front doors GM High Rise Task Force: Influencing the national picture • Supporting national workstreams looking at future standards • Lobbying Government to make funding available - both Andy Page 32 Page Burnham and Paul Dennett have written to Government • Response to national consultations • Working on the development of GM standards for fire safety that can be implemented in advance of legislative changes • Keeping the High Rise Task Force a key priority for services Emerging Issues
• Post Grenfell - ACM Cladding • Grenfell Inquiry •
Page 33 Page Day 1: Dr Barbara Lane - Stay Put should have been abandoned at 1:42am • Day 96 Dr Barbara Lane – the Certificate for cladding was not valid • Day 96 Professor Luke Bisby • Stay Put not appropriate from the date cladding installed • “Likely” that a fire anywhere near the window would breach out and into the cladding • Compartmentation compromised as soon as 11 minutes after the fire started at 12:54am Areas of uncertainty
• Changes to legislation • Current consultations • Timeframes Page 34 Page • Scale of work • MHCLG tests • Emerging issues • Compartmentation • External Fire Spread • Fire Doors • Funding • Campaigning Emerging Issues – Government Response
• Fire contained within flats for 60 • 3 routes to compliance minutes • Desktop Study X • No external fire spread in • Large Scale Fire Test ? Page 35 Page buildings over 18 metres • Complies with ADB – Certificate ? • 60 minutes compartmentation • Manse Masterdor tested by MPS – failed at 15 minutes. Further tests of internally composite doors 5 /6 failed • Fire doors prevent spread of fire • Testing of wooden doors ongoing but and smoke internally so far products have passed Vital for Fire Safety & Operational • Fire Stopping generally poor Fire Fighting throughout buildings • Structural defects – no cavity barriers Impact of emerging issues
• Cannot assume that buildings which are certified as compliant with ADB will not have external fire spread
Page 36 Page • Increased focus / concerns in relation to Stay Put • Speed of fire spread quicker than earlier thought • Experience of buildings in GM the risk is not related to cladding systems – widespread problems with compartmentation • Cost of remedying construction defects is significant • Balancing risk – likelihood vs consequence • Poor building standards not restricted to High Rise The Changing National Picture (1)
• Government response led by Department for Communities and Local Government – now Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government Page 37 Page • Established ‘Building Safety Programme’ • Required FRS to inspect buildings • Created Independent Expert Advisory Panel • Implemented testing arrangements - ACM Cladding only • Required LAs to gather data on private blocks • Ministerial changes & changes to officials The Changing National Picture (2) Timeline for the Hackitt Review 14th June 2017 – Fire at Grenfell Tower th Page 38 Page 28 July 2018 – Government announcement independent review of building regulations and fire safety 30th August 2017 - Review Terms of Reference published 12th September 2017 – Call for evidence 18th December 2017 – Interim report published 22nd January 2018 – Industry Summit held & working groups established – feedback March 2018 17th May 2018 Final Report published The GM HRTF Response to Hackitt • Welcomed the report and proposal that safety should be embedded from the Planning Stage • Disagreed scope should be buildings >30metres – suggested starting
Page 39 Page point of 18metres & rolled out to other buildings • Proposal for a JCA welcomed • Unified Regulator (of existing partners) not a further tier • Enhanced sanctions required • Should operate on full cost recovery basis • Agreed Dutyholders should be clearly identified • duty to maintain and handover safety documents • JCA to host digital platform of accessible information Greater Manchester High Rise Taskforce Page 40 Page Resident’s Survey – Key Findings
December 2019 DEMOGRAPHICS
• A total of 172 responses were received to the survey
• Tenure: • 50% leaseholders • 27% renting from housing association • 17% renting from private landlord Page 41 Page • 6% ‘other’ (i.e. living rent free, renting from friends and family)
• 76% of residents have lived in their flat for longer than two years
• Over 70% of residents responding to this survey said their building has cladding. Of those who said their building has cladding, approximately 70% said their cladding has been identified as a concern following a fire risk assessment
• 77% of residents responding to the survey live in high rise buildings. FIRE SAFETY • 65% of residents were concerned about having a fire
• 77% of residents who live in a building where cladding was identified as a risk were concerned about having a fire compared with 48% of residents
Page 42 Page living in buildings where cladding has not been identified as a risk
• 70% of residents thought they were ‘not very likely’ or ‘not at all likely’ to have a fire in their flat residents were most concerned that other residents may not take the same precautions as them
• 98% of residents have working smoke alarms just over a quarter said they test them either weekly or monthly. Approx. 30% do not test their smoke alarms or test them very infrequently. EVACUATION PROCEDURES • A third of residents did not know the evacuation procedures for their building
• Some residents said they had forgotten them; others incorrectly stated the evacuation strategy for their building some residents thought they were Page 43 Page to ‘stay put’, but they should be evacuating when the alarm sounds
• 20% of residents said they would not be able to evacuate safely and a further 20% were unsure if they could evacuate safely. Some residents said their concerns about evacuating safely have not been taken seriously by their landlord. COMMUNICATIONS AND ENGAGEMENT • 40% of residents had previously sought fire safety advice. Almost all residents would trust GMFRS most to provide fire safety advice
• 30% of residents receive fire safety information from their landlord/managing agent at least every few months 55% said they receive information very Page 44 Page infrequently or never receive information about fire safety
• Preferred formats for receiving advice: • 65% like face to face visits • 63% like accessing advice online • 50% like leaflets or posters in the building • Social media, text messages, emails and online videos were also popular formats FINANCIAL IMPACT Analysis of the free text responses showed us what residents have been experiencing over the past 18 months:
“My service charge has increased from £90 per month to £480 per month to cover cladding replacement” Page 45 Page “We are facing £30,000 per flat costs [to have cladding removed]”
“They are saying there will be between £1,000-£2,000 added each month to our service charge to cover the work”
“Charged £10,000 for works, some not done, mostly done to a poor standard. Work has not started but management company has proposed cost of works to be added to our maintenance charge. Approximately an extra £1,000 per month.” FINANCIAL IMPACT Residents have also experienced problems when trying to sell or re-mortgage their flats:
“The sale fell through due to the cladding situation”
Page 46 Page “I have been trying to sell my apartment for the past 15 months. Two buyers have backed out of the sale as there was no cladding report and no cladding test was done till April 2019. I'm still finding it hard to sell my apartment and move on”
“Could not remortgage as identified unsuitable cladding report so had to stay with current provider, meaning a worse rate”
“Only cash buyers offering 30% less than the normal price” FINANCIAL IMPACT
“My wife and I do want to move out but due to cladding on [our building] we cannot sell or get a mortgage on a new property so are "stuck" in [our building]”
“The sale fell through as we didn't have a fire safety certificate. We have now been told that our property is worth zero which has had a very damaging affect on our Page 47 Page relationship and mental health”
“Unable to remortgage… Our building has not had a new survey done so we cannot confirm the building meets the fire regs. This is costing me an extra £170 per month”
“Tried to sell but buyer’s mortgage lenders requested a document that [managing agent] couldn't provide… the buyer has since dropped out.” Challenges
NFCC Information Media Operational Campaigning Page 48 Page Consultations Guidance Residents MHCLG Reassurance Political Home Expectations Legislative Office Changes Information Enforcement
Disputes Next Steps
• Developing a HR Task Force Workplan • Expanded scope of buildings affected • Developing guidance and support for responsible persons Page 49 Page • Providing consistent advice to developers • Reviewing existing approaches • Refreshing fire safety advice • Ongoing support for residents • Developing a GM Standard • Continue to influence the national picture This page is intentionally left blank Greater Manchester Flood Risk Investment Programme and Future Funding Page 51 Page
Presentation to Greater Manchester Planning and Housing Commission, 19th March 2020
• Helen Telfer – Planning and Growth Lead, Sustainable Places Team Agenda Item 8 • Nick Pearson – Senior Advisor, Partnerships and Strategic Overview Team An overview of:
• Flood risk across Greater Manchester – why invest? • Recent flood events
• Environment 52 Page Agency Investment Programme • Local Levy • Government Commitment / National Infrastructure Commission • Working with partners on strategic infrastructure issues/opportunities for co- delivery
2 Current Flood Risk Page 53 Page
Fluvial risk: 19,000 properties within Flood Zone 3 3 63, 000 properties within Flood Zone 2 Surface water risk:
38,000 properties up to 1% chance/yr Page 54 Page
163, 000 properties up to 0.1% chance/yr Future Flood Risk?? Page 55 Page Previous Flood Events
Storm Eva devastated Greater Manchester on Boxing Day 2015
• 2200 properties, across 65 (many of them deprived) communities, in 8 Local Authority districts.
• At least £11.5m in infrastructure damage
• 56 Page 500 businesses flooded.
• 31,200 properties without power
• KPMG estimated cost across the north at £5bn.
• Future economic – potential GVA impact of £160.8m/day.
More recently…..
March 2019 July 2019 February 2020 (2nd highest on record at a number of sites in GM) Flood Risk Capital Investment Programme
Nationally (England) - £2.6bn over 6 years between 2015/16 – 2020/21
In return: 300,000 residential properties in reduced risk band, with a target of 10% efficiencies and 15% partnership funding across the 6 year period.
Next spending review period is beyond March 2021 and we have been working with government to develop the terms of that. We wait for confirmation of the terms of the settlement. Page 57 Page Partnership Funding
Principles of Partnership Funding are expected to remain in the next SR, with some changes to the calculations.
It will be important for Risk Management Authorities to work together to identify PF opportunities, early.
Develop a Partnership Funding Strategy for the Flood Risk Investment Programme.
‘Inland flood defences save the UK £1.1 billion a year, ABI (2019)’ In Greater Manchester 2015 – 2021.
• 4909 residential properties in a lower risk band.
• Salford 2nd Basin (1100), Worsley Brook culvert (260), Westleigh (230).
Page 58 Page • Significant project development in Bury and Rochdale Boroughs, with a start on site in Radcliffe and Redvales this FY. Example of ongoing flood risk project in Bury
Summary
Radcliffe and Redvales devastated by Storm Eva.
Reduction of risk to ~900 residential property. £~324m total economic benefits. Page 59 Page Funding
FCRM Grant in Aid £27.7m
Deprived Communities Fund (Booster funding) £7m
RFCC Local Levy £3m
Bury Council - £2m Including a number of schemes led by Local Authorities
• Large SW and ordinary watercourse schemes delivered across the Combined Authority in Rochdale, Oldham, Wigan, Bolton among others.
• Used a variety of funding sources – GiA, Levy and Council contributions. Page 60 Page • Little contribution from sources beyond those mentioned above. Important to begin to develop other sources if programme is to be maximised and to develop complementary infrastructure programmes. Environment Agency Flood Risk Infrastructure
Annual Asset Management Costs - £2.9m
Current flood Page 61 Page defences protect 10,800 properties Locations of projects within Current Capital Investment Programme 2019 – 2021 (allocated)
~£55m of GiA and LL spent 2015 -
Page 62 Page 2021 Future capital flood risk investment programme (Beyond March 2021)
• Dependent on funding settlement… but.. • 80 Potential projects • Up to 7,000 residential properties at
Page 63 Page reduced risk • Opportunities for links into major development and infrastructure projects. Local Levy
• £4.1m/yr contributed by local authorities across the north west of England and forms a source of Partnership Funding to flood projects.
• Contribution by GM c.£1.4m/year
• The balance at the start of the FY was £7m but the is forecast to 64 Page reduce significantly by 2023/4.
Increased competition for this pot on projects such as ageing assets and other funding sources need to be identified.
Example LL contributions
• Radcliffe and Redvales £3m • Rochdale and Littleborough £3m • Westleigh Brook £0.3m • Culvert refurbishment across GM £0.5m Page 65 Government Strategy Page 66 Page
16 Working with GM and Partners
• Infrastructure investment enables prosperity, social inclusion and ensures that
Page 67 Page Greater Manchester is resilient to potential shocks and stresses
…This will require collaboration and innovation across a number of partners/funding programmes.
17 Working with GM and Partners Page 68 Page Key discussion points for PHC to consider:
• Sources of partnership funding • Influence on Local Levy spend
• How 69 Page can PHC and its members support the delivery of the flood risk investment programme
19 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Item 9
GREATER MANCHESTER PLANNING AND HOUSING COMMISSION
Date: 19 March 2020
Subject: Greater Manchester Flood Event Report – Storm Ciara and Dennis
Report of: Jill Holden, Flood and Water Management Programme Manager, Greater Manchester Combined Authority
PURPOSE OF REPORT
To update the Commission on the flood events from storm Ciara and Dennis.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Greater Manchester Planning Housing Commission is requested to
Note the contents of the report.
CONTACT OFFICERS Jill Holden, Flood and Water Management Programme Manager ([email protected]) Anne Morgan, head of Planning Strategy ([email protected]) David Hodcroft, Principal ([email protected])
Page 71 1.0 Greater Manchester - Storm Ciara and Dennis. 1.1 Storm Ciara hit Greater Manchester 1200 9th February 2020 – Met Office. (GM) on 9th February 2020 with wind speed in excess of 80mph. Fallen trees affected Metrolink trams including services to Rochdale, Bury and East Didsbury and flooding affected train services in several areas including Todmorden, Rochdale, Manchester Victoria, Bolton and Piccadilly. 1.2 Bolton, Bury, Rochdale, Tameside and Wigan all reported properties flooded from a combination of sources e.g. culvert surcharge, river and highway surface water run- off. 1.3 The total number of flooded properties collated from the EA and Local Authorities are 71 residential, 23 businesses. 1.4 All reports of flooding are still being investigated and figures may change once the validation process is complete. United Utilities (UU) are still investigating reports of flooded properties that fall within their remit and will provide an update in due course. 1.5 Storm Dennis hit the region on 18th February 2020 but no reports of flooding to properties have been received in GM following the storm. However there was disruption to motorways and local roads. 1.6 As no properties are known to have flooded during storm Dennis the following report is focused on the impact of storm Ciara.
2.0 Local river levels and rainfall data
2.1 River levels recorded on the River Irwell and River Roch were significant, recording the 2nd highest level on record at the following three river gauges:
Blackford Bridge, Bury (R. Roch, just upstream of Irwell confluence – this gauge has been in place since 1948) Bury Ground, Bury (R. Irwell) and Littleborough (R. Roch) (3 of the 4 largest events on record have happened between March 2019 and now). The highest at these stations was Boxing Day 2015.
Page 72 2.2 Rainfall data at key points in the upper catchments - the higher figures are equivalent to more than a month’s rainfall in half a day. Many of the flooded locations are the same as Storm Eva, 2015.
Holden Wood (Upper Irwell) 70mm in 12 hours Bacup (Upper Irwell) 69mm in 12 hours Cowm (Upper Irwell)/(Upper Roch) 40mm in 12 hours.
3.0 Warning and informing
3.1 The EA issued 30 flood warnings to areas across GM.
3.2 Flood defence assets across the Greater Manchester area were operated, reducing the risk to 12,000 properties. This included the operation of the two Salford flood storage basins, Littleton Road and Castle Irwell, as well as clearance of many debris screens.
4.0 Flooding impact on districts.
4.1 Bolton – 25 households and 5 business properties
Flooding to Riverside Drive, Prestolee from the River Irwell to 25 homes. Council team including 10 x Adult Social Care, 2 x Housing, 2 x Forward Incident Officers, Neighbourhood Services and Waste visited the area to assess needs and respond accordingly. Neighbourhood Services are carrying out clean up to the properties. One family is displaced and will be out of their home for six months. Electricity and gas supplies were temporary affected but were restored by Tuesday 11th February. Riverside Drive, Prestolee, Bolton was also flooded during Storm Eva, 2015 with over 50 homes reporting flood damage. Since 2015 the Environment Agency have been looking at the viability of flood defences.
4.2 Bury - 32 households and 4 business properties
Key areas affected were Warth Road and Openshaw Fold. Residents were evacuated Sunday morning and some are still displaced. Skips have been provided through Six Town Housing and clean up continues. The Fire Service attended to assist residents trapped from flood water. The EA and their contractors (BAM) working on Radcliffe and Redvales Flood Risk Management Scheme (Phase 1) tried to plug the public access gaps in the defences, to reduce risk of flooding to Close Park, Bury. This was not successful and water levels overtopped every temporary defence and inundated the park. Flooding occurred halfway up the top car park and cabins have been under 1.8m of water along with some of the plant machinery.
Page 73 Work was also carried out to fill the gaps at end of Morris Street by creating a temporary bund which prevented flooding to around 100 properties. 4.3 Rochdale – 14 businesses
Confirmed reports of flooding to 14 businesses from the Greenvale Business Park / Todmorden Road area of Littleborough. Most were 1 – 12inches depth of floodwater. On the whole the main disruption was some loss of stock, cleaning up and some lost production time while this was done. Most were back in business later the same day or the following day after cleaning up. There was also some issues with traffic accessing and using Todmorden Road whilst the flooding was occurring. There was requests to close Todmorden Road but the peak of flooding happened so quickly, that it soon dissipated afterwards and once officers could get there, it was not required to be closed at that point.
Some flooding to cellars and external properties, including garages and gardens were also reported and will be investigated further to ascertain if there is any issues that can be rectified or mitigated to help reduce further future risk.
4.4 Tameside – 8 households
On the weekends of 8/9 and 15/16 February drainage engineers and maintenance crews were deployed to ensure critical drainage inlet structures were inspected and cleared. A total of 8 properties were flooded during storm Ciara from surcharging or blocked culverts in Hyde and Dukinfield. The following working week gangs responded to impacts from storm Ciara and Dennis and reports from residents. No additional resources had to be brought in with the exception of road sweepers which were deployed across the borough to help remove debris for main roads. 4.5 Wigan – 4 households
Flooding to 3 residential properties and a block of flats (ground floor lift space) were reported. Source of flooding was from different sources including highway run-off, blocked culvert and poorly maintained private ditch. In addition there were numerous highway issues. 4.6 United Utilities – River Irwell, Kearsley pipe bridge,
Kearsley pipe bridge damaged due to high water levels. The bridge carried sewage from Kearsley Pumping Station to Bolton Wastewater Treatment Works as well as the pumping station power supply. UU electronically isolated the pumping station and flows were pumped via a temporary pipe carried by another bridge over the river. Samples were taken and there was no impact on water quality.
Page 74
5.0 Flood Recovery Framework - Resilience Grants
5.1 The Government to provide further support under the Flood Recovery Framework, to district or unitary local authority areas that have 25 or more flooded households. Bury and Bolton Councils are the only districts in Greater Manchester where properties are eligible.
6.0 Next Steps
6.1 Community engagement - drop in sessions have been arranged for flood affected areas in Bury and Bolton to engage with the community and help verify flood outlines. Information collected will feed into the section 19 investigations and in turn improve the evidence base to inform future projects.
6.2 Long term engagement - approaches are needed across all areas at risk by providing an honest broker/trusted contact for the community especially in more vulnerable areas. Explore existing practices in districts where this has been successful and identify transferable approaches.
6.3 Data collection/reporting process - GMCA and the EA have commissioned a project to review data collection and consider potential options for future central data platforms. Collecting data across districts and partners to provide accurate reporting is difficult and whilst there are processes in place there remains issues with consistency of both data collection and reporting of the event. The project is expected to conclude by the beginning of May 2020, recommendations/options can then be considered.
6.4 Insurance and affordability – discussions are ongoing with Rochdale Council, RFCC, National Flood Forum and Flood Re to scope a possible project that explores approaches and transferrable ideas/practice for some key issues around disadvantaged communities, insurance cover, engagement with landlords and housing standards to help tackle/deliver affordable and sustainable flood resilience.
6.5 Reducing risk - capital projects Radcliffe and Redvales currently constructing Phase1, Phase 2 next - complete by 2021 protecting around 1000 properties. Rochdale and Littleborough – Planning application for Phase 1a submitted last month, with community drop in session held 3rd February. Start on site aimed for summer 2020. Prestolee – developing business case, waiting for announcement of acceleration money to see if the EA have money to develop preferred option in 2020/2021. The EA have met the MP (Yasmin Qureshi) twice in the last 6 months.
Page 75 This page is intentionally left blank Agenda Annex
The GMCA declared a climate emergency in July 2019. When travelling to our offices, please consider the carbon impact of your transport choice. ______
Our address, telephone number and email address
GMCA, Churchgate House, 56 Oxford Street, Manchester M1 6EU 0161 778 7000 [email protected]
Location and access
We are perfectly located in the city, a short walk from Oxford Road train station, St Peter’s Square Metrolink and all major city bus routes. A location map can be found here https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/contact/ Disabled/wheelchair access is located next to the entrance of Churchgate House.
Contacting us by phone
If you are deaf or hard of hearing you can call us using the Text Relay service. To do this call 18002 0161 778 7000. If there is a specific number you wish to call add the prefix of 18002 to enable Text Relay. For more information on how this works, Ofcom’s guide on Text Relay can be found here https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms- and-internet/advice-for-consumers/accessibility/text-relay-guide. You can also use an app to use this service and this can be downloaded from https://www.ngts.org.uk/
Transport choices
The closest tram stop is St Peter’s Square. Churchgate House is a 5 minute walk (0.2 mile) from the tram stop: https://tfgm.com/public-transport/tram/stops/st-peters-square-tram
The most convenient train stations are Oxford Road, Piccadilly and Victoria. Oxford Road is a 2 minute walk (0.1 mile), Piccadilly is an 11 minute walk (0.5 mile) and Victoria is a 21 minute walk (1.0 mile) to Churchgate House: https://tfgm.com/public-transport/train/stations/
The free buses V1, V2 and V3 are available around the City centre and stop at Portland Street, a 6 minute walk (0.3 mile) to Churchgate House: https://tfgm.com/public-transport/bus/free-bus
Page 77 Should you choose to cycle, cycle parking facilities are available opposite Churchgate House. See below for a cycling map of Greater Manchester: https://tfgm.com/cycling/maps
Churchgate House is 21 minute walk (1.0 mile) from Victoria station and much less for closer locations such as Piccadilly, St Peter’s Square and Oxford Road. A walking map can be found here: https://tfgm.com/maps/old-trafford-walking-route-map
There are a number of park and ride facilities; click the below link for the most convenient: https://tfgm.com/public-transport/park-and-ride P & R
The postcode for Churchgate House is M1 6EU. The post code for the NCP car park opposite Churchgate House is M1 5EJ. For further information on accessibility and charges see: https://www.ncp.co.uk/find-a-car-park/car-parks/manchester-oxford-street-jv/
Top tips to reduce air pollution include leaving the car at home and catching the bus, train or tram and walking or cycling more. For more information see: https://cleanairgm.com/
Page 78