Councillor John Fillis, the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, Lancashire County Council, will attend the meeting for a question and answer session on this topic.
Minutes:
The Chairman introduced the item, that had been added to the Committee’s work programme as a result of concerns from Members on the performance and maintenance of the gullies in the Borough following the flooding that had occurred on Boxing Day 2015 and the lessons learnt.
The Committee welcomed County Councillor John Fillis, the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, Lancashire County Council to the meeting for a question and answer session on Flooding of Highways Drainage System.
Prior to the meeting Members had provided a series of questions to the County Council’s Cabinet Member. In response to the questions previously submitted County Councillor Fillis had provided a written response, circulated prior to the meeting, as set down at pages 201 to 211 of the Book of Reports.
At the meeting, the County Council Cabinet Member provided an overview of the response by the County and others agencies to the floods that had occurred on Boxing Day 2015. He went on to explain, that through that response experience, the County had reflected on its procedures, referring to details as set down within his written response. This included the responsibilities of the different agencies involved in flood management / water flow which included the Environment Agency (EA), District Councils, Water Companies (United Utilities) and local highways authorities (LCC) as identified in the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 (FWMA) and the role of the Risk Management Authorities (RMAs).
In respect of maintenance of the gullies it was explained using past data and also local knowledge, the County had overhauled its gully emptying service and had now produced a schedule of Priority 1 and Priority 2 gullies. Rather than a rotational cleaning, this service was now prioritised. In relation to sandbags, he said that this was the responsibility of District Councils.
In conclusion County Councillor Fillis referred to the LCC campaign and literature that had been produced to assist residents. He also commented that, whilst LCC Highways enforcement powers are limited and site/circumstances specific, if there is any local knowledge of real-life situations then this information can be passed through to him so that specific responses can be investigated and produced.
In discussion questions and comments were raised in relation to:
· Priority 1 and 2 gullies schedules – identification of gully priorities; availability of site lists; future proofing (new housing developments).
· Flood Relief – allocation of resources; monetary assistance (grants); future investment.
· Road drains – maintenance and removal of debris.
· Methods of reporting flooding / drain issues – access to the LCC web-site; preparation in / for “at risk” areas.
· “Gold” Command – composition (police and emergency service led), involvement of local response units.
· Other best practice models – National Flood Forum.
· Commissioned survey work undertaken in a local neighbourhood (Jacob report)
· Use of hydro bags as an alternative to sandbags – provision of emergency “kits”.
· Effectiveness of natural barriers – tree-lines; replanting hedgerows.
In response to the question on the Priority 1 and Priority 2 gullies, referred to in his written response, County Councillor Fillis stated that this information could be provided and noted the comment in relation to fluidity in their composition.
In relation to the “priority” lists it was suggested that there could be a “Priority 3” related to “very blocked drains”. Members referenced the effects of the flooding on the road drainage in their wards that could not take the volumes of water that had been experienced.
In response the Cabinet Member provided feedback on the procedure in respect of the County Council’s response to drain clearage notified to them and spoke of the web-site service where such issues can be reported.
The Director of Leisure and Wellbeing referred to the role and responsibilities of the Borough Council in relation to flood situations which is one of support in liaison with the lead agencies. He referred to the permissive powers in respect of ordinary water-courses within the Borough and that under FWMA the lead role in relation to watercourses had now passed to the lead authority (LCC). The Borough Council has a small number of water-courses which it is the riparian owner, for example, Hurlston Brook for its length, as it passes through Coronation Park.
In response to the availability / distribution of sandbags, it was recognised that the public’s perception of the effectiveness and availability of sandbags to protect their property was often quite unrealistic. The Director of Leisure and Wellbeing confirmed that it was not the responsibility of the Borough Council to provide sandbags. This responsibility lays with the homeowners themselves.
It was recognised that good communication and information sharing between the agencies is essential as is encouraging residents, particularly those who live in areas which have suffered from flooding in the past, to be proactive in installing flood resilience measures. The Director of Leisure and Wellbeing referred to Initiatives that had been introduced to encourage winter preparation and the improvement measures, following a survey of Council owned properties which had been subject to internal flooding during the recent flood events, to limit damage caused by future storms. The ‘Flood Awareness’ page on the Council’s website also provides a range of information and external links to those responsible agencies.
The Portfolio Holder for Planning, who attended the meeting, with the permission of the Chairman commented on the role of Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs), that can be set up in areas of special drainage (at present Lancashire has only one). It was further understood that LCC and the Environment Agency were also looking at a range of options, of which the final list is still awaited.
The Chairman thanked County Councillor John Fillis, the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, LCC for his attendance and response, written and oral, to the questions put to him in relation to flooding and asked Members to pass on details in relation to local knowledge on gullies to him.
RESOLVED:That the presentation by County Councillor John Fillis, Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport, LCC be noted and that any suggestions in relation to local knowledge and the Priority 1 and Priority 2 gullies schedule be directed to him.