January 2003 Flooding - Conclusions and Recommendations - The Thames at Windsor - Discussion Areas - The Royal Windsor Forum - Message Board

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

January 2003 Flooding - Conclusions and Recommendations

Author	Comment
thamesweb	January 2003 Flooding - Conclusions and Recommendations	Lead	[-]
Posts: 1307 (04/20/04 08:29:27) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Tags : None RBWM Press Release The main conlusions of one of the most comprehensive reports investigating the causes of the flooding on the lower River Thames in January 2003 were presented this week to the Flood Risk Action Groups. The Mechanisms of Flooding Report is the culmination of nearly a years work by Senior Civil Engineer and Independent Chairman of the three Flood Risk Action Groups, Clive Onions. The report is set to be published in full in a few weeks time, but at a joint meeting of the three FRAG groups, (Tuesday March 23) Mr. Onions presented his Executive Summary and his main conclusions and recommendations. The main conclusions and recommendations are: * Weather: Several days of heavy rainfall in late December 2002 on a saturated catchment were critical to the River Thames. This rainfall resulted in the serious flooding experienced. * On the role of the Windsor, Maidenhead and Eton Flood Alleviation Scheme (MWEFAS) and the Jubilee River: The peak of the flooding was not affected by the Jubilee River, but the Chairman recommends that the Environment Agency reviews operation procedures at Taplow Weir. * The protection of the floodplain by the Jubilee River around Maidenhead did not move the problem of flooding to other areas. The reasons for this are explained fully in the main body of the report. * On checking sources of data: Some key instruments measuring data from the River Thames failed to give continuous information. It is recommended that all measuring equipment is checked and maintained regularly * On management of the River Thames weirs: All weirs were fully open by 1st January 2003 whereas the peak of the flooding came four days later, during which period no further control was possible. * On communication: this is the most significant area in which all organisations need to improve. They should ensure that reliable records are kept and only correct information is issued. * On flood forecasting and warnings: Many people failed to receive flood warnings despite the fact that the Environment Agency issued a warning at least two hours prior to the flood and met its targets by a considerable margin. The Chairman recommends that people living in areas at risk of flooding should register with the Automatic Voice Messaging (AVM) System. * On dredging: The Environment Agency has been asked to continue researching the effects of dredging on flood risk. The full Executive Summary can be obtained in the Mechanisms of Flooding area of the Subgroups section on the FRAG website: www.frags.org.uk The FRAG groups will now hold a series of Open Days, which will give the public an opportunity to find out more and see the full Mechanisms of Flooding Report, which will be published in the next few weeks. The events will take place in areas affected by Thames flooding and will offer people the chance to talk to the organisations represented on the FRAG groups including the Environment Agency, Thames Water, local authorities and community groups. During each Open Day there will be an opportunity to speak to the report author and Independent Chairman of the FRAGS, Clive Onions. Mr. Onions said: Now that I have completed my investigation and presented my conclusions and recommendations I believe it is essential that the FRAG partners and the community at large look to the future. The organisations involved with flooding need to draw a line under the investigations into the January 2003 floods and focus their resources on all aspects of flood risk management, including forecasting, warning, mapping, research, investigation and flood protection schemes. The Open Days will be held on the following dates and will run from 3.00 pm until 9.00 pm: April 20 Court Garden Leisure Complex, Pound Lane, Marlow April 27 Spelthorne Leisure Centre, Knowle Green, Staines April 29 The Hythe Centre, Thorpe Lea Road, Egham Hythe May 6 Wraysbury Village Hall, The Green, Wraysbury In a few weeks time and prior to the Open Days, the public will be able to view copies of The Mechanisms of Flooding Report at selected local authority offices and in public libraries across the FRAG area. Details of the report, the Open Days and the work of the FRAGs are available on the FRAG website: www.frags.org.uk Notes: The three Flood Risk Action Groups cover the areas: Hurley to Wraysbury (FRAG1) Wraysbury to Teddington (FRAG 2) and the Chertsey Bourne (FRAG 3) Mr. Onions, was appointed in May 2003 to lead the three FRAG groups which cover the areas of the Thames affected by the flooding and the area affected by flooding from the Chertsey Bourne. One of the main aims of the FRAG process was to investigate the causes of the floods in the lower Thames area. Using information from the FRAG groups and drawing upon more than thirty years of engineering experience, Mr. Onions has produced the most thorough investigation to date.
Unregistered(d)	PRESS RELEASE	#1	[-]
Posts: 0 (04/21/04 11:02:02) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	NEWLY FORMED FLOOD COMMITTEE SPEAKS OUT The Community Support Group South (CSGS) was originally formed last year following the January floods to act as a conduit between the flood-affected communities and the Flood Risk Action Groups (FRAGs) chaired by independent Chairman, Clive Onions. However, very few meetings were held and interaction with the community and the FRAGs was minimal. Unaware of this established mechanism for community liaison, a number of Wraysbury residents sought active participation with Clive Onions to represent community views and to challenge data used in the flood studies. Now, those Wraysbury residents, along with participation from Old Windsor, Datchet and Horton have recently reformed and relaunched the CSGS, nominating Jes Jarvis as their new Chairman. The newly formed Group intends to present a consistent approach and positive input into future plans for the development of a Lower Thames Flood Alleviation Scheme and improvements for flood defence in the future. Recently Mr Onions presented his Mechanisms of Flooding Report executive summary, conclusions and recommendations to the FRAGs. The Environment Agency has been heavily criticised on many aspects in the report. The Community Support Group South has discussed Mr Onions report in great depth and it is considered inappropriate for CSGS to endorse the report based on the following concerns. The 2003 floods were lower than 1947. Therefore it should be possible for insurance companies to retain their pre-2003 insurance risk assessments on the flood plains affected. The report is based on selective use of rainfall information. The flooding of 1947 has been the benchmark on which searches and planning regulations have, hitherto, been based. To include data going back to 1890 in the report is neither helpful nor necessary. There are major problems regarding the structural design, construction and capacity of the Jubilee River, quite apart from the manner in which it was operated. This is of serious concern to the community. Credibility remains low in view of incorrect river height and flow information issued into the public domain for 14 months, followed by a number of recent changes to that data. Figures should be complete, accurate, transparent and not subject to change. The report suggests that the operation of the Jubilee River did not increase levels by more than 2-3 mm at or below the confluence yet no explanation or justification of this statement is provided. What difference would regular dredging in the past 10 years have made to the 2003 flood event? The lack of dredging on the Thames since 1995 is a major concern. Before then dredgers were seen on all reaches of the River Thames on a regular basis. In a recent Environment Agency publication River Views an article states: A self-propelled, walking dredger has helped to reduce the risk of flooding along the River Medway. Dredging of the River Thames must be reinstated as a matter of urgency. Loss of the floodplain must be taken into account further when calculating the effect of the flood event. Until all the facts regarding the 2003 flood event are known, it is not possible to determine mitigatory measures for the future. For the future Community Support Group South believes: It is imperative to establish exactly what happened last year. Based on the recent changes of data by the Environment Agency, we do not believe this is possible in this Mechanisms of Flooding report. Independent consultants (W S Atkins) have been commissioned to carry out a review of the Jubilee River. We believe the report must be published immediately for the public to understand the structural problems that have been found to exist with the Jubilee River. The Jubilee River has not been built as originally designed. There must be an analysis of the design variances of the Jubilee River between the approved scheme and the completed project to determine their effect on its ability to provide the protection originally intended and the effect downstream. The criteria for operation of the Jubilee River must be made public. Community Support Group South intends to request an urgent meeting with the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead following the Councils adoption of a motion committing it to achieving the same level of security against flooding for its residents upstream and downstream of the Jubilee River as is afforded to those of its residents who are now protected by it. As a matter of urgency a programme of dredging should be implemented. If it was previously necessary to remove 100,000 tonnes of material each year from the Thames to prevent flooding, what has changed since 1995? The Environment Agency should ensure that watercourse maintenance is improved immediately. The EA want to take over the maintenance of many watercourses in the area but this has to be carried out on a long term basis, not simply because it suits them to be seen to be doing something now. Responsibilities for groundwater management should be effected immediately as no agency appears to have responsibility for this. Development of floodplains should be subject to rigorous control, managed on a holistic rather than piecemeal basis. Community Support Group South plans to become involved with The Lower Thames Study for an extension of flood protection downstream and work with the Environment Agency and lobby DEFRA in order to drive an acceptable scheme forward to a successful conclusion.