MEETING HELD ON WEDNESDAY, 13TH MAY 2009 AT IRBY & BRATOFT VILLAGE HALL
FLOODING 2007 – UPDATE
Notes taken at the meeting.
The meeting was chaired by Lincolnshire County Councillor Neil Cooper.
Speakers: From the Environment Agency - David Hawley, Area Flood & Coastal Risk
Manager; Ian Russell; John Ray.
From Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board, Colin Hinchcliffe and one other.
Other ELDC/LCC councillors were also present, including Pauline Cooper (ELDC); and
Michael Clark (Chairman, Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board).
Firsby Group Parish Councillors were in attendance.
75 residents attended.
Cllr Cooper thanked Firsby Group Parish Council for arranging the meeting, thanked
everyone for coming and introduced the speakers.
David Hawley said that the catalyst for this meeting was the flooding in 2007. This had
been an exceptional event, but doesn’t seem so in view of others, such as Hull; it was
linked to climate change.
At the moment the weather was very dry, but we must expect heavier rainfall at some time.
The big challenge for the Environment Agency (EA), Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs) and
local authorities is to manage the flood risk. Some events will, however much planning is
put in place, still be overwhelming but the purpose of this evening is to show the actions
that have been taken since the floods in 2007 and what is planned for the future to mitigate
the risk.
Ian Russell gave a presentation.
Firstly he showed the River Steeping catchment area, which illustrated the areas of
responsibility for both the EA and IDBs.
1
The next map showed the areas flooded in 2007, taken from aerial photographs.
He said that this had been a very significant event (statistically 1 in 30), because 1 month’s
rain had fallen overnight onto already saturated land which couldn’t soak up any more
rainfall.
Along the course of the River Steeping are key structures to help evacuate water:
BURGH SLUICE TIDAL DOORS on the northern arm of the river outfall, which close
(operated by tidal pressure) when the tide comes in, to prevent sea water contamination of
the river, and open automatically as the tide recedes.
WAINFLEET CLOUGH TIDAL DOORS on the southern arm of the river outfall act in the
same way.
COW BANK PUMPING STATION pumps into the Steeping.
HAVENHOUSE SLUICE GATE main purpose is to keep the river level up in dry weather
(for fishing etc. but are automatically opened if river level rises beyond safe limit.
PUMPING STATIONS further up the river (e.g. Thorpe Culvert) assist in controlling the
level and flow of the river.
The EA have undertaken the following work since the 2007 floods (starting from the sea
end of the river):
BURGH SLUICE: doors have been inspected and the silt behind the doors has been
cleaned out twice in the last year to prevent further build-up, the most recent in April 2009.
EA will continue to monitor and redo as necessary.
HAVENHOUSE SLUICE: This gates normally hold the river water in. As the water rises
beyond a certain level, the gates will open and close once the safe level is reached. They
did not open quickly enough in 2007, so the system has been changed and they now open
twice as fast on a rising water situation. The gates have been thoroughly overhauled and
are now inspected regularly. There was some evidence of seepage around the sluice; this
has been repaired.
RIVER BANK: Soon after the 2007 floods the river bank was raised for about 150 metres
length, where it overtopped at Wainfleet. Also the bank has been raised on the Relief
Channel just down from the confluence with the Steeping, and there is still a bit more to
do. Repairs have been undertaken to the banking at Thorpe Culvert Pumping Station to
strengthen the bank.
TREE/BUSH MAINTENANCE: has been carried out further upstream.
THIS YEAR:
Plan to carry on making sure the system operates as it should.
EA are going to remove silt at Wainfleet Clough Sluice.
Start raising the bank on a length of Wainfleet Relief Channel.
2
Work near the railway line on the Relief Channel to repair joints in the wall.
Will also check on bank damage by badgers etc. and repair as necessary.
Routine maintenance will continue as usual: weed cutting twice a year; bank tops cut
regularly (unless used for grazing) and cut side banks once a year. This work usually
starts June/July each year.
The assets are in good condition; there were no breaches in 2007, it was overtopping. The
two exceptions to the ‘good condition’ are the badger damage and the joints at Wainfleet
Clough (previously described).
John Ray then spoke:
COMPUTER MODELLING: This gave a reproduction of the river system on computer. It
includes all channels and structures within the river system.
The survey shows depth, width, flow etc. all along the watercourse.
Using this model the EA can then simulate different amounts of rainfall and the model
shows what the effect will be, which helps plan actions to be taken in each eventuality.
They are now modelling summer storms; previously only winter storms were simulated.
The model predicts flows, potential flood areas etc. for each type of weather condition. It is
calibrated against REAL events, so the 2007 floods provided exceptional data for this. It
also helps assess the impact of possible/proposed improvement schemes and the
effectiveness of the existing maintenance programme. It helps to assess what the impact
of climate change is likely to be on the river system.
Uses REAL data, not theoretical statistics.
Slide showed the aerial survey of land levels, showing the height above sea level very
clearly and in great detail. From this the EA can calculate flood risk, pattern of flow in the
case of floods, etc.
What has the modelling told us so far?
Standard of protection is quite good. The chance of flooding in some areas is 1 : 25 but
mostly 1 : 100. (This compares with DeFRA’s indicative sample of 1 : 25 to 1 : 200) Se
even the 1 : 25 levels meet this.
Looked at a range of operational scenarios through the model:
 The seaward sluice gates are designed not to open fully, because the tide wouldn’t
close them if they did. Have investigated whether, if they opened fully, this would help
the situation? Very marginal, and not worth the risk of potential sea tidal flooding.
3
 Dredging – if the river bed were lowered by 1 metre, what effect would it have? At
Wainfleet, it would reduce water level by around 60 – 100mm, but further upstream
(Firsby, Little Steeping) the reduction in river level would be more like 400 – 500mm
(around 1 foot). Showed diagram of the difference it would make.
The next steps:
Can’t say that dredging will definitely happen, because they now have to put in a ‘bid’ for
this work (between £300 and £400k). The bids are on an annual cycle and have to be
submitted May/June, but the results would not be known until February/March 2010.
Therefore if the bid was successful, work would be carried out in the next financial year
(2010/11). They have to put forward a firm business case for this funding, hence the
necessity of the computer modelling.
Funding comes potentially from two different sources:
National funding from government; there are severe competing needs for this funding.
Local Levy Funding, managed by the Regional Flood Defence Committee. For this your
bid is competing at a more local (regional) level.
Cllr Cooper said he is a member of the Regional Flood Committee. They have looked at
cost benefit analysis for Louth and Horncastle flood prevention schemes and have agreed
to fund £3m towards each to the EA, so EA now has only to find half the cost of these. EA
was underspent by £4.5m last year: can’t some of this be used for dredging the River
Steeping? The work NEEDS to be done.
David Hawley replied that it was vital that the EA apply to ALL the funding pots. They will
do their best to secure the funding for the dredging work.
Local people can help:
Disposal of the silt from dredging can cost a lot. If local farmers and landowners will take
the silt it will help cut the project costs. They should contact EA as soon as possible to
offer sites for the silt to be placed.
Residents can also contact their MPs to raise the profile of the project, so it gets more
pressure put on by MPs.
Question: If flooding happens again, can water be diverted – for example, into the River
Witham?
Colin Hinchcliffe (Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board) said that the IDB have purchased more,
bigger pumps since 2007 which would help in this eventuality, provided the Witham Fourth
IDB allowed the pumping to be done.
4
Question: Could floodwater be allowed to overtop between the sea banks until it could be
pumped away? Could extra doors be put in at the sea end to spread pressure and get
more water away? Why not put in a bid for the whole lot in one go?
Question: Could a computer model be used to see whether, if the four bridges were
removed or widened, the flow could be increased enough to make a significant difference?
Ian Russell said that this could be looked at, but that altering bridges was a very expensive
project.
Question: Is it true that the consultation/survey/modelling cost £178k? No. What did it
cost? Survey £20k; modelling £100k.
Question: Lady Wath Beck – if there was another flood; what’s going to be done?
Colin Hinchcliffe: The next stage of modelling is to input IDB data, to gain integrated
mapping between IDB and EA. Now looking at flood storage areas with local landowners.
Dr Mike Morgan (Great Steeping) had already offered land for this purpose, but said he
hadn’t heard anything since he made the offer in November 2007. Colin agreed; said it’s a
disgrace.
Question: In 15-something a Dutchman worked out how to drain the fens without all these
gadgets. The IDB have done a sterling job. Why doesn’t someone start at the sea end and
make it so we can have a continuous flow out to the sea?
Michael Clark (Chairman, Lindsey Marsh Drainage Board): Can’t do anything without the
money, and we need to have the evidence to get the money to do the job. You should be
pressing your MPs and Councillors like hell to raise the profile of this. The government will
look at urban areas such as Hull way before ours. You have a lot of power – email, write,
phone your MPs so they know the situation and start asking questions.
Question: Must also look at the case that we have very valuable arable land that is under
threat.
David Hawley: Linkshore is protecting thousands of homes as well as lots of agricultural
land.
Question: Robert Heane (Great Steeping) took issue with the EA 1 : 25 figure. In 2007
there were TWO floods in Great Steeping, not one, 3 weeks apart. It was just as bad the
second time. If you do not do routine maintenance things will get worse. If it’s not carried
out as a matter of routine it costs even more money and we have to go through this
funding nonsense.
5
Ian Russell: 1 : 25 change in any year of having this flood. The EA take this information
into all the analysis to adjust the forecast figures. Some places around the county have
much greater risk.
Question: When was River Steeping last dredged?
Partly done 4 or 5 years ago, but EA changed from dredging being part of routine
maintenance after this.
Question: When did the EA KNOW the flood was going to happen? When did you know
that you had to let people know? What did the EA do between first becoming aware of the
situation and acting/informing people, etc?
Sensors at Havenhouse Sluice set off signal when the river reaches a critical level.
Operational patrols then check bridges, outfalls etc. If the river continues to rise, flood
warnings are put into place. That night everywhere’s flood alarms went off, so had to
prioritise. It may be that other areas were checked before ours.
Question: How come you didn’t know the bank at Wainfleet was lower until after the flood
and the second ‘near miss’?
It was sandbagged between the first flood and the second event, so a temporary barrier
was in place, and then the bank was raised properly since then.
Question: The dredging work estimate is a cost of around £300k, but the cost to repair
each property flooded was about £50k, notwithstanding the distress etc.
The Association of British Insurers have three categories of flood risk, and 1 : 75 for
‘normal’ premiums. Anything under 1 : 75 they consider to be at ‘significant risk’. The
government say 1 : 25 but ABI say 1 : 75, so there’s a large discrepancy. EA have to work
to 1 : 25
Question: If the flooding happened again tonight, what would you do? How much benefit
would dredging have for people living further back up the river system?
The risk has been reduced by the work undertaken so far. Dredging will increase the
capacity of the river. The further upstream you go, the bigger the difference will be. Up to
about 2ft at Lady Wath Beck.
Question: Is there any proposal to raise the banks on Lady Wath Beck between the road
bridge and where it comes out of the culverts under the old airfield?
These low spots have been identified and EA will be working their way through them. It
must be tied in with the dredging work.
6
Question: Lady Wath Beck is filled by ‘highland’ water that comes off the Wolds very
quickly and enters the village [Great Steeping] at a very low place. Unless something is
done it will continue to flood Sandy Lane/Old Church Lane.
Cllr Cooper asked if there were opportunities to store water upstream of Lady Wath Beck,
before it entered the culverts under the old airfield?
EA are committed to making improvements to this, but cannot guarantee what will be
done. Will investigate this possibility.
Ian Russell: EA may decide to submit a separate bid for the tributaries such as Lady Wath
Beck, so they might get funding for this even if the main river bid is rejected. They can only
put bids in once a year, so they will be submitted soon.
Question: Area affected in 2007 was to the west of Lady Wath Beck. There was a ‘double
whammy’ – 2 pipes culvert the highland water under the airfield, but only 1 under the
B1195 road. So it backs up and floods Sandy Lane. Then 1 smaller pipe from Lady Wath
into river, so it backs up again and Old Church Lane floods. At November 2007 meeting,
IDB suggested it might be possible to divert water around these bottlenecks using other
drains and avoiding the river. Has anything been done?
Colin Hinchcliffe said there is one possible watercourse, but it flows the wrong way. They
have been looking at whether they could turn the flow round, because they cannot find a
suitable outfall to take it into the drainage system.
Question: Is there a way of releasing water from the river at Thorpe Culvert into another
drain, such as the Bellwater?
Colin Hinchcliffe: There is indeed a ‘door’ under there which, if opened, would take water
via the drains into the River Witham (down the Bellwater into the Hobhole and pumped into
a further drain).
There are three culverts; 2 were still free in the 1960s. When cleared, the River Steeping
sank by 18 inches by hydrostatic effect along. You will never get it working again until the
water level is reduced.
These syphons used to drain UNDER the river. Witham Fourth Drainage Board paid
Lindsey Marsh on condition the doors were SHUT. In the 2007 floods, Witham Fourth
refused to allow them to be opened.
But an agreement could be come to between the IDBs. This would work very well,
because the Hobhole and Lade Bank have excellent pumping systems.
A gentleman from Wainfleet Bank, a former drainage engineer, offered a copy of the plans
for these syphons to Colin Hinchcliffe.
7
The meeting closed at 9.00pm. Cllr Cooper thanked the speakers and they received
applause from the audience.
8