Memorandum submitted by Sue Everett (FL
107)
I have only just found out about this inquiry,
so have put together a quick email and also a few slides, using
Powerpoint.[33]
1. The local authority (West Berkshire Council)
assisted by Thatcham Town Council are currently compiling an overview
of the flooding in West Berkshire on 20 July, so hopefully you
will have received more detailed information from them.
2. I am a resident of Thatcham but was lucky
not to have been flooded. However, over 1000 residential properties
were flooded. The local authority is still trying to get a final
figure. It may reach 1200+.
3. The nature of the flooding was associated
— astoundingly high rainfall over a
short period of time
— surface water unable to "fit"
into culverts and drains through the built up area
4. A significant number of properties were
flooded because before housing estates were built in the 1960s
and 1970s, ditches and streams that took water from the valley
slope down to the River Kennet, were diverted into culverts. These
culverts now lie under roads and gardens, although residents have
no information about the precise line of some of them and whether
or not they run under their gardens. Certainly it would appear
that parts of the culverts run under residential properties. See
Slide 3 showing properties on Swansdown Walk that illustrate this.
5. Some of the housing estates were built
"on appeal". Environmental Assessment unheard of, as
was ecological design. With hindsight, linear parks should have
been left to cater for flood events, allowing sufficient space
for streams to fill up into grassland between houses.
6. The amount of surface water is exacerbated
by gardens being concreted over, and the lack of porous hard surfaces.
Also, I suspect that gutter maintenance is too infrequently undertaken.
However, these were not the cause of the flooding.
7. Infilling—replacing two or three
houses with denser developments and building in gardens—is
increasing the density of concrete and potentially worsening the
surface water situation.
8. On 20 July sewer overflows occurred nearly
everywhere in the town where there was flooding, including in
the vicinity of the new sewer main installed by Thames Water south
of Lower Way.
9. A new housing estate of nearly 900 units
(Kennet Heath) is currently being built in the lowest part of
the town. Many houses only recently occupied here were very badly
flooded as water from the rest of the town ended up here. Originally
the plan was for 550 houses, this number has now been increased
by one third owing to the pressure for housebuilding. This area
is known as being prone to flooding. It used to be occupied by
the MOD (supplies). Houses here should have been built with garages
and non-residential space in the lower floors. Can plans for the
houses yet to be built here be changed?
10. The flooding must be having a significant
impact on the housing market and will do so into the future. There
is no vacant rented accommodation available.
11. There is plenty of evidence that drains
and ditches serving the town had not been sufficiently maintained.
On the 20 July this fact may not have prevented flooding in most
cases. However, this is an assumption.
12. There have been other flood events in
the town, eg in the 1970s. I am told by older residents in the
area, that the most serious flooding was after the 1947-48 winter—at
this time there were no housing estates in the town. There was
also a near-flood event on 31 December 2006 when one of the streams
running out of a major culvert in the south of the town overflowed
its banks. There was also a sewer overflow (Longcroft Road) following
this event. If the rain that day had been more prolonged, a similar
event to 20 July may have occurred.
13. Regardless of the cause of flooding,
and anticipated changing weather patterns associated with climate
change, events likely to result in significant flooding of residential
properties in the town are likely to occur at least 1 in 60 years,
possibly 1 in 30. The developments constructed since 1960 have
not taken this periodicity into account, nor the likely quantity
of water that may arise following extreme events such as in 2007
and possibly 1947-48.
14. Many properties flooded on 20 July 2007
will flood again, if a similarly extreme event occurs. Only by
knocking houses down along the path of major culverts and creating
linear parks, will future flooding be prevented.
15. Surface water could be reduced by encouraging
residents to retrofit porous surfaces to hardstandings. Grant
aid would be required. If there was substantial activity on this,
potentially minor flood events might be averted but extreme events
as occurred on 20 July would inevitably flood residential properties
again.
16. Thatcham has grown at an extraordinary
rate, from a population of around 5,000 in 1950 to an estimated
25,000 today. There are huge pressures for housebuilding in West
Berkshire. All of the developments to date can be construed as
being environmentally unsustainable on grounds of carbon footprint
and sustainable drainage, ie neither have been taken into account.
17. The largest development in the town
was built in the 1990s (Dunstan Park). This was built over predominantly
pasture land that gently sloped along the foot of the valley.
This area was riddled with springs, all of which are now in pipes.
Water from this area will have substantially exacerbated flooding
in the south of the town—balancing ponds and culverts were
insufficient to take the quantity on 20 July. See Slide 3—Stoney
Lane—much of this water will have come from the Dunstan
Park development just upslope. There are pressures to build more
houses just to the east, but the drainage systems lying to the
south would clearly be unable to cope if this was to happen.
18. No one—residents—local authorities—voluntary
groups—was prepared, in any way, for the flooding that occurred
on 20 July.
I am noting below some further specific items
worthy of consideration for the proposed EFRA enquiry.
1. FLOOD VICTIMS:
HEALTH
A fair number of flood victims I have spoken
to in Thatcham fell ill after clearing their houses out.
As far as I know no one is producing any figures
on this, but the GP surgeries should be requested to do so.
Advice was not available prior to the floods,
and residents were probably to a significant extent unaware of
the risks to their health, which includes gastro-type infections
as well as Weiles disease, as a result of dealing with contaminated
water.
In addition, an obvious action at time of flood
would be for all residents to know NOT to use or flush the loo,
as this will inevitably increase contamination of flood water.
No advice on this has ever been available as far as I know.
2. RETROFITTING
BETTER DRAINAGE
SYSTEMS
Most of the flooding in Thatcham was associated
with flash flooding—water following the course of old streams
which now have housing estates built on them and which have, in
part been diverted, into culverts which do not completely follow
the old courses. You can clearly see where the land lies lower
(the houses are also lower) where the old streams used to run.
These houses will flood again. Should they be
knocked down? That may be the only way to stop future flooding.
The drainage infrastructure in many flooded
areas was proved inadequate. Who will pay for it to be upgraded,
where this may be possible? Who is going to identify what needs
to be done where?
3. IMPACT ON
HOUSING MARKET
What is the future for houses affected by flooding?
Who will want to buy them? To what level will their value have
depreciated? 1500+ houses flooded in Thatcham out of around 8000
residential properties has already had a significant impact on
the housing market and removed all available rented properties
from the market.
4. HOUSING IN
FLOOD ZONES
STILL BEING
BUILT—SHOULD
DEVELOPMENT BE
STOPPED?
There is a large housing estate of 880 homes
in the process of being built in Thatcham (Kennet Heath). A substantial
no of properties on this development, situated at the lowest part
of the town, were flooded. Should there be a moratorium on completion
of this development until a full and proper assessment of flood
risk is undertaken?
5. ROLE OF
ECOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT
OF LAND
IN MANAGING
FLOODING
The Environmental Agency should be provided
with statutory powers to acquire and manage land for flood management
purposes, or to impose management of land which at present may
contribute to flooding. This includes blocking upland drains,
and drains in forestry land. For example, a large woodland near
Thatcham (under an FC management agreement with the landowner)
has a substantial network of drains in it, water from which will
have contributed to raising the levels in the River Pang, which
overtopped and flooded many properties downstream, e.g. in Bucklebury
Village.
The Higher Level Environmental Stewardship Scheme
is insufficient to address the need to develop large-scale ecological
management of land areas for flood management. It is a voluntary
scheme (landowners have to apply) and in any case its cash resources
are restricted, meaning that it will be targeted at land that
is designated as SSSI (Sites of Special Scientific Interest).
The EA should be resourced to undertake catchment
based land management plans to manage flood risk and identify
specific sites where ecological land management activities to
manage flooding might be undertaken. Even in places like the Berkshire
Downs, there are areas of agricultural land which flood when water
levels are high along the site of springs, but their drainage
has been "improved", which then increases the quantity
of water ending up in villages downstream (Great Shefford is an
example). As far as I know there is no comprehensive assessment
of, for example, the River Kennet catchment, to identify land
that is actively managed for flooding, who manages it, and there
is no comprehensive plan for managing the catchment to reduce
flood risk. As far back as the early 1800s, water meadows were
created at Hungerford with the precise objective of reducing flooding
downstream in Newbury. These were actively managed with sluices
etc, but structures have since been abandoned. Sluices and so
on that exist on the Kennet are, as far as I know, managed by
lots of different people, especially water keepers employed by
fisheries and landowners. They actually do quite a good job, but
what they do isn't as far as I know coordinated nor part of any
grand plan.
Sue Everett
September 2007
33 Not printed. Back
| 
