Agenda item

To discuss water management and flood mitigation measures and their potential impact on residents and properties in Denbighshire with representatives from Natural Resources Wales and Denbighshire County Council.

10:45am- 11:30am

Mr Keith Ivens, Natural Resources Wales’ (NRW) Operations Manager and the Council’s Senior Engineer – Flood Risk Management were welcomed to the meeting by the Chair to facilitate a discussion on water management and flood mitigation measures in Denbighshire. 

During the discussion members raised a number of concerns with respect to the maintenance of rivers, streams, ditches and cuts, enquiring on who was responsible for maintaining and clearing them.

In response to the Committee’s questions both officers advised that:

•           both the local authority and NRW worked closely together to mitigate the risk to life and property of flooding from ‘main’ rivers;

•           details of planned maintenance work on all main rivers and watercourses within NRW’s jurisdiction were listed on the annual ‘North Wales Routine Maintenance Programme 2016/17’ on the NRW’s website;

•           the NRW’s maintenance schedules were drawn up based on an assessment of risk and budget allocation available.  Modelling work had already been programmed in for 2017-18 for the purpose of understanding if the infrastructure and maintenance of Rhyl Cut could be improved.  However, Rhyl Cut was not currently considered to be a high risk area, because there were three exit points for water from the Cut, including the pumping station located there;

•           indications pointed towards an increase in periods of high intensity rainfalls in recent years and this was proving difficult to both predict and manage in relation to watercourse maintenance work;

•           responsibility for overseeing watercourse maintenance and management across Wales was determined by each watercourse’s designation.  NRW was responsible for overseeing ‘main rivers’ – these included main/larger rivers, streams and some smaller watercourses.  Every other open watercourse, known as ‘ordinary watercourses’, are overseen by the local authority in its capacity and the ‘Lead Local Flood Authority’.  Information on watercourse designation was available on the NRW’s website;

•           NRW was allocated a budget that was ‘ring-fenced’ for the purpose of maintaining ‘main rivers’ for irrigation purposes and for mitigating the risk of flooding from those rivers.  Local authorities (lead local flood authorities) had to finance any flood risk management work from within its non-ring-fenced budget;

•           whilst NRW, local authorities and individual landowners had duties in relation to water management and flood risk these were split into two categories – responsibilities and jurisdiction.  Duties which fell into the former category placed a legal responsibility on the riparian landowner to undertake flood mitigation/water management work. Whilst NRW and local authorities have legislative powers to carry out works on watercourses, they were under no obligation to do so;

•           capital funding allocated to NRW tended to be towards high risk flood mitigation work e.g. flood alleviation work, whilst the revenue funding was more likely to be used for flood prevention/river maintenance work;

•           Riparian landowner duties in relation to watercourses as per the Land Drainage Act 1991 extend to ensuring that the water flows through the land unimpeded;

•           the pumping station by the Lyons Holiday Camp in Rhyl, which failed during a heavy rainfall event in summer 2016, was the property of Welsh Water not NRW.  The Council had contacted Welsh Water to seek reassurances regarding the reliability of this pump;

•           the main focus of the NRW’s work was to undertake flood mitigation and management work where there was a threat to life or property.  If problems were identified which did not pose a risk to life or property they would inform the riparian landowner of the problem.  NRW has a guidance document available for riparian landowners, which was promoted widely via the farming unions.  The Council also was in regular contact with landowners on issues of risk or concern;

•           A study has been undertaken by NRW the looking at the potential effectiveness of ‘natural flood risk management’ i.e. the catchment area for the rivers Elwy and Clwyd. An example of natural flood risk management is NRW working in conjunction with Coed Cymru, where trees had been planted with a view to reducing the amount of water that ran downstream and slowing its flow. The study concluded that opportunities for natural flood risk management were fairly limited in the Elwy and Clwyd catchments.

•           whilst it had long been acknowledged that forestation was an effective method by which to reduce the amount of water flowing downstream and for stemming the speed of the flow, recent research suggested that small scale felling, such as that proposed for the Clocaenog Forest area near Cyffylliog for the purpose of erecting wind turbines, should not have a long term adverse effect on river levels and water flow in that area or further downstream.  Members were sceptical of this assumption;

•           no ‘greening’ measures, similar to those trialled in the north of England where farmers were encouraged not to dredge or open up new ditches with a view to mitigating the risk of flooding, had been undertaken in Denbighshire;

•           that schemes similar to the Pontbren Farmers scheme in the Llanfair Caereinion area of north Powys may prove beneficial in other areas for agricultural, bio-diversity, water management and flood mitigation purposes;

•           for large housing developments the developers, as part of the planning application, were required to demonstrate that they would not increase the rate of surface water run-off water in watercourses etc.  Generally developers tended to apply to Welsh Water for permission to connect to the local sewer system.  This was permitted where ‘feasible’.  If there was no capacity in the sewer system the developer then tended to apply for planning permission for a private treatment plant, which was an approach that NRW tended to view unfavourably;

•           NRW were willing to discuss with landowners any plans they may have for dredging or managing watercourses on their land.  Permits were required for the purpose of undertaking this type of work.  However, the permit application process was fairly flexible and could accommodate an application for periodic permits e.g. an annual dredging/maintenance permit;

•           NRW would normally not remove objects/foreign bodies from rivers unless they posed a risk to life or property, or an immediate threat of flooding;

•           NRW would generally not force landowners to carry out watercourse maintenance work unless there was a risk to life or property.  If it was deemed that there was such a risk the NRW could access the land to undertake the work and reduce the risk, and then subsequently charge the landowner for the work carried out.  To the representative’s knowledge this approach had not been utilised in recent years;

•           health and safety concerns relating to bridge structures, even if the pressure on them was due to water torrents, was a matter for the local authority not for NRW as structures such as bridges were the responsibility of the local authority; and

•           it was anticipated that the UK’s decision to withdraw from the European Union would, in the long-term, have a detrimental effect on the NRW’s funding for large capital projects, as all recent major flood alleviation/sea defence schemes had been delivered in the main with European funding;

Members asked that:

•           concerns raised with respect to water run-off from hardstanding areas into local cuts in the Meliden area once developments in the Local Development Plan (LDP) are built be raised by NRW officials at their next operational meeting;

•           that NRW and Council officials meet with county councillors in the Rhyl and Prestatyn area to discuss concerns with regards to flood risks in the local area; and

•           due to the complexities surrounding matters relating to water and flood risk management, including different organisations’ roles and responsibilities in relation to watercourses and structures spanning rivers and on riverbanks, that a presentation be given to all county councillors during a Council Briefing session on all these aspects.  It was suggested that for ease of reference that illustrations be used to explain the various responsibilities, and examples used to highlight how all stakeholders work together to avoid situations escalating to serious incidents;

The Chair thanked both officers for attending and for answering members’ questions.  He felt that the Council had a role to play in communicating clarity about each individual stakeholder’s role and responsibilities in relation to water management and flood mitigation work.  It was therefore:

RESOLVED: - that

(i)        a presentation be given during a Council Briefing meeting post the May 2017 local authority elections for the purpose of assisting councillors to understand both the County Council, as the Lead Local Flood Authority, and Natural Resources Wales’ statutory responsibilities with respect of water and flood management, including coastal and river maintenance responsibilities, and how both organisations work together to mitigate the risk of flooding; and 

(ii)       in the meantime, a press release be prepared and issued for inclusion in the Farm and Country supplement of the Daily Post on how riparian landowners can apply for permits to undertake periodic maintenance work on watercourses that traverse their land.