Puckshole earth bank: I have had calls from two residents in Puckshole - the company that repaired the new bank where there was the landslip appear to have left a pile of extra earth on the edge of the road - effectively they have made the road narrower by a little - one resident reports that earth is washing off this pile into the drains and is concerned about blocking drains (see photo). Highways have now checked the site but I understand that they report that they do not intend to take any further action.
Puckshole river: the District will now try to contact the owners of the fields regarding the 'river' going along the road (see photo) to see if the causes can be tackled. See original blogs on this here.More on drains: below is a letter sent to Highways and the County's Cabinet member for the Environment:
I have had phone calls from several residents about the unsatisfactory state of drains. These have all been attended to very promptly after calls to the drains hotline. However there seem to have been on-going problems at a number of road drains over recent years in the Randwick area - and no doubt other areas.
The level of rainfall during the last year would indicate very strongly that many drains are insufficient to cope with the quantity of water. Indeed Highways report that while there is only a yearly clean of drains they do, after every heavy rain, deal with drains in Randwick (i). This is still unsatisfactory as often these drains block very quickly and cause flooding across roads before Highways can get to them.
I am sure the county council is acutely aware of the need to adapt to the inevitable consequences of climate change, which include more intense and frequent rainfall (ii) and that the existing highway drainage system was not designed to cope with the type of storms we can expect now. I am also aware that the County has invested in redesigning some local key drains like at Ash Lane and Humphreys End so that they can cope with larger flows of water/debris etc. However they are both still inadequate to cope despite apparently the Ash Lane site having the largest tank available.
1. Drainage review - I would welcome news on how the County plans to review drainage and in particular what extra investment is planned for this in the light of the recent budget? In particular whether Randwick can be included in improvements.
Two other key connected issues I would welcome more information on:
2. Urban drainage can’t be looked at in isolation and what goes on in the catchment – for example river flood prevention schemes will almost always have an impact on the free flow of drainage systems. I know the County are looking at flooding issues seriously and would welcome news on how this will be considered within Highways following the County's report on flooding. I understand there are some good examples like the Glasgow Strategic Drainage Plan where a new plan is delivering an integrated and sustainable approach to sewerage and drainage master planning. Clearly there is also the issue of development planning and new build on floodplains: it is not necessarily the case that the development shouldn’t go ahead, but specific, detailed and early consultation is vital. In Holland I understand houses in the worst flooded areas are now built on poles so that when flood waters rise so do the homes.
3. Sustainable Urban Drainage systems: some councils like Oxford seem to be using these effective techniques more widely in Highways than Gloucestershire does. Indeed it would appear at present there is not a policy document on this within the County? I accept the Government is failing to lead on this issue and I have had much unproductive correspondence with Ministers and Defra, however SUDS is clearly the direction we should be moving in.
Cllr. Philip Booth, Stroud District councillor for the Randwick, Ruscombe and Whiteshill ward
Notes:
(i) Key drains in need of additional attention include:
1. The dip at Humphreys End was nearly a foot deep in water
2. Bottom of Redhouse Lane
3. Far Westrip - opposite telephone box
4. Ash Lane
5. Two sites near Court Farm, Randwick
(ii) The existing highway drainage system was designed to cope with storms which occur once every 40 years. Over recent years these severe storms are occurring with increasing frequency, with the type of storm that used to happen once every ten years now occurring once or twice a year. The situation is not helped by the increasing proportion of land, especially in built-up areas, that is now paved, lessening the water's ability to simply drain into the ground. This can only get worse with more houses, businesses and roads in the pipeline.
2 comments:
After the email above I was emailed the following which I have taken up with Highways - they have already assured me they will inform contractors to take the silt/debris away - clearly not in this case....
Since the drains were cleared again early last week by Highways I have had two separate complaints about Ash Lane Gulley and Redhouse Lane gulley - the latter was cleared only the day before by Highways and it blocked again the next day. They MUST take the debris away and clear all the drains in the series there are at least two more at Red House Lane within 20 metres of the main drain which they often do not touch and when the top one gets blocked the other two are already blocked and the water goes everywhere - the same goes for the several gullies in the vicinity of Court Farm and also below the Ash Lane main gulley. Its no good them coming out doing only one drain/gulley and dumping the silt and debri at the side of the gulley and then going off without dealing with the gullies in the immediate proximity.
I have since had a response from the Cabinet member responsible who rightly places blame at the Government's door - how can Glos raise money - Council tax would be capped - but at the same time I still consider they could be doing more - they are for example still working on old flood models.
They note that the surcharge will enable GCC to start funding some resilience measures in addition to more frequent drain gully clearance but as the email to me notes:
"I fear it will only be that - a start. We reckon we need £50M plus to resolve all the drainage problems for which GCC is responsible."
The email also rightly points out that a lot of the problems have nothing to do with GCC but result from neglect of downstream responsibilities by riparian owners and EA. District Council also have a part at least as far as enforcement on private land is concerned. Part of the work GCC plan is to identify at least where flooding is the result of owner/EA neglect.
The email finishes: "With regard to Glasgow, we can only look on with envy at the investment that they are able to make - I forget the figures but the per capita government grant for Scotland is many times what we get - with their cash we could solve all our problems. As it is, looking at their plans could only inspire pipe dreams and envy..."
Post a Comment