Minutes:
Louise Smith (Flood and Water Manager) – was in attendance for the item.
1.The officer provided a presentation covering the following key points:
a) The study had originally been proposed by the previous Chair of the Committee. The purpose of the study was to highlight the risks faced by Romney Marsh and surrounding areas and to set out the work undertaken to date, alongside the next phases of activity.
b) The officer provided an overview of Romney Marsh, explaining that it is a low-lying area of reclaimed wetland covering approximately 250 square kilometres. Members were advised that the area is protected by an extensive network of tidal flood defences, which play a vital role in reducing the risk of coastal flooding across the marsh.
c) Outlined the work completed to date and the planned future phases of the study, which were intended to manage and mitigate the identified risks. The importance of ongoing assessment, investment and partnership working was emphasised to ensure the long-term resilience of Romney Marsh
d) Advised that Main Rivers within the area were managed by the Environment Agency, while ordinary watercourses were the responsibility of the Romney Marsh Internal Drainage Board. Members were informed that drainage was achieved through a combination of gravity-fed systems and pumping stations, and that the area supported approximately 14,000 households and 700 businesses.
e) Discussed that increased rainfall, sea level rise and the potential for tide locking were expected to increase flood risk across Romney Marsh, although the extent of these impacts remained uncertain. Members were informed that the Romney Marsh Impact Assessment would improve understanding of these risks and help identify options for future flood risk management and adaptation
f) Explained that Romney Marsh was exposed to flood risk from a range of external sources, including tidal inundation from the English Channel and fluvial flooding associated with Main Rivers, particularly the River Rother.
g) It was advised that these flood risks were being considered through a range of existing studies, the findings of which would inform the current assessment. Members were informed that the Romney Marsh Impact Assessment would focus on watercourses within the study area, including how flood risk may change over time and the potential effects of sea level rise.
h) Members were informed that Kent County Council had appointed Arcadis Consulting to undertake Phase 1 of the Impact Assessment, to support a submission to the Southern Regional Flood and Coastal Committee Local Levy.
i) Phase 1 of the study had involved a review of existing flood risk data for Romney Marsh. Members were informed that the area contained an extensive network of watercourses, with a series of outfalls regulating the discharge of water to external bodies. It was noted that Main Rivers could drain to multiple outfalls and that watercourses managed by the Internal Drainage Board formed an interconnected drainage system across the marsh.
j) Members were advised that pump operation data for pumped outfalls had been reviewed as part of Phase 1. It was noted, however, that information relating to gravity outfalls was limited and would be examined further during Phase 2 of the assessment.
k) Southern Water had provided data on surface water sewers and pumping stations, identifying six catchments serving urban areas within the study area. It was highlighted that this information would support Phase 2 in assessing flood risk impacts on the sewer network.
l) Historical flood data had been gathered from the Environment Agency, Internal Drainage Boards, Kent County Council and East Sussex County Council. Data had shown that recorded flooding had primarily occurred around Camber, New Romney, Dymchurch, Lydd and inland at Brookland.
m) Funding for Phases 2 and 3 had been secured through the Southern Regional Flood and Coastal Committee Local Levy, with contributions of £120,000 from the levy and £10,000 from Southern Water, alongside further contributions sought from Folkestone and Hythe District Council and the Internal Drainage Board.
n) Phase 2 would involve modelling to assess interactions between watercourses, pumps and outfalls and it was explained that the study area would be divided into catchments based on outfalls, with modelling used to assess flood storage and risk to key locations.
o) The officer advised that, due to the low-lying and pumped nature of the catchments, flood volume was likely to be a more significant factor than peak flows and that the Environment Agency had recommended the use of the Coastal Design Sea Level 4 dataset for deriving tidal levels, with allowances applied to account for sea level rise.
p) The officer explained that the proposed modelling would improve understanding of water level management and long-term flood risk associated with climate change.
q) Members were advised that the outputs from Phase 2 would inform the detailed scope of Phase 3. Phase 3 would provide a high-level assessment of potential options to manage future water levels and flood risk across Romney Marsh.
r) Phase 3 of the assessment would explore a range of potential flood risk management options, including innovative approaches and lessons learned from comparable environments elsewhere in the United Kingdom and Europe.
s) A multi-criteria assessment would be used to identify suitable options, alongside providing high-level cost estimates and clarified that Phase 3 would not be a detailed options appraisal, but would instead act as a guide for future decision-making, further work and investment.
t) Members were informed that the overall assessment would improve understanding of water level management in low-lying areas, particularly those reliant on pumped and gravity outfalls, and identify potential approaches to managing future flood risk.
1. Members discussed the following points:
a) Members commended the officer on the hard work undertook and praised the details captured within the presentation.
b) Questions were raised if there was any scope to capture and store excess water for later use. The officer advised that consideration was being given to opportunities for capturing and storing surface water for irrigation purposes, including the potential to reduce flood risk and could reduce reliance on mains water for agricultural uses, particularly for non-potable purposes, including irrigation and livestock supply.
c) In response to questions regarding whether solar farm developments could increase flood risk, the officer advised that, in their role as a statutory consultee within the Sustainable Drainage Team (SDT), proposals for solar farm developments were routinely assessed as part of the planning process to ensure that flood risk and drainage implications were appropriately considered.
d) It was noted that assessments considered the volume of surface water generated by developments and the proposed management of runoff. The officer advised that developments were expected to limit discharge rates to no greater than greenfield runoff levels, with runoff arrangements reflecting the previous use and characteristics of the site.
e) Where necessary, developers might be required to incorporate on-site storage and adopt sustainable drainage measures to manage water appropriately.
f) A Member referred to Thanet Earth, the largest commercial greenhouse complex in the United Kingdom, and noted concerns raised locally following reports that the site had been required to disconnect from the Southern Water supply. Concern was expressed regarding the potential implications for water resilience and future demand on local water resources.
g) In response, the officer advised that they were not aware of the specific case at the time of the meeting but acknowledged the importance of engagement with water companies and major water users. Members were informed that collaborative work between Kent County Council and Thanet Earth was ongoing in relation to rainwater harvesting and water resilience measures
h) Members asked what lessons could be learned from the work being undertaken in Romney Marsh and whether the approach could be applied to other coastal communities across Kent.
i) In response, the officer advised that partner organisations, including the North Kent Internal Drainage Board, were undertaking similar work relating to water level management. It was noted that findings and lessons learned would be shared across these projects to support a consistent and informed approach to flood risk management across Kent.
j) Members were advised that the Environment Agency’s Shoreline Management Plans identified locations where managed realignment may be required in the future, recognising that it would not be feasible or sustainable to maintain existing coastal defences in all areas indefinitely.
k) In response to questions regarding whether the power station had been included within the study, the officer advised that the current focus was on understanding the implications of flood risk for communities and businesses within the study area. It was noted that the project remained in the early stages of Phase 2 and that there would be scope to consider additional factors, including critical infrastructure, as the assessment progressed.
l) Members queried the scope of the study, officers advised that consideration could be given to activities undertaken by the nearby nuclear power station, including its flood defence infrastructure, and whether these had any implications for the surrounding area.
m) A Member asked whether Government funding was being sought to support investment in water storage infrastructure for farmers. In response, the officer advised that current discussions were focused on securing investment from water companies, as increased water storage capacity could help reduce demand on the mains water supply and deliver wider resilience benefits.
n) It was noted that Government funding had not been pursued at this stage. The officer advised that water companies were expected to play a key role in supporting such initiatives, given the potential benefits to water supply resilience and the reduction of demand on the mains network.
RESOLVED to note the Romney Marshes Flood and Climate Change presentation