RIVER THAMES SCHEME ( RTS )

We have just been informed that Surrey County Council have obtained financing for their part of the scheme which is great news. RTS Channel 2 will run between Egham Hythe and Chertsey.

It's not clear whether the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead ( RBWM ) have also obtained the funding to build their channel between Datchet and Wraysbury.

Building all three channels will take a long time during which SCC clearly have have no intention of clearing the simple land drainage problems that were created on their watch. If these man-made problems are not been dealt with before the RTS Scheme becomes operational , Egham Hythe residents could still be affected by land drainage problems every time the River Thames gets into the Meadlake Ditch.

LINKS

• RTS Channel 1 - Datchet to Wraysbury
• RTS Channel 2 - Egham Hythe to Chertsey
• RTS Channel 3 - Chertsey to Shepperton
• A news article written by Fiona Dent in 2017 describing the background to the Jubilee River , River Thames Scheme and the 2003 , 2007 and 2014 flooding problems that should have been avoided.

We hope that lessons have been learned from way that Jubilee River ( Taplow to Datchet ) was brought into service in 2003 . Basic design , build and operational problems caused severe downstream flooding in 2003 and 2014. Many of these problems dating back to 2003 have yet to be completed.

Don't believe everything that the Environment Agency and Surrey County Council say because they have a very poor track record for delivery , admitting their mistakes and clearing them up afterwards.

Memorable clangers linked to the EA include :-

• The Jubilee River in 2003
• The Foss Barrier in 2015
• The Todbrook Reservoir in 2019

I have pasted some draft notes below written by Ewan Larcombe listing some of the problems he is aware of.

DRAFT NOTES: ref RTS Funding etc.

1. Firstly I must confess that it is nice to see a possible funding solution via Surrey County Council is up for consideration.
2. I must make clear that I agree 100% that there is a need to reduce the probability of Thames flooding downstream of Windsor. My concern is with the current approach.
3. I would have liked a Planning Inquiry but will be content with an NSIP Development Consent Order.
4. I believe we should examine the MWEFAS/Jubilee River project in order to learn from the mistakes of the past.
5. A combination of ‘fade factor’, organisational loss of memory, corporate amnesia and risk of reputational harm all hinder the learning process.
6. There is a need for improvement and it will not look good if there is a repeat past mistakes.
7. Unfortunately there are many outstanding issues in respect of Jubilee River design, construction and operation that are still to be clarified. The MWEFAS project was just ‘a bit in the middle’. While Windsor, Eton and Maidenhead were better protected, in practice the bypassing of the natural attenuating features simply amplified and moved the flooding problem downstream. The diverted flood water travelled more quickly, arrived earlier, rose more quickly and finished at a higher level.
8. In particular I do feel that the failure of the authorities to heed the Inspector’s warnings about capacity went unheeded. There would have been a consequently impact on cost/benefit ratios.
9. At the 1992 Planning Inquiry it was claimed that the channel would give additional protection to 200 homes in Datchet. This was not true. The gravel strata is porous and the water simply appears at the lowest points first - and is unstoppable.
10. At the 1992 Planning Inquiry it was claimed that algae would not be a problem. In fact algae is a problem because the channel contains slow flowing water contaminated with nutrients. A small amount of sunshine promotes explosive algae growth.
11. In my opinion the process of cost reduction and/or design changes after Ministerial approval is inappropriate if it fails to include consultation with interested parties.
12. I am concerned about the failure to incorporate a ‘stilling basin’ feature at Taplow and the significant and costly structural failings along the entire length of the channel.
13. The £1.3m cost to dismantle and rebuild 350m of the Myrke embankment while retaining the inadequate plan form feature leaves a permanent memorial to substandard design on the landscape. The embankment is degrading steadily over time.
14. Clive Onions report into the 2003 flood event recommended reinstating dredging and acquiring disposal facilities. This has not happened.
15. In 2003 Barbara Young attempted to supress EA Board Meeting debate on Jubilee River structural issues by censoring the Agenda.
16. In 2006 there was a £2.75m out-of-court settlement in respect of sub-standard design and construction. The scheme designers were incorporated into Black and Veatch.
17. I understand the need for safety but public access to and views of the channel in Datchet have been gradually reduced over time. The car park on Eton Road has now been removed and in my opinion a 40m section either side of Black Potts viaduct is in practice too remote for viewing purposes.
18. The Myrke in Datchet – a designated main river – is overgrown due to lack of maintenance and is polluted.
19. I am concerned about River Thames bed rise due to lack of maintenance for over twenty years.
20. I am concerned that RBWM has recently authorised a planning application on the Fowles site in Wraysbury (the RTS route) that should have been protected.

Ewan Larcombe

www.jubileeriver.co.uk

28-10-2019