A pipeline? (3)

There was an accompanying editorial in the Oxford Times of 26 January 2019.

At the moment the details of the pipeline proposal are not published. Here are some of the things we’d be interested to know about:

  • The OFAS scheme is designed to increase flood flow though Oxford by 38,000 litres per second. What is the volume of water the HOEG pump(s) will pump per second?
  • What size of pump is assumed for this job? How many?
  • Where would the pumps be located?
  • Will the pumps be secure against flooding themselves, and how would they be accessed for maintenance in a flood?
  • What provision is there for intrinsic pump failure?
  • If the pumps are electrically powered, how is the risk of failure of the electricity supply during a flood addressed. Would there be generators raised above any flood level with nearby fuel stores accessible during a flood?
  • What is the route, how would pipes be put underground, how would the many services in the ground be navigated?
  • Construction and disposal of spoil.
  • How is downstream risk to Kennington in particular, and possibly also Abingdon, addressed?
  • How were the costings were arrived at – what do they include?

[The suggestion of a second (albeit smaller) pipeline to Farmoor would be a very large project in itself and is so speculative and far removed from the present issue that we are not asking further about that.]

We wrote to the group concerned recently, on 25 January, asking if we may see their engineer’s plans and any other details; we look forward to their reply so we can better understand their proposal.

A pipeline? (2)

According to an article in the Oxford Times of 24 January 2019 the pipeline proposal has changed, so the pipeline would now involve  “a pumping station at Seacourt, under Botley Road and then along the Hinksey Plain to the Old Abingdon Road.”

That would mean that the start of the pipeline is (wisely) no longer proposed to be at Port Meadow, and that it ends at Redbridge rather than Sandford Lock.

The cost has risen from “around half the cost” [of the Oxford Food Alleviation Scheme presumably – HOEG press release of 18 January] – which would be about £75 million – to £100 million in the press report on 24 January.

More to follow.

A pipeline? (1)

The ‘Hinksey & Osney Environment Group’ issued a press release on 18 January 2019 which included:

“The group is also proposing an alternative scheme, drawn up by a local engineer, which will deliver all the flood alleviation benefits for around half the cost and for a greatly reduced environmental impact.
 
The alternative proposal involves a pumping station at Port Meadow that will divert flood water through an underground pipe to Sandford Lock.
 
The pipe would safely carry the flood water around areas currently at risk.
 
Other advantages of this proposal include:

  • Flood water can be pumped much faster than is possible when relying only on an open channel. This means Oxford would enjoy greater protection from flooding.
  • It uses proven technology and is guaranteed to work.
  • Using a second, smaller bore pipe, the pumping station can also be used to supply water to Farmoor reservoir.
  • An underground pipe would have no long-term environmental impact.
  • The destruction of local nature reserves, thousands of trees in the green belt and valuable flood meadows can all be prevented.”

This raised many questions and we were surprised that the proposal included a pumping station “at Port Meadow” – unlikely to be universally popular.

More to follow.

Answers to concerns

Some people have had concerns about the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme – the Environment Agency have recently made this response which we thought people might find of interest. (To avoid making it even longer we have not included the questions but the answers should make it clear enough what the questions are.)

Design of the scheme 

The scheme has been designed to be as natural as possible and respects and works with the existing natural floodplain. It is not a concrete channel. It is not an ‘on/off’ channel but a passive design which allows the natural floodplain to carry more water when needed. Most of the excavated area will be planted with vegetation and provide valuable new habitat for the area. It is designed to increase the capacity of the floodplain to carry more water.

The Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme will not increase flood risk to properties downstream of Oxford. The scheme does not hold back water (like a flood storage scheme) nor does it speed up water (like a deep narrow channel could do). We conduct detailed modelling, which is always independently verified, and this shows the scheme will not increase flood risk to properties downstream of Oxford. In addition, the Vale of White Horse District Council also commissioned a completely independent review of downstream impact. This was published in December 2017 and confirmed that the scheme will not increase flood risk to downstream properties.

Willow Walk 

We will be removing the existing culverts and their metal railings, shown below and will install a new bridge in their place.

The existing Willow Walk track is already raised above Hinksey Meadow. The new bridge will continue from this track, just raised slightly higher, and will span 19 metres. The height of the deck of the bridge will be approximately 1.5 metres above the existing footpath. The bridge needs to be this size to allow flood water to pass underneath it.

We recognise the importance of Willow Walk as an historic route and a key east-west link for pedestrians and cyclists into Oxford City. Access will be needed for occasional maintenance vehicles. We have confirmed previously that there are no plans to turn Willow Walk into a road.

 Green Belt

If the scheme is approved we believe it will help to safeguard the Green Belt in this area as it will need to remain as a functioning flood alleviation scheme for at least the next 100 years. This will help to maintain and preserve the openness of this part of the Green Belt. The natural design for the scheme includes the creation of over 20 hectares of new habitat. The scheme aims to bring a long term green legacy to the area.

 Maintenance

The scheme will have a long term maintenance plan for the lifetime of the scheme, 100 years. This includes managing the vegetation in the area by grazing. The ‘second stage’ wider part of the channel has been designed to be grazed by cattle to create floodplain grazing marsh. Temporary fencing and removable barriers will allow the second stage channel area to be grazed. We will also create many wetland features within the second stage channel to maximise available habitat for wetland and aquatic species. The backwaters, scrapes and ponds will have a variety of depths, dimensions and gradients, to encourage diversity of wetland wildlife.

Existing streams

The new flood alleviation scheme does not divert water away from Seacourt, Bulstake and Hinksey Streams. The scheme lowers the existing natural floodplain so that in the event of high flows it can carry more water. In the Hinksey Meadow area, the existing Seacourt Stream will act as the first stage channel.

Managing excavated material

A Materials Management Plan has been submitted as part of the planning application. This plan explains the options we considered for both the management of the materials excavated as well as the options for transporting the material from the site. There are no plans to use North Hinksey Village to divert traffic or transport materials. We will construct a haul road specifically for construction traffic within the scheme area to reduce the need for lorries to drive on local roads to access different areas of the site. However, we will be removing a large amount of material which will need to remove from site. Lorries will leave the site via a new compound and access road at South Hinksey and join the A34. This will be our main compound and access point onto the road network.

The majority of the material being excavated will be alluvium, a silty clay. We will reuse this material in the proposed flood embankments where possible. Excavated gravel will be re-used in the scheme for environmental improvements and on the channel of the new river bed.

Most of the material leaving the site will be transported to old quarries and will be used to restore these sites. Once planning permission for the scheme has been granted we will be able to confirm which sites have the capacity and necessary permissions to receive the material.

Tree planting

To mitigate for the estimated 2,000 trees that will need to be felled during construction, we will be planting 4,325 trees. Approximately 15,000 smaller tree species, such as hawthorn, hazel and elder, will also be planted, along with many more native shrubs such as dogwood, goat willow, dog rose and wild privet. The tree-planting proposals result in more woodland within the scheme area after completion, than there currently is at present. These woodland areas will be managed for wildlife and include glades that are sown with wildflowers to encourage butterflies and other insects, as well as birds and foraging bats.

The replacement woodland trees will be saplings and it will be many years before they have the same ecological value as those being felled, so throughout the design process, our contractors, engineers and ecologists have worked together to minimise tree loss wherever possible. Once a contractor has been appointed we will work with them to further minimise losses of mature trees wherever possible. The contractor will also protect all retained trees and hedgerows within the scheme boundary by erecting stout fencing before materials or machinery are brought on site and before any work starts.

The Environment Agency is committed to the scheme bringing additional environmental benefits beyond reduced flood risk, and this includes our consideration for the trees and wildlife across the scheme area.

Dredging

Dredging the River Thames would not significantly reduce flood risk to Oxford. Even if we dredge all the channels that currently exist in Oxford, it would not reduce flooding from a major flood. In many cases, dredging isn’t the best long-term solution because rivers can quickly silt-up again. It can even increase flood risk downstream, alter the ecosystem, be environmentally damaging, costly and disruptive. Studies have indicated the River Thames would require frequent re-dredging as the natural tendency of all rivers after dredging is to deposit silt and return to their more natural dimensions. And it would not be a cheap option to dredge the River Thames.

 

Vicki Arroyo: “Let’s prepare for our new climate”

Vicki Arroyo is the Executive Director of the Georgetown Climate Center at Georgetown Law, where she also serves as the Assistant Dean of Centers and Institutes and a Professor from Practice. See here for more about her: https://www.georgetownclimate.org/about-us/staff.html

In the video below she talks about preparing for and adapting to climate change. She ends with:

“The larger point I’m trying to make is this. It’s up to us to look at our homes and our communities, our vulnerabilities and our exposures to risk, and to find ways to not just survive, but to thrive, and it’s up to us to plan and to prepare and to call on our government leaders and require them to do the same, even while they address the underlying causes of climate change. There are no quick fixes. There are no one-size-fits-all solutions. We’re all learning by doing. But the operative word is doing.”

As a flood plain city Oxford is very vulnerable: seven main rivers meet at Oxford, with a combined upstream catchment of about 2,500 km2. For over 10 years our Alliance has been talking to, calling on, and working with, the authorities responsible – from the Directors of the Environment Agency to local government and other bodies –  to make Oxford better prepared for what climate change will bring. A good deal has already been done but more is needed; the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme will enable Oxford to continue to thrive. Without it we may be, almost literally, sunk.