The second week of the Inquiry was devoted to hearing the submissions of the first Statutory Objector to the scheme, the Oxford Preservation Trust. Their arguments focused on two major points. Firstly they claimed that the Environment Agency had been slow to realise the ecological importance of Hinksey Meadow and in consequence the impact of the scheme had not been studied in sufficient detail. The second claim was that the option of having no channel in the meadow, and therefore leaving the site untouched, had not been fully examined. OPT accept that conveyance of flood water has to pass through the meadow but want the channel removed.

The OPT’s fielded three expert witnesses, on hydrogeology, fluvial hydrology, and ecology. Ms Fraser’s evidence on hydrology cast doubt on the reliability of the EA’s understanding about how the gravel aquifers in the area work. Her evidence was extremely technical, and focused on interrogating the methodology used by the Environment Agency to model the way that water moves across the scheme. In her expert opinion, there remained uncertainty as to how the surface water and groundwater interact, including which direction the groundwater actually flows through the site. 

Additionally, the calibration of the model used by the EA resulted in scenarios that do not match the “real world” movement of water in the area (although she also explained in cross-examination that all models are different to reality to some extent, by the very nature of their being models). This led her to conclude that groundwater in the area could be lowered by the scheme at certain times of the year. The consequences of this, in her opinion, were that there was no evidence to conclude the mitigation sites would be suitable for MG4 grassland. As for mitigation, it was premature to start to consider mitigation while the hydrogeology of the site was still unclear.

In cross-examination, Ms Fraser clarified that her analysis was based purely on the impact of the scheme on the water levels on the OPT meadow, rather than at a regional level, and that she had not been asked to analyse what the impact on groundwater would be if there were a submerged twin pipe scheme going through the meadow.

The EA fielded three members of their team, covering modelling, ecology and scheme design, to rebut arguments advanced by the OPT. The EA argued that they were aware of the importance of the meadow in 2014 when it was decided to develop the scheme. The first botanical studies were undertaken in 2015. The EA accepted that the model used to assess impacts on groundwater at Hinksey Meadow has limitations – it was designed for a different purpose. They also accepted that some data had been entered incorrectly. Ground water in the meadow will be monitored going forward and mitigation for any change in the levels can be adjusted as required. The EA has had boreholes in the meadow since 2018 and now has sufficient data to be able to establish a robust baseline for tracking any future changes to groundwater levels. A more refined model would not fundamentally affect the need to route the channel along the side of the meadow. 

The EA also argued that they have reviewed the ‘no channel in the meadow’ option but conclude it would increase flood risk and make the performance of the scheme unpredictable. They do not see any viable way of mitigating these effects. This was the only alternative put forward by OPT to the scheme as designed.

The OPT and EA agreed a statement of common ground on a number of planning issues which OPT had intended to raise. The inquiry adjourned early at 2pm on Thursday and will recommence Tuesday 28 November.

The Public Inquiry into the Compulsory Purchase Order for the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme opened on Tuesday 14 November at the King’s Centre on Osney Mead. It will run for approximately five weeks, and is open to the public.

A Compulsory Purchase Order Inquiry is a normal part of many large developments that stretch over multiple parcels of land. The purpose of the process is to ensure that property owners’ rights are considered carefully. The case is determined by an independent Inspector, appointed from the Planning Inspectorate. In coming to their decision, the Inspector judges whether or not there is a compelling case in the public interest, and whether there has been enough engagement with landowners to show that the CPO is being used as a last resort.

The Inspector also considers whether there is any impediment to the scheme going ahead: this matters because, once a CPO has been confirmed, a scheme should be quickly implemented so that people who have been deprived of their land are not left ‘in limbo’ for a long (or even indefinite) period of time. For this reason, Compulsory Purchase Orders often take place in tandem with planning permission applications, even though the CPO Inquiry process is entirely separate to the planning application for OFAS, which will be determined by Oxfordshire County Council.

Day One saw the different parties making their opening statements: The Environment Agency (as proposer of the scheme), the Oxford Preservation Trust, and the Ferry Hinksey Trust and the Oxford Flood and Environment Group.

The first week of the Inquiry has seen the Environment Agency experts explain the scheme in minute detail, showing how it was designed, how it will work given the hydrology of the area, how it is being funded, and how discussions with landowners have progressed. The team also covered the benefits, the ongoing maintenance required, the impacts on highways, compliance with planning policy, the impacts on the environment, landscape, and public access, and all the ramifications of the construction of the scheme.

Members of the public are able to ask questions of each expert after hearing their evidence, and the Inspector also asks her own questions.

On Thursday, members of the public in support of the scheme were heard. These included Andrew Down and Cllr Bethia Thomas from the Vale of the White Horse District Council, Cllr Nigel Chapman from Oxford City Council, and Bob Price, former leader of Oxford City Council. These speakers pointed out the unique opportunity offered by the scheme to tackle an expensive and complicated problem affecting the entire region, and the high cost-benefit ratio.

Members of the Oxford Flood Alliance spoke about their experiences of flooding in their own areas of Oxford. Adrian Porter recounted his experiences of being flooded at night with a young family and spending 6 months in alternative accommodation. John Mastroddi, part of whose garden will be compulsorily purchased, gave the perspective from Kennington, where residents worked together to prevent floodwater from being washed into neighbouring houses. Simon Collings described the flooding of his own house and others on Osney Island, and the work that is ongoing with the EA and other organisations to ensure that the biodiversity impacts of the Scheme are mitigated. Finally, Nick Hills told the story of residents of Earl Street and how he had been called up on holiday by Cllr Susannah Pressell, the Lord Mayor at the time, to be told that the street, and his own house, was flooding. He then asked some neighbours to lift his furniture as best they could. Over the last two decades, he has led the residents of Earl Street in protecting themselves from flood risk, including working with the council to have a bund installed at the top of the street and securing investment for a community-owned pump.

The members of the Flood Alliance demonstrated their commitment to working together to reduce flood risk across Oxford, not just in their own neighbourhoods. They showed how they have engaged with an extremely large number of local authorities, statutory undertakers, regional partners, national organisations, and most of all the general public and Oxford’s residents over the years to achieve this goal.

Next week will see the submissions and witnesses on behalf of the Oxford Preservation Trust, opposing the scheme on environmental and planning grounds. The Inquiry will open on Tuesday at 9.30am.

OFA member Simon Collings was interviewed on BBC Radio Oxford this morning about the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme and the public inquiry into the Compulsory Purchase Order which starts today. Simon talked about the misery of being flooded and the need to be pressing on urgently with implementing the scheme. He rejected claims that there are better options than the one proposed by the Environment Agency, and he welcomed the inquiry as a fair method for resolving challenges from opponents of the scheme.

There wasn’t time during the interview to deal with a claim by the spokesperson for the opposition that the scheme will ‘destroy Hinksey Meadow’. This is not true. The Environment Agency has worked very hard to minimise the impact of the scheme on the meadow and has worked closely with the Floodplain Meadows Partnership, the UK experts, in designing the scheme.

Jon Mansbridge from the Environment Agency was also interviewed later in the morning. He explained what the flood alleviation scheme will deliver, both in reducing flood risk and environmental benefits. If the scheme gets approval it is hoped construction will begin in late 2024. It will take five years to complete the scheme but benefits will begin to accrue as elements of the project are put in place.

You can catch recordings of the interviews on BBC Listen Live.https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/live:bbc_radio_oxford. Listen from 7.20am to hear Simon and from 8.20am for Jon Mansbridge.

Fifty-one letters supporting the flood alleviation scheme have been sent to the CPO inquiry, most of them by people in areas of Oxford at risk of flooding. Oxford Flood Alliance contacted a number of long term residents with experience of flooding and asked them to write. Many of the letters recount residents personal, often harrowing, experiences of floods and make a powerful case for why we need the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme. These voices are representative of the community the Oxford Flood Alliance was set up to serve and on whose behalf we speak.

The letters, along with written representations from OFA, proofs of evidence from the Environment Agency and evidence from objectors, can be read on the inquiry website https://www.hwa.uk.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Inquiry-Documents-List-26-10-2023.pdf

The inquiry starts on 14 November and is being held at the King’s Centre, Osney Mead, Oxford.

The public inquiry into objections to the compulsory purchase order, issued by the Environment Agency in connection with the flood alleviation scheme, will start on 14 November. Four members of the Oxford Flood Alliance Steering Group will be speaking at the inquiry in support of the scheme. We want the planning inspector who is hearing the objections to support the CPO.

The Environment Agency contacted around 400 landowners at the start of this year about more than 800 parcels of land which the agency needs to acquire to build the scheme. Some of these acquisitions will be temporary. There have been 27 objections from landowners, who are referred to as ‘statutory objectors’. The majority of these objections relate to specific land-related issues or to protection of infrastructure including railway assets and National Grid pylons. The Environment Agency expects to resolve many of these issues before the inquiry starts. Five of the statutory objectors oppose the flood scheme in principle or aspects of it.

There are also twenty-three ‘non-statutory objectors’, members of the public who do not own land subject to compulsory purchase. These objections range from concerns about future public access to the scheme area for recreation and dog walking through to environmental concerns about the scheme or aspects of the scheme.

OFA has been asking people in flood-affected communities in Oxford to write to the CPO inquiry in support of the flood scheme. It is important that the inspector hears the voices of people wanting the scheme to go ahead.

If you have not been approached by OFA but would like to write in support of the scheme you should send your comments in an email to the Programme Officer, Helen Wilson, who is supporting the Planning Inspector. Helen Wilson’s email is progofficer@aol.com. The deadline for letters is 5pm on 17 October.

The inquiry is being held at the King’s Centre, Osney Mead and is open to the public. Sessions run Tuesday-Thursday and in some weeks on a Friday. The hearings are scheduled to run for five weeks. OFA members expect to be speaking on the afternoon of 16 November. Information about the inquiry can be found here. All of the objections, with responses from the Environment Agency, are listed in Appendix 2 of the Statement of Case which is available from this link.

OFA has alerted the Environment Agency to potential maintenance work which may be required in two locations in the city. A member of the public contacted us recently about fallen trees and encroaching vegetation in the Weir’s Mill Stream near Donnington Bridge. We passed these comments, with photographs (see example below), to the Environment Agency who are arranging a site visit to assess the situation.

We also alerted the Environment Agency to a fallen Willow tree in the Bulstake Stream just north of Willow Walk (photo below). The branches are partially obstructing the channel. Maintenance work is scheduled on this stretch of river in September/October and the tree will be examined by the field team as part of their activity.

Maintenance of existing river channels is important for managing flood risk in the city. The Environment Agency carries out work on these streams annually. If you see fallen trees or other obstructions in the river which you think need attention please notify us.

The Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has confirmed that the public inquiry to consider the Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) for the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme will begin on Tuesday 14 November 2023 and run for around 3 weeks.  The inquiry will be held at The King’s Centre, Osney Mead, Oxford, OX2 0ES, and will be open to the public.

There will be a pre-inquiry meeting held on Thursday 21 September to consider how the inquiry will be run, to ensure it is conducted as efficiently as possible. Anyone who has objected to the CPO will be invited to attend.

In its latest newsletter, published today, the Environment Agency says:

‘A CPO public inquiry is standard procedure when objections are received. We welcome this opportunity for an independent inspector to hear the cases for and against the scheme. Following the public inquiry, the inspector will make a recommendation to the Secretary of State on whether or not the CPO should be confirmed. We expect it may take several months before the decision is known. We are confident the scheme as presented is the best option for reducing flood risk in Oxford. We are continuing our negotiations with landowners to attempt to resolve as many concerns as possible before the CPO public inquiry.’

The floodplain west and south of Oxford has changed dramatically over the last 200 years. What we now think of as the main channel of the Thames, flowing past Osney Island, assumed its present form in 1790 when Osney Lock was built to improve navigation. Prior to that the Bulstake Stream, which flows through Tumbling Bay, round under Botley Rd to the west of the main Thames channel, and then turns east to run along the south of Osney Mead, was also a major channel.

The map below, from 1830, shows many recognisable features, and some notable absences. (North Hinksey was then in Berkshire and the county boundary is shown as a black dotted line.) The Seacourt, Hinksey and Bulstake Streams, and the River Thames, follow the courses we recognise now. But we also see streams and drainage ditches we don’t find today. On the other hand, Hogacre Ditch (see maps) which appears on later nineteenth-century maps does not yet exist, Willow Walk is yet to appear (built around 1880), there’s no railway (built in 1844) and the area which is now New Hinksey was fields all the way to the Thames.

Source: OS map 1830, detail, National Library of Scotland

In contrast, the map below, from the 1920s, shows a much less open landscape and a reduced floodplain with development along Abingdon and Botley Roads. The A34 has appeared to the west.  Willow Walk, Monks’ Causeway and the Devil’s Backbone are there. So is Hogacre Ditch, showing as a continuous channel from North Hinksey across to the railway. This watercourse seems to have existed as a channel for only around 100 years. By 1961 the underground cables of the Electric Road had been laid, cutting Hogacre Ditch in half. The western section is now a dry ditch. The eastern portion is a backwater skirting the north of Hogacre Common and continuing on as Eastwyke Ditch down the eastern side of the Eco Park. Eastwyke Ditch runs under the railway, through New Hinksey, and eventually connects with the Thames.

Source: OS map 1920s, detail, Vision of Britain

In their book Oxford and Its Countryside (1982) Ian Scargill and Alan Crosby, both from the Oxford University School of Geography, lament the impact of these many changes. They praise the unique character of Port Meadow, but go on to observe:

South of the Botley Road the Hinksey Meadows are another expanse of flat floodplain, but they were enclosed in the late eighteenth century and have a landscape quite different from Port Meadow. The area is low lying and to make it suitable for agriculture a network of ditches and watercourses was created, criss-crossing the flats and linking the two main branches of the Thames.

They mention the intrusion of electricity pylons, the railway and the A34 and comment:

Despite the obvious beauty of the streams that are bordered by willows and yellow flags, scattered with water lilies and scented with mint, the Hinksey Meadows have lost some of their overall charm and can no longer be regarded as one of the most attractive parts of the whole Oxford area.

Since Scargill and Crosby were writing, agricultural practices have changed. Today there is a range of environmental initiatives in this area that they would have applauded. Hinksey Meadow, owned and managed since 1997 by Oxford Preservation Trust, is a notable example. Public access to these meadows has increased greatly in recent years. The area today is a mosaic of habitats of varying character, quality, and ecological value, a legacy of human actions over many centuries.

(Left) Hinksey Meadow in all its glory, end June 2023. (Right) Abandoned field west of Osney Mead, July 2023

In 2019 the Environment Agency built a fish pass just to the north of Tumbling Bay in Botley Park. An area of scrub was cleared and a small channel excavated to allow fish to navigate around the weirs in the bathing area, and access the Thames.

The area between the fish pass and the bathing pool was seeded with a wild-flower mix, and in recent weeks the meadow has been a glorious sight. There is lots of knapweed, also ox-eye daisy and lady’s bedstraw, and plenty of butterflies including gatekeepers (photo below), small skippers, meadow browns, and green-veined whites. The stream itself is also rich in vegetation.

This illustrates how just three years on, an area which was cleared, excavated and re-profiled can already be looking attractive and providing habitat to wildlife. If the Oxford Flood Alleviation Scheme does get built we expect to see many areas recovering similarly quickly.