Maintenance Back-Logs Catch County Out as Floods Spread on Hertfordshire’s Roads

7 Jan 2014
steamroller
The picture does not show equipment actually used by Ringway, HCC’s contractor, but it is a metaphor for the slowness of HCC’s response to highway repairs

Given the recent levels of rain and the large amount of flooding occurring across the county it is clear that not all of this is due to the weather. Some of it is caused by the County not keeping on top of the gully cleaning - especially in winter months when leaves and road debris are likely to block the drains and gullies.

County Councillor Nick Hollinghurst, Tring and the Villages, said "There is of course a distinction between flash flooding and recurrent issues where there is clearly a gully problem.

"However the major problem seems that the clause in the current contract with HCC which requires Ringway to clean gullies no more than once every 18 months. Whereas a small number of gullies, identified as being vulnerable, are cleaned every 6 months. The 18 month cycle for routine gully clearing is obviously inadequate."

Stephen Giles-Medhurst, Central and Oxhey, LD spokesperson for Highways said "This points to:

  • The requirement for an urgent review of this part of the contract;
  • checking with Ringway what capacity they have now to bring in extra gully cleaning equipment - ie Vactor units. We need to know how many do they currently deploy in Herts as I have had complaints that gangs are turning up at sites and saying they cannot unblock drains because they do not have the equipment. This was the case at one flood where a Councillor was actually present and the water was clearly entering the property yet Ringway at the time said they could do nothing! "I would have thought a vulnerable area that I, and others have been reporting for over six months as requiring attention, would have been dealt with in anticipation of the coming winter - but nothing was done until this weekend's heavy rain!"

Another issue requiring clarification is the accuracy of the messages that are sent from the fault reporting website. Giles-Medhurst went on to say "I am puzzled by the vagueness of the "Any repairs required have now been carried out" response. This is not the same as a confirmation that the reported fault (or indeed any fault) has actually been dealt with. It matters whether repairs have or haven't been carried out. If not, the problem may well re-occur in the next heavy rain.

"The flooding problem I referred to and which had been reported, received this automated response, and it flooded again. So clearly nothing was done. Workmen turned up and, I suspect, didn't like the look of it or thought the water level had dropped - indeed it was dry at the time of their attendance - so they then went away without doing anything. This despite the two very visable raised slabs that had been shifted by the sheer volume of water.

"All of this points to the necessity of a serious overhaul as to how the County deals with rainwater flooding, which I, and my fellow LD County Councillors, are formally requesting."

This website uses cookies

Like most websites, this site uses cookies. Some are required to make it work, while others are used for statistical or marketing purposes. If you choose not to allow cookies some features may not be available, such as content from other websites. Please read our Cookie Policy for more information.

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
Marketing cookies are used by third parties or publishers to display personalized advertisements. They do this by tracking visitors across websites.