Concerns about Brede sluice and river water levels in Rye were raised by local residents during a meeting with the Environment Agency last week. Work is continuing on the sluice and repairs are underway after the eastern bank of the Brede collapsed following heavy rain a fortnight ago.
25 residents from New Winchelsea Road and Winchelsea Beach took part in the discussions with Ian Nunn, a senior manager at the Environment Agency, at the Rye Heritage Centre on Wednesday November 31. They were joined by the mayor of Rye and both Rye’s District Councillors.
Ian Nunn opened the meeting by explaining the project at the Brede Sluice, handled by contractor Mackley which delivers coastal, river and complex infrastructure across the Southeast. He emphasised that the sluice was a key part of the Rye tidal water system allowing flows to be controlled out of the River Brede, so that levels of tidal water in the Rock Channel and river levels can be best balanced.
As the sluice was an old structure in need of repair, the project had been classed as “emergency”. The up and downstream gates needed attention and improvement. The work involved the building of a temporary coffer dam upstream, retained by pilings, to allow “draining down” for access to parts of the sluice. The plan was to brace the frame and fit improved sluice gates. On the upstream side there would be integral “slot boards” to enable better control.
Difficulties had arisen. Ian explained that on the west side, an old culvert bypass had been found which required sealing. Then, south east of the sluice there was a bank slip, probably partly aggravated by recent heavy rain. Similar events have been seen above the Military Road and along the River Rother. This bank slip did not directly affect the operation of the sluice but needed urgent attention as behind it the trackway to Castle Mill cottages had fallen away. The Environment Agency had made alternative arrangements for foot access.
Against this background, the residents on New Winchelsea Road and Winchelsea Beach were particularly concerned about the impact of high river levels on gardens and infrastructure along the west bank of the river.
There was a lively debate. Over 30 questions were posed relating to the handling, design and impact of the project. Ian Nunn touched onto finance and the way that the Environment Agency allocates its constrained funds to those projects justified by business case.
Some residents questioned the amount of research, particularly on ground and soil data and flow modelling, that might have been completed before the work started. Others asked about the fitting of heavier and improved sluice gates to framing that was apparently old and partially mobile. There were questions about the bank slip, its causes and its mitigation. Some asked about the impact on local biodiversity (including nesting birds, fish and eels) and of using a temporary raft and coffer dam.
There were allegations that the stabilising infill at the toe of the bank slip had included non-biodegradable material. Most wanted to know about project timings and duration. Those with boats asked about the slipway on the west side of the river.
The subject that kept arising was the need for better communication so that locals could be reassured about the work.
At the conclusion, there had been a good airing of many issues. REACT (Rye Emergency Action Community Team), which organised the meeting, undertook to assist the Environment Agency with future communication and perhaps a follow-up meeting.
Image Credits: Anthony Kimber .
I am not sure local people should be reassured by the ongoing problems at Brede Sluice.
The bank and road that the Contractor Mackley managed to destroy belongs to me and there is the access to Castle Farm, Castle Mill Cottages and the important Bridlepath and Footpaths that cross the Farm and go to Winchelsea Beach.
I was not invited to the Public Meeting or in fact knew anything about it. This is not surprising as the EA, their Consultants managing the works and Mackley are all a law unto themselves and there is zero communication.
Despite being out of pocket to a significant amount due to the disruption, at present the EA are doing an investigation into what went wrong and who is to blame. This is going to take up to 3 weeks and cost a few thousand pounds, I expect.
The fault is entirely down to Mackley for not doing what they were told, which was the Coffer dam had to be removed by the end of September or latest early October before there were any significant rains and flood risks. They didn’t do this.
They had started to remove the Coffer dam, but instead of taking out the centre section to allow the water to flow directly into the sluice they started to take out the sheet piles on the East side. They couldn’t remove the centre section because they had welded the piles together!!
The effect of taking out the piles when there was a huge amount of rain 18mm which fell in less than half an hour caused the flood water to set up a whirlpool along the river side which then ate away at the bank as all the flow was directed that way because of the coffer dam.
It was perhaps fortunate that it wasn’t the other side as many of the houses would have been at risk.
None of these projects are managed by the EA but by various consultants.
When things go wrong there is no one who takes the blame.
The work still hasn’t been completed because the Pile driver in the river has apparently broken down, The starter motor needs repairing/replacing. I would have thought there should have been some urgency to get it repaired!
I am sure the official report will just say that it was an extreme weather event, no one will be blamed and Mackley will charge another Million pounds for fixing what is their cock up!
Well said Frank,the truth of the matter always prevails in the end.
I have been to a couple of the meetings which I had organised as a friend of ours had been left unable to get to her house , the tone of the meeting was very apologetic and they would pay for BB etc, two weeks into this saga not a penny has been repaid and now we are asking for compensation, is it because no one is admitting blame for the disaster that could of taking lives ?