Prediction has Become a Reality


Last October the statement below was posted on this blog warning that if the grids were not regularly cleaned along Checkley Lane the potential for flooding would increase substantially:  

...........

'Additionally (to the flooding already experienced along Checkley Lane), the telecom mast installation further along the Lane has given rise to a persistent stream of water coming from underground.  The resolution to this was a ditch dug from the the mast to a grid at the side of the road, into which the water and sludge now flows.  When this drain becomes fully silted up (as are the two drains under the bridge now are) this water will flow into the road and so we will have another flood to deal with.   Half a step forward and three back!   Oh Dear!'

............

This has now come to pass.  Except that what we now have is the added scenario and danger of the flood under the bridge and the run off from the field on the Cheshire East side, joining up with the telecom mast run- off which will soon join up with what has become the usual Checkley Lane flood to make a large stretch of the Lane on the Wrinehill side impassable.  The flood at the mast site is particularly deep and dangerous.  Although the Lane was closed yesterday and one of the land owners was attempting to pump the water out, drivers were still using the lane, and the water was still flowing.

At the Parish Council Meeting on Thursday 25 January the Chair reported that a ditch had been dug by persons unknown directing the water onto adjacent land.  This was reported as a resolution to the issue.  However, that night it rained heavily and the flood returned - so clearly neither a solution nor a resolution.

Yesterday I walked the Lane with a resident from Cheshire East to see where the sources of water were coming from.  Mainly the blocked drains - all of them along the bridge/telecom/Checkley Lane (Staffordshire side) of the Lane.  Until these are cleared and some kind of solution is worked out re desilting, then the situation of flooding is only going to worsen.  

We spoke with the local landholder who is going to continue to pump the current flood water onto his land, and hopefully ditches on the land will be dug.  It is not for Staffordshire County Council to claim that it has no money.  How money is allocated is a political decision.  If Government allocations are too small to deal with what needs to be done within the County then, National Government needs to be approached in no uncertain terms.  And this is where MPs have a part to play in lobbying their government to pay attention and increase its grants to Local Authorities.  And for some of this to be ring- fenced for roads and flooding.  Unless this happens we will remain where we are - waterlogged.    


       

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Poppies and Cut-outs

  People might have noticed the poppies and the cut out metal figures placed in the village for Armistice Day in November.   It was suggested by Councillor Owen that metal figures be purchased and   placed on the Village Green. Poppies would be displayed through the parish on lamp posts etc. These were paid for from the Parish Council Funds (£350 for the cutouts plus 20 plastic poppies at £5 each).   At the November meeting I asked if there was a reason that no poppies had been placed in Wrinehill since the account had been paid from Parish Council funds.   I did not receive a satisfactory answer but I was accused of making a ‘complaint’ (the only person not to praise the display, it seems).   But it was not a ‘complaint’ only a question based on an observation. The upshot is that an email was sent to all Members of the Council   suggesting that as a result poppies and cut out figures would be purchased -3 sets of figures and 40 more poppies).  ...
Read more

Clarification

 It has been noted in the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 June 2024 Minute 5 a statement made about this blog 'by a member of the parish council'- 'that  any comments submitted to the author of the blog which questioned the factual accuracy of the contents of its reports were ignored and not published'.  This is an assumption (yet another) not a fact.   It also seems to be yet another example of attempts to undermine the integrity of the blog (and its author). The blog, it has been noted, presents another view point which often differs from the 'standard'/'official' view presented via the Minutes particularly, where statements are made and treated as if they were universal truths rather than just  'a view' of a group of people. It needs to be pointed out here, therefore, that all comments received are read and considered, even though they come from a very small pool of anonymous, in the main, individuals, some with obvious agendas and with mali...
Read more

Business as Usual?

 At the last meeting of the Parish Council in February,  the Chair directed Councillor Head to report back on the issue of the S106  agreement monies for the former Wrinehill garage site.  The contribution of £11,500 has been deposited with the Borough Council.  Residents feel that this money should be spent primarily in Wrinehill, given that the S 106 proceeds of the last two developments were not.  (£45,000 the Commuted sum for the Bluebell development went to Knutton, also a sum (not known) from the Saw Mill development  was allocated for Laudy Croft, but it is not known if that happened, we are told). It is unclear why a councillor for Betley village is reporting on this matter unless ....  It had been mooted way back that the S106 money should be spent on resurfacing the Village Hall  car park.   Needed it is true but the Village Hall could raise funds from other sources not to mention its own reserves, which are not insubstant...
Read more