Letter: Removal of Debenhams Northern Canopy Is Relevant to Flood Risk

Published on: 19 Sep, 2024
Updated on: 20 Sep, 2024

An abandoned car by the Plummers store in the 1968 floods.

From Bibhas Neogi

In response to a comment from Roger Main on the story: Demolition Proper of Debenhams Building Still Months Away

I recall seeing flooded Millbrook photos when Plummer Roddis’ basement was affected in September 1968. I was still driving down to Guildford from Battersea to newly opened University building of Civil Engineering at Stag Hill. Maybe The Dragon could show a photo?

Another looking north-east of the recently built Plummers store in Millbrook during the same flood. The northern canopy which would be positioned just around the far corner of the building as shown, was built later.

Guildford Past and Present group on Facebook has a photo of flooded Millbrook that clearly shows water level that was above the paved area outside of the north canopy. Now that it has been removed, the floor, I believe, is at the same level as the outside.

I am amazed at the statement that “The northern canopy has nothing to do with flooding” now that there is no barrier for ingress of water through it to the basement down the opening on the floor next to it!

Who are these “various organisations who still protest at any change today”? Raising educated cautions and drawing attention to factors that are not readily visible are not protestations; they are concerned observations for the benefit of the developer.

The northern canopy before it was removed.

Responses to Letter: Removal of Debenhams Northern Canopy Is Relevant to Flood Risk

Roger Main Reply

September 27, 2024 at 9:26 am

I think I have the right to reply to the comments above. The northern canopy on the Debenhams building has nothing to do with flooding. It was built because various organisations, too numerous to name, objected strongly to our proposal to link the store via bridge. This was deemed unacceptable due to sight lines, historic issues etcetera (yet further down the road is a bridge that links the Friary Shopping Centre).

So at great cost to the company, after a failed appeal which then cost in the region of £350,000, planning was granted for the canopy but even then people strongly objected.

Flooding of this building in previous times was caused by the river rising above the terrace area which then would ingress into the lower ground floor but again this was nothing to do with the the northern canopy.

This retail unit employed in the region over 300 people full-time or part-time and contributed for many years to the economy of Guildford, especially through payments of business rates which will continue to a greater extent with the new build benefitting Guildford and the riverside.

Roger Main is a former general manager of Debenhams.
- Bibhas Neogi Reply
  
  October 2, 2024 at 3:32 pm
  
  I think Mr Main has missed the point I was making. The demolition contractor has removed the whole porch and thus exposed the building to an increased risk of flooding through the opening that has been left.
  
  So they need to take measures to create a flood barrier in the same way as in front of what was the main entrance and the access to the basement next to it.
  
  I expect sand bag barriers will be used and provision of pumping out any water that seeps through them.
  
  The latest video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEIDBiwqvDU does not show any provision of sand bag barriers as of the 15th of September when the video was taken.
Roger Main Reply

October 3, 2024 at 6:04 pm

I have not missed the point at all. The flooding risk is there along the whole of river bank alongside the building, As soon as the river goes above ground floor level it will flood, regardless of the opening.

Has Mr Neogi forgotten that the entire building is coming dow? Yes, there will always be a risk to the building site but I am sure the contractor may put sandbags across that entrance as a temporary measure.

Perhaps Mr Neogi should become a consultant to the contractors, who I am sure know what they are doing.

As a foot note, the store always had a contingency plan in place for the event of flooding which did include sandbags as he has previously mentioned and a good relationship with a local authority, river authorities etc. I’m sure that this current contractor will also be developing good relationshps as the new building takes place and when completed. Just let them get on with it.
Bibhas Neogi Reply

October 15, 2024 at 11:13 am

“The flooding risk is there along the whole of river bank alongside the building, As soon as the river goes above ground floor level it will flood, regardless of the opening.” says Mr Main – really?

How would water get in if the entrances were protected? If there are other ways for water to enter the building that would be a worrying risk for the developer even for the newly replaced since the basement and the foundations are being retained.

Flood alert was issued on the September 12 but the video taken on the September 15 showed no sign of any sandbags in the vicinity of the building ready to be put in place. There was fresh warning of flooding a few days ago but luckily there are no such warning currently. However risk of flooding hasn’t gone away for the foreseeable future.

As for the contractor, they are clearing the inside of the building prior to actual demolition starting. If they were instructed to safeguard the building from flooding, I would have expected them, with sandbags stored nearby, to be ready to deal with any flooding. I expect Native Land is well aware of risk of flooding and will take appropriate measures during the demolition period but the site looked vulnerable as seen from the video.

Thanks to Mr Main for his recommendation yet again and yes, I could offer my services as I am a Chartered Structural Engineer. However, being nearly in my mid- eighties, I do not consider that feasible. Also a while ago Mr Main had recommended me for a job of a consultant for the council.

Maybe Mr Main’s achievement as a former general manager of Debenhams that employed 300 people and his claim to contribution to the economy of Guildford have not been acknowledged properly. So in return I would like to recommend some kind of an award like the ‘Honorary Freeman’ of the borough be considered or better still nominations from people of Guildford for an award like a MBE or an OBE might be appropriate?
Howard Moss Reply

October 17, 2024 at 9:26 am

I am sure the contractors know exactly what they are doing with the demolition of this building. It’s not exactly two blokes from the pub that someone recommended via Facebook.
- Bibhas Neogi Reply
  
  October 19, 2024 at 6:20 pm
  
  I hope so too but accidents and unexpected events still do happen either from inadequacies of measures or because of factors that have been overlooked.
  
  I have no idea of the relevant experience of this particular contractor doing the clearing work and I guess Mr Moss is not likely to know either unless he is privy to such information.
  
  This contractor may well be a sub-contractor of the main demolition contractor and doing the job of stripping out the building in readiness for the structural demolition. So, drawing attention to risks are not a bad thing even when such risk assessments have been carried out.