We welcomed hundreds of people to our Show of Hands event on 28th June. All of them increasingly appalled by the Thames Water proposals. We had lots of questions, which we thought we would capture here for general circulation
The size of the abstraction facility
Some people were not really sure how big the abstraction facility will be, nor the extent of other structures in Burnell Open space. The TDRA structures at Burnell Open space will be very visible and will have a negative impact on the character of the green space, riverside and Thames Path.
The abstraction facility would be built into the riverside, constructed from reinforced concrete. It would be up to 38m wide including reinforced concrete wing walls. The main intake apparatus and a series of fish screens would be in the middle of the structure measuring about 12m wide. The height of the structure could be equal to or up to 3 metres higher than the existing top towpath. A barrier of posts and floating booms would keep river users away from the structure. The fish screens and posts would mean the structure could extend up to 3 metres into the river.
The very large kiosk; For the first time Thames Water have described a non-riverside structure. This is a single storey kiosk which would be approximately 5.5m by 5m may be needed. This would house electrical power supply, telemetry and buried connection pipework to the connection shaft within the Burnell Avenue.
The treated sewage outfall: The other structure on Burnell Open Space riverside is the treated sewage outfall. There are two options for this structure. The first option is a bankside structure: a 4-metre-wide structure with access covers at ground level and extending slightly over the river edge. Vertical bars will sit below the overhang to prevent debris blocking the outfall. The second option is an in-river option: For this there would not be any change on the riverbank. Instead, there would be a a series of underwater pipes and diffusers located within and on the riverbed, roughly 6 to 8 metres from the riverbank. The visible part of this option would be a protective marked out with posts with ropes and buoys extending about 15 metres from the riverbank.
NOTE: The very large “kiosk” is barely described by Thames Water. There is no description of what it will be made of, how tall it will be, or how often it will be used. Thames Water also “under describe” potential security requirements. “Indicative” security for the site is minimal; the kiosk has none and the abstraction facility has what looks like a 3-foot fence. Thames Water say that extra security measures may be needed including additional fencing and potentially CCTV. In fact, it is very hard to find a water company intake that does not have a 6-foot fence with spikes.
NOTE: the in-river option for the outfall has significant impact on river users and also on the look of the riverside. Thames Water do not explain why the EA has suggested such an option. If the EA insist on this option for environmental reasons then what is the point of asking the public for feedback?
You may want to provide feedback on this topic in the consultation response: For example: How do Thames Water expect you to feedback when they do not provide sufficient information? Why is there not more details about the “kiosk”, or the details of security fencing and CCTV; how will swimmers and boaters be impacted by not having access to the riverbank at that location? Why has the EA suggested this “in-river” alternative outfall and how much can the public influence this?
2.Tunnelling under houses. Obviously the “tunnel under your house” situation is a concern for many people. Thames Water has a land and property e-mail address (property.TDRA@thameswater.co.uk.co.uk ) which they suggest people write to with any concerns about property issues. Consider also including concerns within your consultation response to pressure Thames Water to respond to issues like this at a project level context.
The following points are from the Thames Water “land and property leaflet”. Thames Water say they will “seek to carry out detailed ground surveys and settlement assessments, as well as property surveys, where appropriate, to ensure that tunnelling methods used mitigate against ground settlement” AND also “In advance of any tunnelling, we’d seek to undertake defect surveys of properties, where appropriate, to record their pre-tunnelling condition, …”.
The point to note here is the “where appropriate” qualifier. Here are some points to consider: What does “where appropriate” mean? When will Thames Waters “settlement assessments” be undertaken? Will the results be made public? Why did Thames Water not do settlement surveys before the consultation? If the results of the settlement survey lead to proposals for property surveys does this mean that tunnelling settlement could cause problems? If the DCO is granted will all properties on the tunnelling route be given defect surveys? Will Thames Water pay for people to have their own independent survey?
It will be best to be very specific in any questions that you ask. As noted above remember to include your concerns in your consultation response as feedback. This way, issues around land and property will be part of a project level response not just “swept under the carpet” by a bland and reassuring “maybe, might, could do” response from the Land and Property team.
The best way to not have tunnelling under any houses is to stop this project!