Minutes:
Phil Stride, Head of London Tideway Tunnels and Nick Tennant, Communications Manager for the Thames Tunnel were present at the meeting.
The following information was noted:
· They were here to consult with residents on the proposed routes for the Thames Tunnel and the proposed use of King Stairs Gardens and St. John’s Estate.
· This was phase one of the public consultation which was to hear the views of residents on their preferred route and sites, and all the other short-listed options.
· The present sewerage system does not meet modern day London and Thames Water want to avoid further sewage going into the Thames.
· Thames Water received a directive from DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs) that a tunnel offers by far the most effective solution to the unacceptable problem of raw sewage is being regularly discharged in the Thames.
· Thames Water were told to come up with a design, construction and maintenance of a scheme for collecting systems connected to Beckton and Crossness sewage treatment works.
· Thames Water are consulting other London Boroughs to consider what sites are viable.
· There are 769 potential main tunnel shaft sites and 373 potential CSO sites and one of the possible sites in Southwark is King Stairs Gardens and the other shaft site Shad Thames.
There are a series of consultation activities, drop in exhibitions available around the Borough. Residents were encouraged to check the Thames Water website: http://www.thameswater.co.uk/cps/rde/xchg/corp/hs.xsl/6071.htm The closing date for comments would be 20 December 2010 and the second round of consultation would take place in January 2011.
Residents asked the following questions:
Q1: Please comment on the general concern about the loss of green space, children’s play area and the Church and you considered other sites like Convoys Wharf in Deptford?
Q2: Who have you consulted?
Q3: Have Thames Water considered the views of residents at previous meetings?
Q4: What about the impact it would have on traffic?
The Head of London Tideway Tunnelsresponded:
A1: A site closer to the River had been chosen to avoid minimal disruption and disposal of sewage. Thames Water had looked at Chamber’s Wharf and Convoys Wharf but due to boring and gravelling issues it would cause problems and is not hydraulically feasible.
A2: Leaseholders that are Thames Water bill payers but not tenants. Also owner occupiers who were not Thames Water bill payers. Thames Water apologised for missing out the tenants but confirmed that they would be included in the second phase of this consultation.
A3: We have taken on board comments and would ensure that everyone is consulted. Other viable sites are being looked at and they fully understand the impact this would have on local communities. Another possibility is the Brownfield Site and after hearing people’s views today they could revisit Chambers Wharf.
A4: Thames Water fully understands and notes residents’ concerns of the traffic problem in Rotherhithe area particularly in Jamaica Road.
A5: On conclusion Thames Water said they would minimise the footprint, look at the alternatives to reduce the amount of construction work undertaken, reanalyse the situation on preferred options for the Thames Tunnel. Also take into consideration the environmental impact following any findings during an archaeology survey which would be treated with respect in accordance with the law.
The chair thanked the representatives for attending and responding to questions.