Agenda and minutes

Councillors Gantly, Doolan, Chowdhury and Russell

None

None

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 26 January 2017 be confirmed as a correct record of the proceedings and the Chair be authorised to sign them

(b)  That approval of the minutes of the meeting of 18 January 2017 be deferred to the next meeting of the Committee

None

The Chair outlined the procedure for Public questions and the filming and recording of meetings

The Chair outlined the future meetings of the Committee as follows –

Nigel Dyer and James Kingston, Thames Water were present for discussion of this item and gave a verbal update to the Committee during which the following main points were made –

·         The report on the incidents of the last major 8 bursts, including the Upper Street burst, had been expected at the end of February, but because of the need for further additional information requested of the independent consultant, Paul Cuttill, to supplement the review, this is now not expected to be ready until April

·         Discussion took place as to the precise location of the 8 recent major bursts and the differing sites that Thames Water had detailed previously, and the precise list was clarified for Members

·         Thames Water stated that there was a need to look at how they responded to emergencies, such as Upper Street, and whilst it had to be recognised that Thames Water were not a blue light service, they need to ensure that they responded as quickly as possible to such incidents. In addition, they needed to look at issues in relation to the wider network, and the control regimes in place and it was important that the independent review took these factors into account

·         Thames Water also stated that a wider review had also been commissioned, in relation to the remainder of the network, with a specific focus on historical bursts on the main trunk mains network and whether there were any patterns to the bursts, the type of piping e.g. plastic or metal in place, new technology  that may be available to detect leaks, monitoring techniques and also the aspect of asset management and the replacement of pipes. There is also the need to look at the operator model and how Thames Water responds with staff having the necessary skillsets to deliver

·         There is also  a need to look at the asset risk management strategy and the consequences of bursts, and how Thames Water responded in an emergency

·         It was noted that this review would be concluded in September and supplement the review to be completed in March, that is referred to earlier

·         Reference was made to the main trunk pipes in Canonbury ward, and that these needed to be surveyed, given the potential for serious injury if these burst, due to basements and proximity to large housing estates. Thames Water undertook to investigate when these pipes were last surveyed and inform Councillors Jeapes thereon

·         It was noted that the initial surveys taking place at present in the Upper Street area were from City Road to Colebrooke Row, in order to ascertain which pipes needed to be replaced, and there had to be co-ordination with TfL, the Council and other relevant authorities to get necessary permissions for road closures

·         Thames Water explained that it was difficult to detect leaks, such as the Upper Street burst, from their normal monitoring methods, as it was felt that this was caused by a thinning of the wall of the pipe from outside corrosion, although this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 319.