Agenda item

Presentation by Severn Trent Water representatives

Three representatives from Severn Trent (Paul Evans, Wayne Ellis and Paul Dennison) attended the meeting, as well as an officer from Gloucestershire Highways, Chris Riley. 

The representatives from Severn Trent talked through the PowerPoint presentation (attached at Appendix 2).  As part of their business plan, Severn Trent recognised the impact that sewer flooding had on their customers.  Over the last two years survey and analysis of the sewers in Cheltenham had been undertaken, which had identified sections of sewer that could no longer meet demands and posed the risk of sewer flooding.  Investment of £6million would largely involve the replacement of existing sewers with much larger pipes and 15 projects would reduce the risk of sewer flooding to 52 properties.  In developing a strategic solution, projects were batched together into geographical areas.  Whilst this had resulted in a wider presence in the area than would be the norm, it also allowed for multiple site working which had helped with the planning of road closures and ultimately reduced the timescale of the overall project.  In talking through the programme of current and future work, members were advised that work at some sites was almost complete, with a number of sites due for completion ahead of schedule.  Work to Lansdown Road was deferred after unforeseen services were located during initial works.  This decision was taken so that the road could be re-opened whilst Severn Trent reviewed their options.  One solution that was being explored with Dean Close School was the option to run the last 100 metres of the project through the School property and discussions were ongoing. 

Members were assured that Severn Trent were meeting their obligations and compensating businesses.  They did however admit that there were some lessons learnt in the Tivoli area.  Their commitment to the community extended to financial support for the recent ‘Souk in the Suffolks’ and the Cheltenham half marathon. 

Before inviting questions from the committee, the Chairman referred members to the questions which had been submitted in writing, by Councillor Wilkinson (attached at Appendix 3).  In response to the answers that had been provided to his written questions, Councillor Wilkinson commented that the business specific banners seemed to be an after-thought and that he felt there was a need for more support of back street businesses.  In a supplementary to question 4, he asked why temporary permits weren’t issued to the residents in Andover Street which would have allowed them to park in adjoining streets for the duration of the road closure.  Severn Trent confirmed that there had been dialogue between all involved but no solution could be reached.  This was a learning point and in future, discussions would start earlier. 

Representatives from Severn Trent, along with an Officer from Gloucestershire Highways and Ubico, provided the following answers to member questions:

·         Severn Trent’s Compensation Manager had provided assistance to a number of businesses with their claims, of which a number had already been received and were either being processed or had already been finalised.  The relationship that had been built with the Suffolk traders was a good example of the relationships that Severn Trent endeavoured to achieve during such works.

·         The start date for work in Lichfield Drive had been deferred until the 15 September to enable the School to circulate leaflets to the students.  These had been provided by Severn Trent and were being circulated by the School.

·         Severn Trent, Gloucestershire Highways and Stagecoach were looking closely at the options for Canterbury Way, with one option being a temporary one way system.  There was ongoing dialogue to ensure delivery of schemes with minimised impact on residents.  Any parking restrictions would be communicated to residents by Severn Trent and with signage on the road itself. 

·         Road closures for essential works did pose issues to waste collections and whilst these road closures were communicated to Ubico, it was not always possible to gain safe access.  A press release had asked residents that were affected by road closures to leave their bins out if they had not been emptied so that crews could make repeated attempts to gain safe access and make collections.  

·         If a site team was made aware of a resident requiring access for a taxi or community bus, it could work with the individual to make the necessary arrangements.  Work was usually concentrated on a small area at a time and it was therefore possible to allow some form of access.

·         Gloucestershire County Council held a utilities co-ordination meeting which helped to identify opportunities for joined up working in specific areas. 

·         Large scale works by utility companies tended to be planned around resurfacing requirements and whilst Gloucestershire Highways endeavoured to protect roads, this did not extend to new supply or repair works.  Severn Trent would be undertaking resurfacing to a greater degree than was required, which had been negotiated and funded by Gloucestershire Higways.

·         Pre work, which included relocation of the gas and water supplies in Cleeve View and Whaddon Road would start prior to Christmas, with work to commence immediately after.  The remaining three public exhibitions for future works would be held at the end of September and would be advertised in due course.

·         When an area was identified for works to be undertaken, the process included the identification of alternative and appropriate routes for traffic.  If a specific issue was identified (i.e. a School) then this would be documented in a risk assessment and method statement.  If no specific issue was identified then this would not necessarily be documented (i.e. traffic cutting through car parks).

The Chairman thanked the representatives from Severn Trent and Gloucestershire Highways for their attendance which was very much appreciated by members.  He asked them to maintain dialogue and whilst he didn’t imagine it would be necessary for them to attend another meeting of the committee, he did suggest that it may be useful for them to revisit at the end of the process and discuss any lessons learnt.