Issue - meetings

Report ES13106

Members considered a report requested by Councillor Nicolas Bennett concerning a water main burst at Corkscrew Hill, West Wickham on Sunday 28^th July 2013, near the junction with Bencurtis Park. The incident resulted in a substantial flow of water along Corkscrew Hill, causing significant damage to the surrounding road surface and pavements.

Some 251 residential properties were directly affected by the incident, including vulnerable elderly residents at Bencurtis Court - the properties either having very low water pressure or in some cases no water.

Thames Water was not aware of vulnerable residents at Bencurtis Court until advised by their staff. Thames Water delivered 40 bottles of water, considered inadequate for the residents by Glebe Housings Association’s Chief Executive. Had Bencurtis Court been registered with Thames Water as premises needing special requirements, a supply of bottled water would have been delivered without prompting.

L B Bromley was notified of the incident via the Council’s out-of-hours provider - this in respect of damage to the highway and the need for temporary diversions. The Council was not made aware of the impact on residential housing. The Emergency Planning Unit was not informed of the full circumstances until the following Tuesday, by which time the incident had been dealt with.

Although the Council’s Street Works team were made aware of the incident on Monday 30^th July, there was nothing to indicate the scale or extent of the impact upon residents. As such no information was passed to the Emergency Planning Unit.

Councillor Nicholas Bennett was concerned that the Council’s Emergency Planning Office was not made aware of the incident until the following Tuesday. Also, Report ES13016 had not considered any possible changes in procedure. Councillor Bennett felt that standard operating procedures should highlight a need for street works officers to ask searching questions on notification of an incident in order to gauge the nature of an emergency and its implications. A judgement could then be made on whether to advise Emergency Planning.

A key issue was that Thames Water had not advised the Council. It was necessary for utility companies to notify the Council of such incidents within two hours. Without such notification officers would have no information on the extent of an incident for vulnerable users. Thames Water and other utilities maintained a register of local service users. Information with officers and a utility company within two hours of an incident would not necessarily provide an indication of the extent of an emergency. Officers were in the hands of utility companies to provide information. It was also highlighted that Glebe Housing Association had not advised Thames Water of vulnerable service users at Bencurtis Court. If a utility company were to advise of an incident being escalated, the Council would pass on necessary information. The Street Works team were now more aware of the potential need to notify Emergency Planning of an incident.

Aware that the Council would have an active interest  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20