Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Two weeks ago they resurfaced EDG between Townley Rd and the Village. Two days ago Thames Water dug it up to fix a leak.


This is on the section outside JAGs where the crest of the hill is and where the mains water pipe has suffered repeated failures for several decades whenever there is a particularly dry summer or wet winter. Movement in the underlying clay soil means the rigid the 100 year old cast iron pipes get stress and fracture.


Why does the Council not pressurise TW water to replace that section with the more flexible polythene pipes that can withstand flexing?


It's a continual process of --- dig, temp fix, reseal then repeat, and repeat, ad infinitum.


Meanwhile traffic is all backed up yet again on what has become an even busier road since the brought in LTNs!

Edited by vladi

A Thames Water operative told me the vehicles used by Conway's to resurface EDG are meant for use on motorways and are too heavy.


He also confirmed that the school coaches, buses and extra traffic caused by LTN's increases the chances of water pipes fracturing due to constant weight of traffic.

What a daft and potentially offensive title. The council is not an individual, and those who have or have had friends and relatives who's life support was turned off might find this an awful term. You are simply providing meat to the usual suspects who froth at the mouth about all things Southwark.


By all means discuss the individual issue, whatever that is as all you've made me do is focus on the title.


But I should thank you for the distraction, football is dull and I'm struggling to get motivation to do anything else with my evening. I'll think I'll post something a bit surreal on the Lounge.


[edited as tile was changed so above is now irrelevant.].


I've said elsewhere that Thames Water poor performance is something we can all agree on.

Edited by malumbu

In fairness, I suppose Thames Water may be keen to explain why pipes keep bursting and increased "weight of traffic" caused by LTNs is handy. Perhaps replacing the pipes in that area is now almost impossible as where would the traffic go while extensive work is underway?


 

A Thames Water operative told me the vehicles used by Conway's to resurface EDG are meant for use on motorways and are too heavy.


He also confirmed that the school coaches, buses and extra traffic caused by LTN's increases the chances of water pipes fracturing due to constant weight of traffic.

Vladi I think the real question is why Thames Water don't plan a total pipe replacement which would possibly cost less to complete in one hit then multiple visits to the same site.


Possibly nothing to do with the council at all (apart from increased traffic caused by the LTN displacement) and unfortunate that recently resurfaced Road was dug up due to emergency road works.


There is a register of planned road works held by the Mayors office that is supposed to align road works to occur at the same time (one hole to repair utilities rather than multiple sets of roadworks on the same spot) but it can't account or plan for emergencies.

Vladi I think the real question is why Thames Water don't plan a total pipe replacement which would possibly cost less to complete in one hit then multiple visits to the same site.


Possibly nothing to do with the council at all (apart from increased traffic caused by the LTN displacement) and unfortunate that recently resurfaced Road was dug up due to emergency road works.


There is a register of planned road works held by the Mayors office that is supposed to align road works to occur at the same time (one hole to repair utilities rather than multiple sets of roadworks on the same spot) but it can't account or plan for emergencies.

 

Thames Water don't want to annoy their shareholders. they're the only ones they care about.


By their own figures, TW lose 24% of their output before it reaches homes/businesses. Any other business that didn't have a captive audience would lynch their CEO if this was the case. And the other water co's are no better and now they're allowed to dump raw sewage into rivers too. Nationalise the lot of them.

I don't support privatisation but it was while Thames Water was under state ownership that neglect and underinvestment set in. Thames Water has reduced daily leakage by 15 million litres per day since privatisation...'course, it's still at 635 million litres per day so...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm certainly not surly - it's Friday, so I'm in a delightful mood.  As Earl Aelfheah said, the money has to come from somewhere. But Labour new that hiking fuel as well as employee NIC in would be a step too far - for businesses and consumers. It was the right decision for this moment in time. Suggesting that someone who's against fuel duty increase on this occasion is against and fuel duty full stop is quite a leap. Why do you demonise everyone who doesn't think that owning a car is a cardinal sin?  I'm not sure using Clarkson as an example of your average farmer holds much weight as an argument, but you know that already, Mal. 
    • Hope it's making others smile too! I don't know the background or how long it's been there 😊
    • If you are against the increase in fuel duty then you are surly against fuel duty full stop.  It has not kept up with inflation, I'm talking about getting it back on track.  Ultimately road user charging is the solution. Labour will probably compromise on agricultural land inheritance by raising the cap so it generally catches the Clarksons of the world who are not bothered about profits from land beyond, in his case, income from a highly successful TV series and the great publicity for the farm shop and pub
    • Were things much simpler in the 80/90s? I remember both my girls belonging to a 6th Form Consortium which covered Sydenham Girls, Forest Hill Boys and Sedgehill off Bromley Road. A level classes were spread across the 3 schools - i remember Forest Hill boys coming to Sydenham Girls for one subject (think it was sociology or psychology ) A mini bus was provided to transport pupils to different sites, But I guess with less schools being 'managed' by the local authority, providers such as Harris etc have different priorities. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...