Hot topic - super sewer crater
RESIDENTS could pay up to £200 each for a ‘super sewer’. Thames Water say they want to site a 30 metre construction hole in one of the borough’s treasured open spaces. Thames Water admit it will do little to prevent flooding.
A huge crater – possibly earmarked for Ravenscourt Park or Furnivall Gardens – would be the starting point for construction. It would pump out at least one million tonnes of soil. The £2.5 billion tunnel will effectively act as a super sewage storage tank. Constructing the 32km long tunnel would take eight years - obliterating an open space. Read more about the super sewer »
Share your views
Are you happy to pay £200 for the super sewer?
Are there better solutions for a cleaner Thames?
Please read our publishing policy.
» Watch the report on the BBC News website (opens new window)
» Read the notes of the council's meeting with Thames Water
» Read Thames Water's 31 July letter to the council (pdf 670KB)
» Read Thames Water's 26 June letter to the council (pdf 681KB)
I can't believe people are convinced by any of the arguments put forward for the sewer as a solution to certain issues. Flooding, sewage backup, etc. can all be sorted without this monstrosity. It is going to be huge. It is going to take years of building, which will stop the river and riverside in Hammersmith being used for leisure. No more strolls by the river, no more rowing or sailing, as it is going to be a huge building site both on and in the river.
From Yasmin Hassan on 27/08/08
I'm extremely unhappy about the prospect of Furnivall Gardens being dug up for the tunnel entrance. Not only will this destroy a well used and much loved open space, it will disrupt those living on the river directly in front and is likely to have a negative impact on historic buildings that border the gardens. From other forum sites, I understand that there are other alternatives available to Thames Water, both in terms of solution and siting for this proposal - one user has mentioned the Distillery Road site next to the Thames Water HQ in Chancellors Road. H&F Council needs to ensure that Thames Water adequately and responsibly consider all alternatives and the best solution is chosen taking into account local residents’ views.
From S Tomlinson on 26/08/08
Hi, I'm writing to lend my voice to the opposition to the proposed super sewer in Furnivall Gardens. Please keep me informed and let me know if there is anything I can do to ensure that this does not go ahead.
From Liana Coyne on 20/08/08
The latest on this super sewer is that Hammersmith & Fulham Council are suggesting to Thames Water to build the entrance in Dukes Meadows. As a resident living in one of the three council estates that border Dukes Meadows, I will be lobbying our local Hounslow councillors to make sure H&F Council are taken to task over such a stupid suggestion after thousands of pounds of charity funding has been spent in restoring it back to it's former glory.
From Ian Richardson on 16/08/08
Absolutely disgraceful! How can something like this be allowed to undermine other positive projects (i.e. Furnival Gardens, King Street development). There are other sites nearby that would be far less-impacting on the community's green-space.
From Charles Blair on 11/08/08
We think the behaviour of Thames Water is cavalier and mercenary. We find it hard to believe that they were not aware that they would need land for their proposed super sewer only four months before it received approval!
From Russell & Sarah Petit on 09/08/08
I am astonished that the lead and deputy councillor take such an intransigent stand. The minimal environmental benefits that they dismiss so readily include the health and safety of their constituents every time they use the river recreationally or come into contact with the river. Thousands upon thousands of tonnes of raw sewage enter the river every year through these sewers and the detritus is left on the foreshore risking the health of the many people who use the river. Apart from this, there is the river ecology which suffered a major fish kill in August 2004 from these sewer overflows. You should remember that the river is the jewel in your crown and if you don't look after it you will lose your best asset. If you looked into it, as I have, you would also find that Thames Water only see sewage bills increasing by £40, and that is by 2020!! The short term inconvenience is more than balanced by the long term gain. The sewage problem is something that us in west London have been complaining about for years; you are so out of touch with the people you are supposed to represent. You should work with Thames Water to get the best way of doing this, with the least disruption, rather than just saying NO!
From Dr Charles Barterham on 07/08/08
A considerable number of streets in Hammersmith have suffered flooding from overloaded sewers in recent summers - in particular Askew Road, Cathnor Road, Cobbold Road, Boscombe Road, Ellingham Road, Hammersmith Grove, Cambridge Grove, Upper Mall, Hammersmith Terrace to name but a few. The Hammersmith Society has previously welcomed the government providing funding for a Tunnel being built under the Thames to resolve the problem. However, the Hammersmith Society is extremely concerned at the prospect of a huge hole being dug in Furnivall Gardens as a means of pumping out the soil from the river for the construction of the tunnel. And in particular, that this hole is likely to adversely affect Furnivall Gardens for an estimated eight years! It will also have a very adverse effect on the Pier and nearby exceptional listed buildings. Hammersmith and Fulham as a borough already statistically has one of the lowest levels of open spaces. Furnivall Gardens is a very special and much used area of open space in our borough. The Hammersmith Society has already objected to plans to reduce the area available for both residents and those who work in the borough to enjoy its riverside amenities by the proposed bridge across the A4 as part of the Town Hall Regeneration Project. The hole and all that would inevitably go with it would effectively make Furnivall Gardens unusable by residents and workers for years to come - and what would happen to the Thames Path which goes through these Gardens? We understand that the little used area of open space of Homefields in Chiswick to the south of the A4 had been identified as where the spoil would be extracted from the river - and there have been few objections to this plan from local residents and amenity societies - can Thames Water please explain why this change is being considered? Is it cost saving? What other options have been considered? Please can they go back to this original plan for all our sakes.
From Angela Clarke, Chairman of The Hammersmith Society, on 06/08/08
If it is needed, put it in Dukes Meadows, not in heavily residential areas or in the middle of parks. What sort of crazy idea is that?? I gather the sewerage problem begins in Dukes Meadows, so why not start a tunnel there?
From Helena Coope on 04/08/08
I would like to air my view that I would not be at all happy with the disruption and cost of this plan to replace the sewer with the Super Sewer, planning to stop in Hammersmith. I absolutely oppose this.
From Anonymous on 04/08/08
I completely agree that this proposal to build it in Hammersmith is mad, for all the reasons you say.
From Anonymous on 31/07/08
It was never intended to start in H&F territory - fight it all the way!
From Penny Walsh on 30/07/08
The loss of Furnivall Gardens would affect the quality of life for hundreds of people who walk or cycle through the park throughout the day. The works and associated river activity would be devastating and unbearable to the community who live on the moorings (who are also council tax payers).
From Stephen Pizzey on 30/07/08
If ever there was a case of NIMBY-ism this is it. When there is heavy rain, sewage ends up untreated in the Thames. Trying to convince us the tunnel is not needed by saying the Thames is now clean and pristine and full of sea-horses rather misses the point. "They are only doing it to save EU fines." Well yes - they get fined if raw sewage ends up in the river, or is H&F OK with that?
From Simon Cork on 30/07/08
Of course we don’t want sewage seeping into the Thames, but surely building a £2.5 billion septic tank under our river, obliterating open spaces, bringing chaos to the borough for eight years while landing residents with a £200 plus bill isn't the answer. This would send a large number of people into water poverty. We must look at other solutions to this problem.
Reply from H&F Council Leader, Cllr Greenhalgh
Surely there is enough space somewhere like Dukes Meadows to start this tunnel? It may cost a few million pounds more, but in percentage terms it’s unlikely to be much.
From Martin Ridley on 30/07/08
I strongly object to a sewer being built and affecting parkland, which is needed to keep the air clean and provide children with a play area in an area which is already blighted by busy roads. It also appears that it won't achieve anything, other than to reduce EU fines, which is madness. In addition, if it were to be built, it is Chiswick that should be the correct starting place. But clearly they have lobbied hard, and it is now being passed on to Hammersmith. Please object strongly on our behalf. If what you say is true, then it's outrageous.
From Margaret Cronin on 30/07/08
I can't believe they are considering Hammersmith for this when there is a lack of open space and a huge amount of traffic that will be affected. I live in Mall Road, and there are only three roads I can park in if I want to be close to home. Taking over Furnivall Gardens will no doubt mean parking will be restricted on the roads close by. I feel that Thames Water should be open and disclose why they are no longer choosing Chiswick, given that it is the start of the overflow. Dukes Meadows is likely to have less of an impact on traffic and residents than any area in Hammersmith.
From Anonymous on 29/07/08
I am a frequent user of both Ravenscourt Park and Furnivall Gardens. On Sunday both were full of people of all ages enjoying the summer sunshine. Every day people walk along side the Thames and through Furnivall. It is crazy that we residents of the borough are being expected to pay to lose a lovely waterside open area. We need more parks and gardens, not less. Surely Dukes Meadows would be a better place for this monster?
From Caroline MacMillan on 29/07/08
Can you give us some background to this please - why Thames Water wants to build a super sewer? Is it simply EU regulations (and what are these)? Or is London falling behind on other indicators of performance?
From Rosemary Pettit on 29/07/08
I would like you to know that I will not be resting assured that you will be fighting Thames Water and the Government every inch of the way over the sewer. You are basically preventing a company (that would not need to do so unless necessary) from cleaning up its act and stopping raw sewage from entering the Thames.
From Simon Wilde on 29/07/08
I fully support the Thames Tunnel project. It is vital for London to continue to grow. I fully accept that there will be some disruption to the borough’s residents and I understand that it may last 3-5 years. It is expected. I’m not looking forward to it, but I understand the importance of it and need for the project. This is a large project, but it is also a very important one. Rather than playing politics with it, the Council should be working with Thames Water to ensure the impact is minimised and completed within the minimum amount of time. I understand that the project may mean that one of the riverside parks is ripped up. But let’s be reasonable and logical. Thames Water will have to pay to put it back. Simple? It’s not an issue. Some times you need to take one for the team. This time, it is the turn of Hammersmith & Fulham to help London out.
From A. Brown on 22/07/08
I am so glad that the Council is going to fight on this issue. In these days of obesity problems and stress in the community amongst young people, as well as those in the work place, it is more and more important to encourage people out into the open. The riverside is one of the places which London has to offer allowing peace and relaxation to enter people's lives. It is vitally important to preserve this very special place in the heart of Hammersmith. Ravenscourt Park is also of great importance to the community, especially now that Chiswick House and Park is getting so preciously smartened up that it will undoubtedly eventually restrict morning dog-walkers who so enjoy their morning stroll. London is still such a wonderful city - its uniqueness must not be destroyed.
From Jan Morgan on 20/07/08
Councillor Nicholas Botterill, H&F Council Deputy Leader:
We are shocked at Thames Water’s u-turn as they always led us to believe that the Thames Tunnel would start in Chiswick. It now appears they have changed their minds. This is worrying news and we are pressing Thames Water for urgent answers. A 30 meter wide tunnel entrance near the Thames can only be justified in a massive area of open land well away from built up areas. There is no area like that in Hammersmith & Fulham so the only answer must be to put the entrance further up river, where previously intended, at Dukes Meadow or thereabouts. It cannot possibly go anywhere in H&F as that would mean utterly destroying somewhere like Furnivall Gardens or another one of our beautiful parks.
Council leader Stephen Greenhalgh:
This would be a disaster for our borough and a disaster our residents who would have to pay for it while enduring eight years of misery for minimial environmental benefits. As a council we are going to fight this madness tooth and nail and would urge our residents to back us. This super sewage tank under the Thames would have virtually no impact on flooding situation. It is designed purely to meet an EU regulation on pollution when in fact environmentalists are saying that The Thames is so clean that even seahorses are thriving. The Government wants this super septic tank so that it won’t have to pay any more EU fines – yet it is not prepared to pay for it and is landing all Thames Water bill payers with a super stealth tax instead. The Government should be challenging the absurdity of the EU directive and standing up for common sense. Of course we don’t want sewage seeping into the Thames, but surely building a £2.5 billion septic tank under our river, obliterating open spaces, bringing chaos to the borough for eight years while landing residents with a £200 plus bill isn't the answer. This would send a large number of people into water poverty. We must look at other solutions to this problem.
