News, updates, documents, photographs and contact information.

MINUTES OF MEETINGS - 3https://carnwathroadcommunity.wordpress.com
Minutes Recorded - Monday 22nd February 2016https://carnwathroadcommunity.wordpress.com

2. Minutes of the Previous Meeting - Action Points and Matters Arising

Ann Rosenberg (AR) requested that final minutes going forward include a list of all attendees, as per the original draft. Also asked if the minutes could include the departments represented by Council attendees.

Lance Pierson (LP) advised he attended the meeting on 13 January but was not listed and was the person who asked how the 170 engineers will be travelling to the site (2nd paragraph on page seven).
Post minutes note: Minutes on Tideway website have been amended

It was asked if paragraph five on page four could be amended to read (‘i.e. with mitigation being offered of second glazing plus ventilation and the possibility of respite accommodation during a selected duration of noisy works’).
Post minutes note: Minutes on website have been amended

Anthony Williams (AW) mentioned his request for a layman’s version of the Construction Method Statement (3rd paragraph on page seven) should have been made an action. Post minutes note: Minutes on Tideway website have been amended.

AR added that the Tideway Progress Report (item 5) within this meeting should cover some of the actions from the previous meeting.

AR advised the map which was part of the recent notification sent out is not very good, as it does not even show Peterborough Road. AR asked if the number of monitors detailed on the map is correct. Chris Stratford (CS) confirmed this to be the case. AR would like to review the optimum number of air and noise monitors needed in order to cover the possible pollution and noise hotspots in the area. To be discussed in the Health Sub Committee. Action: Health sub committee.

AR referred to paragraph six of page seven of the previous minutes and asked what the status is now with regard to consents. CS confirmed this will be covered within Item 5 (Tideway Progress Report). AR also asked if the junction at Carnwath Road and Wandsworth Bridge Road will be included in Item 5. CS confirmed this will be discussed.

CS apologised that Tideway’s noise specialist was not present at this meeting and confirmed they will hopefully be at the next meeting, so Item 6 (noise and dust monitoring including a noise specialist) would be postponed until then.

AM requested that an Arhag representative be listed on the minutes as being both from Arhag and Network Stadium.
Post minute note: Action complete

David McGinty (DM) mentioned the minutes from the last meeting were very generic and it seems a lot of detail has been left out. He thinks Tideway should take the meetings and the minutes more seriously as these meetings should not be about Tideway ticking boxes. AW added he felt a number of points had not been recorded on the draft minutes he received for review, so he did make a few corrections. AW asked that people say their names before making any comment, so the minutes correctly record who has said what. It was also advised that this particular meeting was being recorded, to ensure the minutes are a true reflection of what took place.

Post minutes note: Tideway has confirmed that attendees do not need to give their names if they do not wish to. Some attendees may not want their names noted on the minutes.

  1. 1.Purpose / Mission of the CLWG Explained
    AR re-stated that the CLWG mission and objective was to ensure that the community was not damaged by the six years of Thames Tideway Tunnel works, and the goal was to leave Sands End a healthier and thriving community after the Thames Tideway Tunnel was completed.
    AR provided an overview and confirmed the role of the CLWG is for the community to act as one voice. The main objective for the group to is to look at Tideway’s mitigation measures and ensure they work. Tideway’s work place must be safe for everybody, with noise and air pollution limited as much as possible. Property values must be protected, along with people’s health and businesses. Ultimately the CLWG and Tideway must work together as a team to a mutual advantage. The CLWG meetings will be taking place for the next three or four years, not necessarily once a month but possibly every two or three months. These meetings are the group’s opportunity to work out what the group wants.
    Post minute note: Tideway would like to confirm that in line with the CLWG agreed Terms of Reference, the aim of the CLWG is to provide a two-way communications channel between Tideway and local communities on aspects of the scheme which affect the community and the environment in the local area. The CLWG will provide an open forum for discussion on matters concerning construction and communications with the relevant local authorities and community/business representatives.
    It should also be noted that property values are influenced by a number of factors. The project has long established policies that recognise that in certain circumstances compensation may be appropriate for property owners. If you have any questions about the mitigation and compensation policies please see the Tideway website or contact the Independent Advisory Service through the helpdesk 08000 30 80 80, between 9.00am and 5.30pm, weekdays. Outside these hours, you can leave a message and an IAS representative will get back to you. You can also email the IAS team via info@tidewayias.co.uk

  2. 2.Sub-Committees to Report Back
    Kirstin Sittard (KS) will head this sub-committee (group not formally established as yet). KS confirmed this sub-committee will cover air quality and pollution, health & safety, noise and disturbance plus health and wellbeing. There is a great deal of technical information to read and understand, however the health and wellbeing of the community is paramount. KS would like a Tideway professional to be available at the sub- committee meetings to advise accordingly. KS went on to raise a few time critical matters / questions:

  3. 1.a)  Baseline levels need to be re-measured before construction starts. When will this take place and how will the locations of these measurements be agreed? Could a map be produced?

  4. 2.b)  Having received a map showing the location of the air and noise monitors, KS would like to review additional monitors.

  5. 3.c)  With regard to the mental and physical health assessments, the Health Impact Assessment stated the effects on residents had been underestimated. On checking the Environmental Statement, it was noted that a 2001 census was used. KS would like a health and mental assessment carried out on all residents within a 200m radius of the zone and again during the duration of the project.

  6. 4.d)  The Environmental Statement advised that no soil testing had been undertaken at the site due to ‘access issues’. When will soil investigation be carried out?
    KS to provide update at the next CLWG meeting in March. Action: KS


This sub-group is still work in progress.
Post minutes note: Tideway would like clarification of the remit of this sub committee.

Legacy and Hoardings

Alex Schniewind (AS) will head this sub-committee. Tim Prager (TP) is deputy in her absence.
TP advised this sub-committee has met several times since the last CLWG meeting in January. Various stakeholders were involved and he continues to work with CS and RG at Tideway to try and develop a plan for a community centre in the Park, along with long- awaited changing rooms and toilets. Drawings are currently being worked on and TP suggested that Tideway had indicated it is happy to contribute a substantial sum to realise a community centre. He said CLWG would like a larger contribution from the Council. .He said the Council is supportive of a community centre but is resisting any reinvestment of the Section 106 money. TP said that AK was taking the lead on Legacy matters and had been working closely with Tideway to develop the Community Centre proposals

With regard to the hoardings, the Legacy Sub-Committee will be recommending these reflect the aspirations of the community in a visual form, preferably featuring Tideway’s promises. TP mentioned AR feels confident there are local artists who would be willing to contribute to the design. AW asked if this request had been agreed with Tideway. TP confirmed it had not and RG added Alex Schniewind had a meeting with the Tideway hoardings design manager recently and there will need to be some similarity between the hoardings at each site.

AW asked if it would be possible for Tideway’s promises to be reflected on the hoardings. RG confirmed this was the first Tideway had heard of the idea to use the hoardings themselves to reflect Tideway's promises, but Tideway acknowledges a meeting was previously held with Alexandra Schniewind where the subject of including Tideway's promises on the hoarding notice boards was raised. CS mentioned there will be a design process to go through and ideas such as old sepia photos of the area, schoolchildren’s drawings, Tideway’s promises will be discussed at the sub-committee meetings. BG added the whole idea is to get the community / schools involved in the artwork that will appear on the hoardings. The hoardings will initially be grey when installed.

AR asked if a map showing where the hoardings will be could be made available.

Action: Tideway.

Post minutes note: Drawing is available within presentation on the Tideway website.

Click here.

AW asked if an update on the hoardings and timetable could be given at the next CLWG meeting. RG advised yes, providing a Legacy Sub-Committee meeting can be fitted in with TP and Alex Schniewind before the next CLWG meeting. Action: TP and Tideway.


Tom Wills-Sandford (TW-S) is heading this sub-committee.

TW-S advised the PC World development is due to start end 2016 / beginning 2017 and there is a huge interaction between this development, Tideway’s project and another 19 projects in the area.

Elizabeth Fonseca (EF), Environmental Quality Manager, London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham introduced herself. TW-S advised somebody at the Council needs to take a strategic view on these 19 projects. TW-S has met with Tideway once since the last CLWG meeting and hopes to meet again on 3 March. He has requested a map of the site, particularly with regard to barges (also mentioned barge turning is also a big issue, having spoken to Jane Langridge). TW-S will also hopefully be meeting with Greg Hands MP, Tideway, London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and TfL on 4 March.

TP asked if TW-S now had any clarity on the junction at Carnwath Road and Wandsworth Bridge Road, following his sub-committee meeting. TP advised he will provide an update at the next CLWG meeting, following his upcoming meetings on 3 and 4 March. Action: TW-S

JL said that the planning permission granted for the PC World (Hurlingham Retail Park) expires in December 2017 and the planning permission granted for the Albert Wharf site (on the other side of Wandsworth Bridge) expires mid 2018 (in fact July) so that developments affecting the WBR/Carnwarth Rd junction would potentially be taking place at the same time as the Tideway project, putting further pressure on the junction.

TP asked Tideway if any further discussions had been had with the Council regarding the plans for the junction. CS advised there is currently one of two options:

1) Widen the corner as you turn from Wandsworth Bridge Road into Carnwath Road, so HGVs can turn left without swinging out into the road. This would take approximately three to six months to complete.

2) Close the left-hand lane of Wandsworth Bridge Road and widen the two remaining lanes. AW advised the right-hand lane is a right turn only, the centre lane is straight on and the left-hand lane is for straight on or left. By closing the left-hand lane and combining the left-hand lane and centre lane would result in huge traffic jams.

CS added the second option would only take a few weeks and is currently being discussed with Wandsworth Council, TfL and LBHF

Another option being considered by LBHF is to add a pedestrian phase to
the lights. This needs to be modelled and agreed with TfL. The Council is proceeding with the design and implementation of the full junction improvement scheme, which would take approximately six months to complete. This would need final approval from London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and TfL and would be likely to commence in Autumn 2016, finishing in Spring 2017. TW-S asked if a map and diagram of the junction improvement scheme could be provided at the upcoming Traffic Sub-Committee meeting on 3 March.

DM said it was agreed at the last CLWG meeting that the community’s safety was paramount and therefore the junction work should have been done sooner. DM suggested Tideway needs to go back to the drawing board as although removing the corner of a junction to allow HGVs to turn makes it more convenient, how will this make it safer, as traffic will just end up tailing back along Wandsworth Bridge Road? AR said this detail would be discussed at the Traffic Sub-Committee meetings.

It was asked if the PC World developers would be at the meeting on 4 March. TW-S confirmed they would not. It was asked if PC World is aware that Tideway will be taking some of PC World’s land. TW-S asked who would be responsible for producing a map for the meeting on 4 March. CS confirmed the full junction improvement scheme is owned by the Council but needs approval from TfL. The interim scheme to close the left-hand lane is Tideway’s suggestion. CS will arrange for Tideway’s plan to be sent to TW-S and will request the Council to send its plan too. Action: CS.

Carnwath Road Coalition (CRC)

AW advised he will be deputising on behalf of Pauline Lyle-Smith. AW advised the intention of the CRC is to be a steering group, to ensure all specific CLWG representatives are able to function effectively and support each other.
Post minutes notes:

  1. 1-  The CLWG is the co-ordinating influence for the meetings and not the CRC. The CRC is independent to the CLWG.

  2. 2-  To avoid confusion as to the roles of the groups, since the previous CLWG meeting the CRC will now be a sub-committee (Leader Pauline Lyle-Smith) and the STEERING GROUP will comprise the leaders of the all the sub-committees in order to facilitate the exchange of information/work in progress before the CLWG meetings. The function of the Steering Group is to co-ordinate the work of the sub- groups where they overlap.
    AW advised the PC World development is a fully approved residential scheme and the approved timetable states work will begin at the end of April 2016. This, however, is a preliminary planning document only, so the dates may shift.
    KS asked whether Tideway had taken the PC World development into account with regard to noise and air monitors.
    TW-S wanted it noted that he along with the group were not happy that no politicians were present at this meeting.
    DM was disappointed as he had been promised twice that he would receive a written apology (with regard to not receiving any information concerning TAPs), but this had not been forthcoming. DM also mentioned that the last meeting with Tideway to carry out a survey on his property was cancelled at short notice.
    Post minutes note: DM was advised at the time of the cancellation that Coop Homes (Landlords of 1-3 Carnwath Road) had requested that a Coop Homes officer be present for this meeting. As a Coop Homes officer was not able to attend on the day of the survey, the meeting had to be postponed.
    The apology letter has been sent to all residents of 1-3 Carnwath House.

5. Tideway Progress Report

BG confirmed Tideway was aspiring to reduce the delivery timetable by up to two years, which would benefit everybody, as it would mean Tideway would be on site for less time, the overall cost of the project would be lower and the pollution issue in the River Thames would be resolved sooner.

The main construction work will now start in July, as originally planned, with the hoardings and site offices going up beforehand. After considering all options, Tideway now plans to deliver the overall project 18 months ahead of the original programme.

BG referred to AW’s request at the last CLWG meeting for a layman’s version of the sequence of events be provided going forward and handed over to RG for a PowerPoint presentation:

  1. 1  700 copies of an Information Sheet were sent out to 700 addresses (within 100m of the Carnwath Road Riverside site) recently, advising that site investigation work would be starting approximately the week commencing 29 February 2016. This will involve trenches of between 1-3 metres being dug, using an excavator, which would take a couple of weeks. If any contaminated soil was discovered as a result of this, then the appropriate action would be taken.

  2. 2  After the site investigation has been carried out, the hoardings will be put up which will replace the current blue hoardings (this will take about four – six weeks). The new hoardings will be grey to start, until the artwork has been designed and agreed.

  3. 3  Temporary services will then be installed, along with power and cables.

  4. 4  Site drainage will be installed (for toilets etc).

  5. 5  Existing site services will be removed.

  6. 6  The site surface will be resurfaced (the surface that the work will be carried out on).

  7. 7  At the beginning of August 2016, the tenants of the industrial estate will have left
    and the buildings will be demolished.

  8. 8  The first ring of the shaft will then be built, which will involve piling. As this is the first
    stage, noise protection cannot be put over this work. This will take place in the

  9. 9  In September/October, an acoustic shed will be placed over the shaft, which will
    completely cover the shaft area and all activities within it.

  10. 10  One of the slides showed an image of the inside of an acoustic shed and RG added
    that all noise and light with regard to sinking the shaft will be contained inside this shed.
    KS asked when the group can receive a copy of the site timetable. BG advised this document is very large, with 14,000 lines. However, he will bring a condensed programme along to the next CLWG meeting in March. Action: BG.
    KS asked what constitutes the start of works. RG confirmed start of works will be in the summer, as enabling works beforehand are not considered to be start of main works. RG advised he had a meeting recently with Tobyn Thomas (TT), of Thomas’s School where noise and air quality monitors were discussed, along with how frequently the information would be presented to Thomas’ School, bearing in mind it is the closest school to the site. AR advised this is a discussion for the relevant sub-committee meeting.
    AW mentioned that his understanding of construction projects is that site enabling work is the first stage of the construction works and that construction work cannot be done without the enabling work. The two cannot be separated. A requirement in the DCOstipulates that all safety requirements should be in place before construction work starts and this includes enabling work. BG added that the process and definitions are complicated but this will be worked through in the relevant sub-committee meetings. BG added that enabling works at Kirtling Street and Chambers Wharf had already started. Post minutes note: Tideway emphasises that safety is paramount and no compromise will be made with regard to this. Tideway also requires consents for enabling works and will not proceed without those consents.

BG added that with regard to the junction improvement scheme, as with the entire Tideway project, safety is paramount. Only certain types of vehicle would mean the junction would be an issue and therefore not using long wheel-based lorries would be another option.

AW stated that the site enabling works should not be started without evidence being provided to the group.
Post minute note: Please provide clarity of what evidence is being requested.

TW-S said the only people that can stop Tideway is the Council – why are there no politicians at the meeting?

It was asked if the group would be informed if contaminated soil was found as part of the site investigation work. The group would like the facts and figures from the enabling works ASAP. CS added the information will be in the public domain as soon as it has been submitted in draft. EF advised the air quality and contaminated land is being controlled by London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham and she will interpret the data on behalf of the group and explain at a subsequent meeting. Action: EF.

DM mentioned the nitrogen dioxide exceeded the maximum level in Putney during the first six days of the year. AR advised this is a discussion for the relevant sub-committee.

JG raised a concern that the site offices would overlook residents of Philpot Square and Carnwath Road. Is there any scope to move the offices? RG advised after the work has finished, a new development will go up which will overlook these properties. BG will arrange a meeting with Tideway and JG to discuss this.

POST MINUTE NOTE: It was felt by JG that RG’s comment was irrelevant and assumptive as any other development on the site was a decade away.

It was asked if work will only take place inside the acoustic shed. Tideway advised only 24/7 work will take place inside the shed, with daytime work being carried out on the site. During 24-hour working, people will walk from the welfare unit to the shed (i.e. there will be no vehicles transporting workers around the site).

With regard to the delivery of the concrete tunnel segments, BG advised Tideway is currently looking at barge design and new marine equipment to enable all segments to be delivered by barge, therefore reducing HGV movements. Tunnelling is not due to start until September / October 2017. Therefore there is still time to work on these solutions in more detail, in order to get 100% of segments moved by river. BG will be able to provide more detail in a few months, possibly not at the March meeting though. Action: BG.

With regard to the resurfacing of the site, it was asked by a member of the audience how many tippers it will take to deliver the concrete. BG advised at the very peak it will be a maximum of 25 a day. AR advised this will be discussed in detail at the relevant sub- committee meetings.

BG added that the Carnwath Road site was illegally occupied in December 2015 and between 8-22 December, hundreds of tonnes of material was removed which involved up to 20 vehicles a day leaving the site, which would be a similar amount to when construction starts at the site. The point being that nobody really noticed and no complaints were received.

6. Noise and Dust Monitoring Including a Noise Presentation

As mentioned above, this will be postponed to the next meeting, as the noise specialist was unable to attend today.

7. AOB

TP asked if there had been any progress on the request for Tideway to produce a version of the DCO in plain English. CS mentioned he had offered a series of briefings in order to explain the DCO and answer questions but these had not been taken up by the CLWG representatives who had been invited. He felt this might help people to understand the full extent of the DCO. TP added a briefing eats into everybody’s personal time. CS confirmed Tideway’s legal department had advised that producing a plain English version of the DCO would not be permitted, as it is a legal document which has gone through Parliament. BG mentioned that CS had spent a lot of time trying to condense the DCO down to summaries, as requested but it was just not possible. CS made the offer again to talk through small sections of the DCO with people and advised he had talked through the traffic section of the DCO with the Traffic Sub-Committee successfully.

AR added the aim of the initial request was to get the DCO information out to the wider public who feel alienated.

TP wanted a straight answer from Tideway as to whether this request is possible or not.

AW mentioned his original request was for condensed layman’s version of the construction method statement for Carnwath Road, in no more than 50 pages. AW sought advice on his request and was told it should be feasible. BG thought the original request was for a simplified version of the DCO to be produced and AW seemed to asking for something quite different.

It was asked if the construction timetable is available to the group. CS confirmed a simplified version is on the Tideway website (click here). Tideway agreed to produce a set of slides in respect of the timeline for Carnwath Road Riverside. Action: Tideway Post minutes note: These will be posted on Tideway’s website.

TP asked if there had been any progress with establishing a website which shows real time air, noise and traffic monitoring that anybody can access, to see if Tideway is working within the agreed parameters. RG repeated the fact he had a meeting recently with TT of Thomas’s School who had approached RG as the representative for air monitoring. RG was advised that, as KS is the leader of the Health sub group, could he liaise with her on this issue going forward.

Sheelagh Hamilton (SH) mentioned that from 16 December she had heard noise and felt vibrations and wanted to check if this was related to Tideway. RG advised no Tideway work was taking place at that time.

TP asked AR for a progress update on trying to get London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham Councillors to attend the CLWG meetings. AR advised she had sent various emails requesting the relevant Cabinet Member attends but was not getting the degree of support it needs from the council and suggested that the CRC Steering Group may want to take this on board. AR mentioned the reason given for lack of attendance is that Cabinet meetings take place on a Monday.

Gloria Guy (GG) asked what guarantee is there that the river will be cleaner after the project than now. AR advised that the CLWG is dealing with Carnwath Road only and cannot take on the whole of the Tideway project.

GG added that the construction work staring in July gives Tideway five months to sort the junction issue out. AR advised that is a topic for the Traffic Sub-Committee.

LP mentioned the schedule for getting the action points to everybody is currently taking too long and asked if the minutes going forward could be distributed within two weeks of the meeting.

LP said the health impact assessment mentioned a 250m buffer and wanted to know if this includes the luxury flats on the other side of the river. CS advised the health assessment had been done as part of DCO. CS added he had already given five hard copies of this to AR plus an emailed version to AR.

It was asked who decides on the communications boundary. RG advised if a notification is sent out which will affect people (such as the February Information Sheet), then this is sent out to people within a 100m radius of the site. Whereas more general flyers such as newsletters will be sent out to people within a 250m radius. RG advised this system has been developed across similar projects over many years.

It was asked if the CRC website was up and running yet. AR advised that a closed Facebook account has been set up by a resident.

11. Date of Next Meeting
Thursday 17 March – venue: St Matthew’s Church


The Carnwath Road Community Websitehttp://www.carnwathroadcommunity.org
Minutes of 
Meetings by Date

23rd Nov 2015

13th Jan 2016

22nd Feb 2016

17th March 2016

13th June 2016

18th July 2016

12th Sept 2016Minutes_-_1_-_23rd_Nov_2015.htmlMinutes_-_2_-_13th_Jan_2016.htmlMinutes_-_4_%3D_17th_March_2016.htmlMinutes_-_5_-_17th_March_2016.htmlMinutes_-_6_-_18th_July_2016.htmlMinutes_-_7_-_12th_Sept_2016.htmlhttps://carnwathroadcommunity.wordpress.comshapeimage_6_link_0shapeimage_6_link_1shapeimage_6_link_2shapeimage_6_link_3shapeimage_6_link_4shapeimage_6_link_5shapeimage_6_link_6