Agenda item

The Chairman noted that there had recently been a significant amount of building development undertaken across the Borough.  It was anticipated that this, coupled with the increasing use of electric vehicles and the development of autonomous vehicles, would provide utility companies with significant infrastructure challenges. 

Affinity Water

Mr Paul Mooney, Stakeholder Manager at Affinity Water, advised that the organisation had planned a significant amount of work over the next year.  This work was focussed around, but not limited to, distribution mains renewals (burst rate and customer impact), trunk main mitigation (security of supply and customer impact) and DG2 (the number of properties at risk of experiencing water pressure below the standard set by Ofwat). 

There were currently 5 mains renewals schemes for Hillingdon in the design or feasibility study stage.  It was anticipated that these schemes would be delivered in April 2018.  As Affinity was aware that its work could be intrusive, effort was made to cause as little disruption as possible, that residents maintained access to their properties and that the work took up as few parking spaces as possible. 

Affinity's work in the Borough was coordinated with Wayne Greenshield and his team in the Council's Traffic Management Section.  Wayne's team provided a great conduit to bring the utility companies together and raise issues for their attention.  Mr Mooney was confident that Affinity's relationship with the Council and with the Environment Agency was very strong. 

Affinity Water submitted work programmes to the Traffic Management Section on a quarterly basis so that opportunities to work with other providers could be identified.  However, consideration also needed to be given to safety issues and the restriction that providers work on a limited length of road at one time.  In practice, what would usually happen would be for the different services to follow on from each other.  Although this approach was not always effective, there were some really good examples of this working well on major roads. 

It was noted that new plastic pipes provided better flow and better water quality which meant that they could be smaller but more effective/efficient and therefore often be inserted into existing pipes to reduce disruption (slip line).  Where pipes needed to be upgraded, or where a new supply was being installed, new pipes would need to be laid.  Although the debris from the old pipes was left in the ground, the physical size of the new main would depend on displacement caused by pipes bursting or directional drill as this could lift the surface and/or damage other services. 

When there was a failure on a trunk main, interruptions could be experienced by up to 2,000 customers.  To mitigate the effect of burst mains, valves were installed to reduce the main lengths.  In addition, the number of network connections were being increased to secure a better supply of water to an area when a failure occurred. 

Affinity Water held a register for DG2 improvements which included those customers that were on the borderline of service failure.  There were currently 10 locations being investigated which included Long Lane and work was underway along the 500m stretch of Long Lane that joined Uxbridge Road to increase the water availability for customers in the area. 

With regard to new building developments, Mr Mooney advised that developers provided Affinity Water with specific details of properties being developed so that demand could be assessed.  If reinforcement mains were required, the developer would pay a contribution towards the cost.  Alternatively, it might be possible to boost the supply in a particular zone or put in pressure reduction measures.  Although new supplies could not be installed on a speculative basis to cater for the growing demand, Members were assured that human resources and capital were available to invest in the necessary upgrades when they were required.  Mr Mooney agreed to provide Democratic Services with contact details of the team that would be able to share a heat map of the Borough to show areas of high activity.

Members were advised that Affinity Water was in the process of renewing two existing water mains in Uxbridge.  So far, approximately 1km of main had been laid.  This work had progressed as far as Belmont Road and Windsor Street but had now been put on hold until the new year so as not to interfere with the French market and the increased Christmas footfall in the town centre.  Although further work was needed in Bakers Yard and Windsor Street, these roads would need to be closed to enable the work to be completed.  In the meantime, work in Bennetts Yard was expected to be completed in November 2017 and residents in the vicinity were being kept updated to ensure that they continued to have access. 

A water main had burst a couple of times in Parkwood.  As such, a flood alleviation scheme had been put in place to renew that section of the pipe.  A start date had not yet been scheduled but it was expected to be completed as soon as possible. 

Mr Mooney advised that it was impossible to predict how many pumping stations would be needed in the future.  However, he assured Members that Affinity Water used the most efficient pumps available and that mobile emergency generators were available for power outages as a short term solution. 

It was noted that work had been undertaken by Affinity Water over the summer in South Ruislip.  General feedback from residents had been positive in terms of the organisation of the works and the frequency and content of communications from the company.  The area had also been reinstated to a high standard after the works had been completed.  However, some residents had complained that noisy work had started at 8am one Sunday. Mr Mooney advised that, although noisy work should never start until 10am on a Sunday (unless it was an emergency), staff did sometimes have to undertake quieter reinstatement or preparatory work.

Concern was expressed that Mr Mooney had mentioned that a mains renewal scheme had been scheduled for High Street Cowley in 2018 as the road was currently being resurfaced.  Mr Mooney advised that, although this renewal scheme was currently in the design phase, roads with Section 58 restrictions prevented statutory undertakers from digging up the road for a period of between three and five years after the road had been resurfaced or reconstructed, unless the work was an emergency or was needed to provide a new customer service.  If this was the case, the work would be put on hold. 

British Telecom (BT)

Dr Bobby Basra, Regional Partnership Director London at BT, advised that BT had spent c£43m with Hillingdon based companies in 2015/2016.  BTs gross value-added (GVA) in Hillingdon was £87m and businesses in the Borough turned over £161m per annum as a result of BTs full economic impact.  The organisation had a large number of people that lived and worked in the Borough, supporting approximately 920 FTE positions. 

In September 2015, BT announced plans that would see coverage increase to 95% of premises in London.  Although the remaining 5% was not commercially viable, residents and businesses in areas that were not covered within the commercial plan were able to register interest for the Community Fibre Partnership scheme.  This scheme helped people in an area that wasn't covered in an existing fibre upgrade plan to find a solution to bring fibre to their area.  Joint funding arrangements were needed where Openreach covered some costs in line with its commercial model and the community had the option to self fund the remaining gap.  Residents and businesses could check availability of broadband in their area via the Openreach website (https://www.homeandwork.openreach.co.uk/fibre-broadband/superfast-fibre.aspx) and would be able to identify which Internet Service Providers (ISPs) offered fibre service in the area.

According to www.thinkbroadband.com, an independent website, fibre broadband coverage in London showed 96.2% and Hillingdon 97.4%. Those cabinets that had been fibre enabled would usually have a large round sticker on them stating "Fibre broadband is here", so that the local community was aware.  Openreach's responsibility went as far as the cabinets and the service providers were responsible for getting the service from the cabinets to the customer properties.

There were four Telephone Exchanges in Hillingdon and it was noted that the Borough boundaries did not align with the Telephone Exchange boundaries.  As such, there would be some Hillingdon residents that were served by cabinets located in another council area and vice versa. 

In September 2017, c2,000 homes had been part of an upgrade of the commercial scheme.  Where cabinets has been upgraded to fibre, Openreach had notified the ISPs who would have been expected to then advise their customers accordingly (this was not within the control of Openreach). 

Dr Basra advised that there had been some challenges in deploying fibre broadband in London, such as planning permission and wayleaves, and there was room for improvement with boroughs encouraging a consistent approach to streetworks across London. 

With regard to population growth planning, Dr Basra advised that Openreach had committed to deploy FTTP, free of charge to all new housing developments comprising 30 or more homes registered from November 2016.  This means that at least nine out of ten new build homes could have access to FTTP if property developers registered their scheme and contract with Openreach.  Dr Basra had actively sought information about upcoming developments from the Council website and from journal articles.  The Chairman expressed concern that this was not the most effective way of working and that consideration would need to be given to how this information flow could be improved.  Dr Basra believed that any improvements to the information flow would be helpful.

Furthermore, if there were areas of major regeneration proposed in the Borough (such as retail parks, large commercial and residential developments), it would be best to work with Openreach at the early stages of the work. 

Dr Basra advised that if Members had any questions about 5G (or any other issue relating to BT), these should be forwarded on to her for her to provide a response. 

Scottish and Southern Electricity Networks (SSE)

Ms Danielle Royce, Lead Customer Relations Manager - South at SSE, advised that the organisation had two distribution networks (one in Scotland and one in the South), covering 128,000km.  SSE used a regional delivery model whereby Thames Valley served Hillingdon and a depot was located in Hayes.  £23½m had been invested in the Thames Valley region to ensure continued supply and £6m had been invested in the Yiewsley substation to replace circuits and add backfeeds.  It was not anticipated that there would be any further major projects in the Borough in the near future. 

SSE had invested in fault finding techniques such as thermal imaging cameras to improve the accuracy of any digs.  It had also recognised the challenge of increasing demand and had therefore been looking at increased generation and the desire to store and generate electricity.  However, SSE could not invest speculatively and, as such, was looking at innovative ways to increase the flexibility of the services whilst also working with other operators to develop system operations rather than network operations.  For example, the six year, £30m New Thames Valley Vision (NTVV) project sought to improve the industry’s understanding of future electricity usage and help with the transition to a low carbon economy.

Other innovative technologies that were being investigated and/or invested in by SSE included:

·         Looking at early adopters and clustering;

·         Energy storage management units;

·         Cold thermal storage;

·         Active network management; and

·         Load shedding.

With regard to the increasing use of electric vehicles, SSE was unable to anticipate where the demand would come from.  It was noted that £2.2bn had been identified as part of a national research paper in relation to the potential impact across the whole of the UL on the low voltage system.  This was not specific to the SSE network area and this money had not been set aside by SSE. 

In terms of age, Hillingdon's infrastructure was relatively new in comparison to other areas.  However, there were still pockets of older network across the Borough which were monitored to ensure that the minimum need was met.  Where it wasn't met, SEE looked to upgrade that section of the network.  The company could also provide additional backfeeds to balance the load when appropriate.  Improvements had also been made with the type of material used, insulation, jointing and the conductivity of the wire.  Performance was monitored on a risk basis and alternatives were explored before consideration was given to digging up a road. 

It was noted that SSE would facilitate requests from developers who had to undertake due diligence in good time else risk costs escalating.  Dr Basra endorsed this but noted that, although it was the developers' responsibility to advise the utility companies, they tended to do what was more profitable for them. 

RESOLVED:  That:

1.    Mr Mooney provide Democratic Services with contact details of the team that would be able to share a heat map of the Borough to show areas of high activity;

2.    consideration be given to the flow of information to BT regarding new development;

3.    Members forward any questions for BT (about 5G or any other issue) to Democratic Services who would forward them on to Dr Basra for a response; and

4.    the presentations be noted.