Liz has told the Gurn that a representative
of Scottish Water is willing to come and talk to any interested individual or
community council concerning the recent discharge of raw sewage onto the
riverside pavements at the Sewage/Merryton Bridge. If you haven't seen the pictures and video of this incident yet then click here. Liz also says a long term
solution is required and will need further investment from Scottish Water to
deal properly with this issue.
Scottish Water have had a team out cleaning
up the area and admit that although the manhole covers were at one time sealed one of them had
actually buckled with the force of the water and may need replacing, the other
manhole was not sealed because it had broken free and blown upwards during
another incident of heavy and persistent rain. Scottish Water told Liz: “The
guys will be back on site on Friday of this week to check the pipes, manholes
and outfall. Our Regulation team have
been in contact with SEPA and given them an update on the situation.”
Obviously a long term solution is needed
but also a short term one to prevent anyone being injured by manhole covers
flying upwards onto this popular footway.
Update: River CC on the case too.
Update: River CC on the case too.
4 comments:
Talks, meetings and updates don't solve the problem.
Cleaning up after the event deals with the symptoms, not the cause.
Sealing the manhole covers is just stupid: ask King Canute what happens when you try to hold back the tide.
The problem is obvious - the pipes and chambers simply don't have the capacity to carry the volume of runoff water and sewage that flows after significant rainfall (and we're not talking Noah's flood levels).
Message to Scottish Water: stop talking, and sort it!
Liz is quite right, further investment is needed to solve this long standing problem. Scottish water must know why this bottleneck is a continuing problem
and really have to solve it once and for all !
I'm not sure we want Scottish Water to *talk* to us, as much as *do* something.
This issue has been highlighted periodically over the proceeding years.
Surely the company employs enough people to carry out it's legal duty to prevent this sort of thing from happening?
It has a legal duty? What law is that?
Post a Comment