WATER & DRAINAGE

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 68, 13 December 1930, Page 12

WATER & DRAINAGE

Day’s Bay Installation REQUISITION UPHELD “Insanitary and Unsafe” Dismissing an appeal by the Hutt County Council from a requisition of the Board of Health requiring water and drainage to be installed at Day’s Bay, the Board of Appeal, in a reserved judgment delivered yesterday, found that the present conditions, both as to water and as to drainage, were insanitary and unsafe and that an efficient water supply and a proper drainage and sewerage system were needed. The Board of Appeal consisted of Messrs. E. Page, S.M., chairman, R. G, Bush and J. L. Griffen. <

By requisition dated June 10, 1929, the Board of Health, acting under section 22 of the Health Act, 1920, required the Hutt County Council to provide “drainage works and sewerage works and water works for the purpose of affording drainage and water supply to the district of Day’s Bay, the work to be car, ried out to the satisfaction of the medical officer of health for the district.’* It was against this requistion that the Hutt County Council appealed. Delivering judgment, the chairman said the evidence showed that there were 166 houses in Day’s Bay and that the population (which varied somewhat between the winter and summer months) averaged 600. For water some of the residents were dependent on the rainfall caught 'in tanks from the roofs, and others were supplied from two small ■reservoirs fed from streams that flowed down the hillside. The main one of these streams came from a catchment area that was open to and, to some extent, used by the public, and the reservoir that it filled was unfavourably placed and inadequately protected to ensure its suitability as a, domestic supply. Pools on the Beach. For the disposal of sewage matter, some of the residents buried the nightsoil on their properties, while others had provided ' septic tanks. The effluent from these tanks found its way, unpurified, into the streams that flowed down the bay, and these streams on their Way across the beach formed pools in which children paddled and round which they played. “By a majority,” the judgment continued, “we are of opinion that the present conditions, both as to water and as to drainage, are insanitary and unsafe, and that an efficient water supply and a proper drainage and sewerage system are needed. “More than one source of supply of water is, for a moderate expenditure, available to this locality, and the installation of a drainage and sewerage system is, having regard to the area and the configuration of..the Bay, not a difficult undertaking. * .Joint Action Suggested.

“it is understood that the adjoining borough of Eaktbourne has under consideration the question of installing a water supply, and we think that reasonable time should be given to enable the appellant county to confer with that borough with a view to considering whether a joint scheme for water supply should be undertaken by the two local bodies and generally to enable the appellant county to obtain the necessary reports and formulate its scheme for water and drainage. ■ “Subject to this intimation, we are of opinion that the requisition of the Board of Health should be upheld and this appeal dismissed.” A Minority Rejmrt. Tn my opinion this appeal should be allowed, said Mr. Griffen, in a minority report “Two schemes have been suggested for obtaining the necessary water to enable the requisition to be complied with. The first of these Involves utilising the existing sources of supply at Day’s Bay itself, involving possible compensation to those through whose properties the water arises. Even assuming that this scheme could be carried through without undue compensation, I consider that it would involve a very high water and sewage rate; The second scheme involves the purchase of artesian wafer from the Lower Hutt Valley, and, on the basis of the evidence submitted, would involve a still higher water and sewage rate. T consider that the present fe an inopportune time to compel a small body of ratepayers to Incur a heavy increase In their rates unless a sufficiently strong case of inconvenience or danger to public health has been made out. In my opinion, this has not been done.”