HOUSE DRAINAGE QUESTION.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXX, Issue 3825, 22 August 1899, Page 7

HOUSE DRAINAGE QUESTION.

RETORT BY CITY ADVICE AND WARNING. In tho course of a report presented to the City Council last night the City - .Engineer submitted tho following reloindois to representations made by a deputation of tho Ratepayers’ Association which recently made certain statements in regard to house drainage ' sit a meeting ot tho Council; 1. As to tho manner in which tho bylavvs arc being interpreted.—Answer : A broad general statement of this kind cannot bo answered. Tho bylaws have been correctly interpreted, and when , any , doubt existed tho assistance of the City Solicitor has been sought. la. That drains wore being passed, under tho houses regardless of clause 154 of the bylaws.—Answer; The fact is in diametrical opposition to this statement. ■ 2. As to the insistence upon straight lines in tho laying of drains, regardless of tho depth of cutting, or the cost. 8. That all drains are rc- , quired to be laid on an even grade, requiring in eases a cutting of from 20it to 30ft.—Answer to 2 and 8 : _ (2) Straight lines in tho laying of drains, both in plan and section, have, as required by the bylaw, been insisted upon; but where any undue or unnecessary depth of cutting would .be entailed by a true grade between the terminal points of any drain,, permission has invariably been given to make two or more grades,- so as to avoid an • unreasonable depth of excavation. No case of a catting of either 20ft or 30ft, as stated, has over occurred. 1 „rc-; member none where the depth exceeded aboxuSft; this but rarely, and only fora very short distance, and. involving the additional - expense of the removal of. ». few yards of earth only. (8) This has, of course, always boon objected ;to. l 3. Insistence upon manholes, two at leant being required for every private house.—Answer: Manholes are’ in no case required except whore the depth of the drain is such that it cannot be inspected from the . surface; _ these are most exceptional cases. It is not a fact that two chambers at least; arc required for every house. One-.only is required in 9'J eases out of.-100, nnd tins is usually not larger than 2ft 3in x Ift lOliir x from Ift Gin to 2ft Gin, deep. No doubt there have been bno 6r two exceptional cases where two, chambers were essential, owing to the arrangement of the house, and of its sanitary fittings. 4. That such manholes are- neither more nor less than .esas-pits.—Answer : This statement is absolutely opposed to fact, and could - only.-bo .suggested... by. one who is quite ignorant or the usual form and construction', of such a chamber. ; ' ' ;■ v

o. That the cost of cadi of'such manholes is between £4 and £s. ; —-Answer: The outside value of the l work in a chamber such as is referred to in No. ih. is 25s complete, and offers to exdctite the work for a loss sum have been received,. A charge of £-4 ’or £.5/'for any except’ a chamber 4ft oi eft deep is most exorbitant. ■ / ■■ . ■ 0. That the present junctions m sowers aro condemned, that new pmci tions were required, necessitating tbo opening up of streets again at .great expense.— Answer: This statement can only bo met by an emphatic'contradiction. • ■■ .■ . 7. That the arbitrary straining of bylaws causes an undue expense' equal to 10 per cent, of the cost of house; — Answer: This is again, a statement of such a general and sweeping character that it cannot ho answered unless ■ on same specific case, and then a reply would bo possible. ' ’ , ' 9. That inspection chambers from the speaker’s. knowledge became a nuisance. —Answer; I can only, place my. own experience- of nearly .thirty years against thatiof'tho -speaker, and . say that a properly constructed chamber cannot become a nuisance. ■ 10. That an extraordinary supply of water would bo necessary for the flushing of such chambers.—Answer:- No water supply whatever will be required to flush out those chambers. 1 GENERAL OBSERVATIONS. The two points upon which special stress is laid are inspection chambers and separate drains where practicable. With regard to the former 1 .submit,as an axiom .that the cost of anything is its first cost .pins its upkeep, and my strong contention iis that tho'-scj persons who have constructed and who do construct such chambers by means of which thoir drains can bo properly and immediately inspected and cleaned, at such an exceedingly small additional cost, will be the persons in the end whose drainage system has cost them the least, and who have also suffered by far the least in convenience. 1 submit further that if manholes, chambers and lampholes are necessary for the inspection and cleansing of the public sewers, steely equal facilities for inspection, etc., are requisite in private drains. On this point I can only add that I know of few cities or boroughs of any considerable importance whore the provision of inspection chambers Ts not made absolutely imperative, and further whore brick disconnecting chambers aro not also required. On the question of separate drains where practicable, it appears to mo that the underlying principle of all legislation upon this subject ■ is that the owner or occupier of any property should bo held responsible for the construction and maintenance of the drains from this property alque; and tliat the sanitary authority should be responsible for the maintenance of all sewers, that is, pipes which receive the drainage of two or more properties. In spite of all this, however, duo consideration must bo given to existing circumstances, and to the manner in which the streets and buildings have been laid out in Wellington, where it will be found that no fixed hard rule can or should bo enft reed with regard to the drainage ■ of properties, but that every particular case must bo dealt with upon its merits, and according to the nature of its surroundings. For instance, whoro houses immediately abut upon a street wherein there is laid a sower (and whoro such houses aro not absolutely joined to one another) it is undoubtedly best and right that every one of such houses should have its own separate drains, as contemplated by the Acts of Parliament and by the bylaws. Each propcity should, in my judgment, as far as possible, bear its own burden, and tbo health and comfort of the careful tenant should not bo dependent';.n, or jeopardised by, his negligent neighbour. It will bo preferable in many cases that resort should bo had to a common main drain, rather than that several private drams should bo laid alongside . of each o ther, and separately connected with the sower. . I am strongly in accord with the view expressed by ono member or too ■deputation, namely, that the Council should bo guided by tho wishes of the ratepayers; but what aro tho wishes of tho ratepayers on those points ? Is it to bo taken and considered that ■ the opinions placed before the Council bn Thursday last hy several members of the association represent the views of the citizens of Wellington? Personally I am unable to think that this is possible, and that a community which has taxed itself to the extent of -i / 0,000 in providing an efficient ar-

tcrial system of servers, and to a further annual charge of about £2500 in working and maintain.ng this system, will bo content to permit, in respect to drainage, anything short of that which is also reasonably efficient, for, if the system or drainage, which is the crowning point of the scheme, is not so reasonably efficient, then the best results are not being obtained from this large expenditure and annual cost.

If tho city docs not wish to have carried out in its drainage system details'- which, as far as my experience goes, are universally accepted as desirable and even necessary, it has but to express that desire and its wishes will, as a matter of course, bo respected and obeyed; but I, as your engineer, must not lie asked to approve of plans, sections and details for drainage work which are apposed to modern pract.ce, and which, it carried into effect, will not, in my opinion, be satisfactory in their operation. I consider 1 should- bo guilty of great deroiictiSn of- duty, if 1 were not to ask for and require what is, in my judgment, essential to-a proper system of house drainage, so long as such requirements are provided tor ;in tho city bylaws and in tho Acts of Parliament. 1 can well understand that those questions, mugb. touch, to some extent, the pockets lof ;#* snlall section of thh community, 'hut'for this reason the health -and : comfort of ; the vast majority, 'which has toi-j live in the houses erected and drained, cannot bo disregarded in fever' so small a degree. Councillor Luke 1 ■ complimented tho City Engineer upon his replies to the Ratepayers’ Association; Tf‘ Mr Rcuntliwaite had ci red at'all,'he had done so in the interest of the people of the city. - There- was < not. doubt, that inspecting chambers wore Accessary to an efficient drainage- -system.-: Thd reason the chambers were not put in during tho earlier stages of the drainage scheme was -sac-to the fact that the engineers'wished to cut' down tile expenses to ratepayers, as much as possible.

Councillor Smith explained - that what he originally wanted <&• know was—why tho inspecting chambers were suddenly' thduglitr'-of, 1 wit-hlOut thcAGouhcil harrtng haa notice of, them ?, Ho cficl not' Sky whether they Were jgoocl'or bakl. In small cotiagics they t were hardly nccessai-y, but in laifgfi' biimhcss; places it was,.'of course,-jdesirable to" have them., ■ ’ Councillor Hai court looked upon it as soivtewfa , at'-'iiumiliating^-'"that- ) - , ~after procuring one of the most competent engineers, the Council would notpermit him to enforce the simplest, refoihis without Greeting? that he should get their instructions. Councillors were not experts, and the engineer would not ho able to carry on his work if councillors dictated the methods he had to follow. . / , I 1 - Councillor LiugartU.-said 'it; appeared to him that the Association was desirous of , bringing the- Council into as much disrepute ‘ as 1 possible. ; These people would-do a great deal of ■harm by throwing' reflections upon the engineer—a highly qualified man., Councillor Tolliurs't' liekf that the contention of the Ratepitj/ers’ Association that the inspcctioivchambers were a new departure supported byfacts. There wash'll bylaw on the subject, and the engineer had simply carried it out. They could therefore only endorse what had been done by Mr Rbunthwaito. " _ _____ It ,w r as eventually, decjiled, that the report should;, be : forwarded to the Ratepayers’ i Association!' "