LEVIN'S SEWERAGE

Chronicle (Levin), 2 March 1948, Page 4

LEVIN'S SEWERAGE

Enginfeer And Counci! Talk Over Proposals A further step towards the formation of a sewerage schemedor Levin was taken last night when Mr. H. Vickerman, of Messrs. Vick- ( erman and Lancaster, Consulting; " Engineers, Wellington/ met they Levin Borough Council to answer ; questtons put to him by members ' in regard to reticulation, treatment and various other matters connected with the schetne. A series of questions was submitted to Mr. Vickerman and it was to answer these that he was present at the meeting last night. Given below are the questions and Mr. Vickerman's answers. . Can the whole of the Levin Borough be drained to one common outiet' by gfavitation, thus avolding the" instaliation and maintenance of .pumping machinery or ejectors? ' — YCs. Most certainly so. Is it your . intention . that, wherever possible, the dfains will be taken along the backs of properties, thus avoiding. the cuttmg up of sealed .roads and footpaths, and causing as little alteration as possible- to the existing septic tank installations?— Desirable, but not aitogether possible. Each part of thq, borough will have to be treated individually. - In the event of the drains going along the- baeks of properties, what autfiority would the council have ahd what compensation would have to be paid for sheds ahd gardens in any way harmed?— The council has f.ull authority, but the question of " compensation is' a legal one. What are the respective merits of cohcrete and glazed earthenware .pipes, and which can be expected to have the longer life? — The cost is about the same but I would be ipclined to recommend the earthenware pipes. It is better not to tie yourself down -to either, but rather think in terms of earthenware. Having in view the rapid progress of the borough, and the possibility of industries becoming established in the near future, is the suggested reticulation of sufflc|ep.t size to cater for all reasonable ev.entualities? — Yes. ' Quite adequate. Do you consider it advisable or necessary to obtain- a large scale aerial maptof the borough? — Yes. Most desirable. No up-to-date borough should be without an aerial map. What would be the average depth of the sewejr trenches, and; having regard to the liature of the sub-soil, would it be possible to use mechanical excavators for all the trenching?— -The average depth will be abbut 4 feet to 4 feet 6 inches. Any eontractor will use mechanical means where possible. In view of your knowledge of the position regarding the disposal of eifluent into Lake. Horowhenua, what alterantjve methods of puri5fication and disposal of the eft'luent do you suggest or recommend?— There is no visual alternative. It might be possible to put the eifluent into the Hokio" Stream or out on to the sandhills. Only liquid. which had been purified and gone through the filters ' would be put into the lake. Would you briefly describe • the generally accepted methods of treatment of sewage? — This question dates back to London in the 1830's. The first sewerage systems were cess pits in the back yards. From this was developed the septic tank system. Later still came the Imhoff tank prineipal, These are the more usual methods of sewage disposal. Where would the settling tafiks be placed? — Possibly hCar the abattoir site. The question ■ will 'have tQ be> investigafed. • * . • In, view of the; possible development of the lake as a pleasiire rerort, does it nqt' seem desirable that sewerage eifluent should ,be , kept out- of the lake? — It would not ,make any materfa^differehee. The reaction of people to this is only a psychological one. What change if any, based on. present day costs, is estimated in your original figure of £74,000. And what 'dilferehce in cost would there be if composting were resorted to in lieu of the generally accepted methods of disposal, also differenee in working costs?— The cost would ; stfil be between £70,000 and £80,000. We will have to wait until the seheme is a little more finalised before the second and third .parts of that question are answered. Would there be any saving in costs as- between working the; instaliation in sections as against carrying out the fuil seheme in one operation?— Do it ih one lot. Each ; part ig interloeked ahd one will pot, ■ be any use without the other. For mstance, r would be no use having the tanks in one place, no pipes to it and mfies of pipe- connected on the other side of the borough. How long would it be, under favpurable conditions, feefore the total seheme C°Uld be complete'd if thp- "m

ahead" signal were given now' Assuming all difflc.ultieS had .been overcome, 18 months to two years +uHa^8',ree'ard t0 the fac-t that of the 1000 houses in the horough 75 per cent have septic tank installatmns and theother 25 per cent. are on the night soil service but use water for 'other household purposes, do you consider the extra d, aw 0 bf water would cause any Nc>n Qn water supply system? f1^2ldd ^ J?e a'dvisable delaying the formulatiomof' the plans until you have seen the bad winter con- - dlte fs surface water in eertaip. parti of the borough' — wVin any/ase- Pipes will not be lort^eommg for some 12 months