View report page

148 Annual Report' of the London County Council, 1914.
Treatment
of sewage.
The treatment of sewage without the use of chemicals during the winter months, which was
tried for four months beginning in December, 1913, was continued for a similar period from December,
1914. The use of the one acre coke bed at the Northern outfall, which had been in operation for several
years, was discontinued during the year. The capacity of the bed had decreased to a very small proportion
of the original, and no further results of a useful character could be obtained from its continuance.
Certain of the Council's officers inspected the experimental work in connection with the biological
treatment of sewage at the Manchester and Salford sewage works, and experiments in this method of
treatment are now being undertaken with a view to ascertaining whether this system is applicable to
the treatment of London sewage.
The special examination of the water of the river Thames, which was undertaken during June,
July, and August, 1913, was continued, but in this instance for twelve months, so as to cover all seasons
of the year. The work began in July, 1914.
Main drainage
works in
the River
Thames
The question of the Council's position in connection with the construction of certain main drainage
works in and adjoining the river Thames had for some time past been in dispute between the Port of
London Authority and the Council. Plans of certain proposed works had been forwarded to the Port
Authority for approval under section 28 of the Metropolis Management (Amendment) Act, 1858, but
the Port Authority claimed that the powers conferred by this Act were exhausted, and that the
Council's application should be dealt with under the Thames Conservancy Act, 1894. The
Port Authority expressed its willingness to grant a licence for the works under certain conditions,
to some of which the Council could not agree, and proceedings were instituted in the High
Court to test the rights of the Council and of the Port Authority in the matter. Judgment was
given to the effect that the Council is entitled by virtue of the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, and
the Metropolis Management (Amendment) Act, 1858, to construct works in, over or under the river
Thames, and that the Port Authority is bound to consider, pursuant to section 28 of the Act of 1858,
the plans submitted by the Council, and, if of opinion that the works or any of them will not interfere
with the navigation of the river Thames, to approve the plans and give a certificate accordingly.
Further, that in respect of any works, the plans for which may be approved and a certificate given, the
Council is not bound to obtain any further licence of the Port Authority.
Northeastern
storm relief
sewer.
One of the questions at issue with the Port of London Authority was that of the construction
of an outlet at Shadwell for the proposed north-eastern storm relief sewer. As the result of the judgment
above referred to, plans of this portion of the sewer have been submitted to and approved by the Port
Authority. The work of constructing the sewer has, however, been postponed on account of the war.
Wandle
Valley
sewer.
The construction, at an estimated cost of £100,000, of the Wandle Valley sewer, which has been
designed to relieve floodings in certain districts in Wandsworth, has also been postponed on account of
the war.
Ventilation
of sewers.
For a number of years the Greenwich Metropolitan Borough Council has complained of emanations
from the Council's sewers in the borough and much correspondence has taken place between the Council
and the Borough Council on the subject. The length of main sewers in Greenwich is approximately
12 miles, and provision for ventilation was made at 99 points, nearly all in the highway. Owing to
complaints, 61 of these surface ventilators had been closed, 30 had been sealed and connected to
ventilating columns, or stack pipes, and 8 only, including 2 at penstock houses belonging to the Council,
remained open. Notwithstanding the Council's efforts, the Borough Council persisted in its demands
for the closing of surface ventilators. It was then suggested to the Borough Council that, if it would
provide convenient sites, the Council would erect ventilating columns. It was intended that these
sites should be on the highways, as owing to the size of the sewers in Greenwich, which comprise some
of the largest in London, the ventilation pipes, if provided, would require to be of the most ample
dimensions, and to be erected in the most favourable positions. The Borough Council, however,
refused to provide sites on the highways on the ground of alleged serious obstruction and inconvenience
to the public, and suggested positions for the erection of stack pipes against the walls of houses which
were unsuitable for the purpose. Ultimately the Borough Council appealed to the Secretary of State
for the Home Department, and asked him to inquire into the alleged failure of the Council to comply
with its statutory obligations, and he referred the matter to the Council for its observations.
The problem of sewer ventilation has proved to be one of extraordinary difficulty and at present
there is no scheme which can be considered satisfactory from all points of view. The Council, therefore,
decided that there could be no departure from the existing practice of considering each case of complaint
upon its merits, and, if possible, to remedy the defect, and this view was conveyed to the Secretary
of State. The Main Drainage Committee subsequently met the representatives of the Borough Council
with a view to arriving, if possible, at an agreement in the matter. It was then suggested, on behalf of the
Borough Council that a ventilating pipe should be erected at the fire station in Tunnel-avenue, and one
at Rainton-road, and the work has been put in hand.
Floodings.
Many complaints have been received of flooding of houses in various districts of London during
times of heavy rainfall. In many cases the flooding could be prevented or remedied, and the Council
resolved to make application to Parliament in the session of 1915 for an amendment of the existing law
in order to provide that the drains of premises shall be constructed so as to prevent flooding when the
main sewer, into which the local sewer draining the said premises discharges, is running full or partly
so. At the same time, the Council resolved to apply to Parliament for authority to require alterations
to the drainage of existing premises liable to flooding, or, if necessary, to fill in the basements of such
premises, subject to the payment by the Council of suitable compensation, and for power to enable local
authorities to contribute in cases in which flooding may be due, wholly or in part, to the insufficiency
of the local sewers.