The Sewerage of the Eastern District

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

THE SEWERAGE OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT.

Some days since a meeting of the citizens of the 16th ward was held at The National Hall, Meserole street, corner of Union avenue, to take into consideration the notice of the Commissioners of Sewers, published in the Times, relative to the adoption of a plan of drainage for the Eastern District. A committee was appointed to call at the Commissioners’ office and obtain information relative to the nature and cost of the proposed drainage. Another meeting of citizens was held on Saturday evening, to hear the report of the Committee.

At the appointed hour about 50 persons, mostly Germans, and apparently small property owners and mechanics, gather together. Most of them should have been au fait in the matter to be discussed but they were inhaling the fragrant fumes of tobacco through pipes almost as large and as long as those which it is said the commissioners propose using; and as for drainage, the frequent visits of the company to the bar evinced that however they opposed its application to their property, they approved it as regarded their own physical systems.

About 8 o’clock a number of others arrived, and the meeting was called to order by Mr. Charles B. Smith,¹ the Chairman of the former meeting, who took the chair, and called on the Secretary, Mr. John H Tobitt² to read the minutes of the last meeting. Mr. T did so, amid much interruption from an old gentleman named Rice, who was “three sheets in the wind” and wanted to make running comments in German as Mr. Tobit proceeded. To this the latter gentleman naturally objected, and in consequence some confusion arose, and threats were uttered about expelling him, which brought the obstreperous individual to order.

Mr. Tobitt then, on behalf of himself, Mr. John Conklin³ and Mr. H.B. Sherman,⁴ the Committee appointed to wait on the commissioners, reported the result of their interview. Each member of the Committee had attended at the office and had spent some time in a careful examination of the maps and plans. They had taken special pains to inquire into the probable cost of the drainage, and to ascertain the proportionate expense which would be assessed on each owner of a lot; and also to obtain a clear idea of the exact nature of the contemplated mode of sewerage; how far it differed from the ordinary methods; whether it was merely an experimental process, and whether the parties liable to be assessed possessed any powers of modifying, postponing, or rejecting it. There appeared, on the part of the Commissioners and their employees, to be every desire to afford explanation and information to those seeking it. With regard to the scientific merits of the plan, the Committee did not feel qualified to give an opinion. The work was in charge of the same gentlemen who composed the Board of Water Commissioners, but further than this it did not appear that there was any connection between the sewerage plan and the Water Works. The plan of drainage for any particular section of the city would not be resolved on by the Commissioners until it had been submitted to the inspection of the parties interested, and their views heard in relation thereto. The district comprising the 1st, 3rd, and 6th wards had already acquiesced in a plan submitted by the engineer, and this section of the city had been the next taken up. The main advantage spoken of as accruing to the mode of drainage proposed, was it alleged cheapness in comparison with others. The engineer had declined, when requested by the Committee, to give any approximation to the cost per lot, but assured them that it would be only one-third that of the ordinary sewers. The kind of pipe sewers which he recommended were similar, he stated, to those now in use in the large cities of Europe. Copies of the act creating the Board of Sewers, and the Engineer’s reports, were furnished to the Committee, which they had carefully perused. With regard to the reasons given for the preference for pipe sewers over the old brick ones, the gist of the whole appeared in the following extract:

"Both theory and experience prove, that with a given fall and length, there will be a greater tendency to deposit in long brick sewers than in smaller pipe sewers. The strongest advocates for the brick servers will admit that the tendency will be as great, and is the brick sewer would only have the advantage of holding a larger quantity of deposit, the preference for them is really on the ground of their capacity as cess-pools for retention of solid matter, and not as channels for carrying refuse away. And with the unusually large body of water at your command, and both water supply and drainage works under one authority, you have all the needed elements for a thorough and economial system of draiange."— [First Report, page 12.

A subsequent report had been made concerning the district of the city. The plan was recommended by the engineer was developed in the following extracts:

"The Tide Canal, from Wallabout Bay, through River street to Newtown Creek, for the building of which an act of the Legislature exists, would form the natural Drainage Basin of the slope extending north of it as far as Division avenue, Twelfth and Stagg streets, be an intercepting sewer on each side of it, to prevent the disastrous effects which would follow a pollution of its waters to such an extent as the drainage of so large a district would insure. It is out of the question to think of ponding its waters and usuing them at low tide to flush out all its impurities, if it be designed that the Canal shall, at the same time, serve the ordinary purposes and navigation. Its length (three miles) and tortuous channel, its comparatively small capacity, and shallowness of autlet, with the limited range in the tides, would render such a process very uncertain in its effects, as a means of removing impurities. At the best, it could only remove them into Newtown Creek or Wallabout Bay, to be spread out into shallow water and deposited on the flats on the one hand, or requiring a frequent resort to dredging necessary on the other. Hence we are driven to the necessity of intercepting and leading it by a sewer of ample capacity to such an outfall as shall relieve us, as far as possible, of the nuisance resulting from a shallow outlet. The uncertainty with respect to the ultimate construction of this Canal in River street, will not affect the location of this intercepting sewer, nor indeed of its dimensions. As the drainage from the west face of this slope, above referred to, must, of necessity, in the event of the construction of this Canal, be discharged into Wallabout Bay at some point, and that from the east slope it is in our power to discharge beyond the eddying action of the tide in this Bay, of course two lines of intercepting sewers become necessary — one for each slope. With reference to the most easterly, nothing need be said in this place, as it will form the subject of a distinct communication from this office, when we come to treat of the drainage into Wallabout Bay, as will also the continuation of these sewers into Newtown Creek, on the North. The location of the most westerly of these intercepting sewers forms very nearly the boundaries to the southeast, south and southwest of the three wards under consideration, as shown on the accompanying maps. The grade of River street, at the intersection with Broadway or Division avenue, is 10 feet above high water, and may, for the present, be considered as the summit, and starting point of this sewer; the bottom grade of which, being taken as 12 feet below the street, will give the depth of tide-water in the sewer, at high water, at about 1 ¾ feet. It is proposed to construct this sewer 6 feet in diameter for its whole length along River street to Kent avenue, up Kent avenue to Ann street, and down Ann street to the pierhead — total length of 7360 feet — with a uniform descending grade of 2 ¾ feet per mile to mean low water. This sewer will drain an area of 270 acres, if the Canal be built, intercepting the drainage from the opposite slope. If, on the contrary, the Canal should not be built, 1000 acres may be drained through it, or even more. In addition to the above, there will be required at the intersection of Tenth street and Union avenue, a brick sewer at 4 feet diameter, increasing to 6 feet at Seventh street, and thence down Union avenue and North Fourteenth street, crossing First and Washington streets, to its on fall at the Harbor Commissioner's pier line, foot of Quay street, Greenpoint, or down Thirteenth street, to the same line, as may be ultimately determined on. Some difficulties present themselves in the establishment of this sewer, which will be brought under your notice at the proper time. This sewer drains 260 acres. In North Fifth street, from Fourth street to the bulkhead, a 24 inch sewer will be necessary, receiving its pipe tributaries from as far as North Eighth street on the one side, and South Third on the other. This sewer drains 88 acres. A brick sewer, 4 feet in diameter, will be needed in Kenth avenue, extending from South Third to South Sixth street, thence to the outfall, at the pier foot of this street, draining 33 ¾ acres; as also one of the same dimension, extending from Division avenue to South Seventh street, draining at the outfall at head of Peck Slip Ferry wharf, 138 acres. These, with a 4 feet brick sewer in Broadway, extending from Lynch street to River street, about 450 feet in length, are all the sewers of brick required in these wards. The remaining streets have good falls for the most part, and the same system of pipe sewers as that recommended for the First, Third, and Sixth Wards, will, it is believed, answer every purpose. The total area drained is some 780 acres, covering near 39 miles of street."

The Committee concluded by expressing the opinion that an efficient sewerage system was a necessity to a large city like this; but that they did not desire, with their present information, either to endorse or condemn this plan. They were willing as individuals to pay their quota of the expense, provided the works were not done upon the dishonest jobbing system which pervaded nearly all our public works.

Mr. Sherman rendered Mr. Tobitt’s remarks into German, for the information of those present who did not understand English.

The Chairman stated that he had examined the plans and conversed with the engineer on the subject. As he understood it, the greater part of those present were in no wise affected by the matter. Most of them lived above Union avenue, which was the furthest uptown boundary of the district for which the plan was made. Nevertheless he would take the opportunity saying, that he was opposed to the proposed system of drainage, as he was satisfied that it would be insufficient to carry off even the surface water in time of heavy rains. Any one street, in a flood, contained more water than could possibly be forced through a 15 inch pipe, which he understood was the size mostly to be used. Further, it was grossly unjust to compel the people to pay for sewers at this time. They had not asked for sewerage, and yet it was to be forced on them by an unprincipled set of knaves who wanted to make money out of the public by furnishing pipes at enormous prices, or something of that kind. It was just like this Water job, which would never benefit Williamsburgh a fraction, judging by a comparison with New York. If we had a large manufacturing interest here there would be some reason for introducing water; but it was not needed for household purposes, nor was it likely to reduce the price of insurance. Premiums were just as high in New York now as before the Croton⁵ was introduced while every house was saddled with ten dollars expense for water. He had been told that the mason work was being done for the Water Works in a very unsubstantial manner, and he expected this drainage was, like that, a complete swindle.

Mr. Gillet.—Is the sewerage plan to be adopted whether we want it or not?

Mr. Tobitt.—Yes, unless some of us shall suggest a better plan, otherwise this one will be accepted.

Mr. Gillet said he thought sewerage entirely unnecessary as yet. Those present were mostly working men, and comparatively poor. The taxes were getting to be so enormous, that they had better give their houses and lots to the common counsel forth with, and go out in the woods to live, then stop here and pay them.—(Loud applause.)

The Chairman suggested that the only way to prevent the plan from being adopted was to apply for an injunction against the Commissioners.

In reply to a question, Mr. Tobitt stated that the commissioners met on Wednesday next, to hear objections to the plan previous to its adoption.

An individual whose name we could not learn spoke in German at some length, vehemently denied seeing the policy of increasing taxes by executing public works at this time. He said this sewage law was one of the acts passed by the infamous Black Republican Legislature of last year and the people should not pay for it. If the Black Republican ⁶ Legislature were determined to have sewers built, let them come and build them themselves or pay for them. (This sentiment was heartily applauded.)

The report of Mr. Tobitt was that adopted, and a protest against the proposed sewerage directed to be drawn up in the name of the meeting. Mr. Gillet, Mr. Pfister, and Mr. Conklin, were appointed a committee to present it to the Commissioners on Wednesday

---