THE CINCINNATI WATER SUPPLY QUESTION.

THE CINCINNATI WATER SUPPLY QUESTION.

MISCELLANY

HENRY FLAD of St. Louis, Chas. Hermancy of Louisville, A. Fiteley of New York, Professor Brush of Hoboken and D. C. Cregier of Chicago, the committee of engineers who have been investigating the subject of a new water supply system for the city of Cincinnati, have made a preliminary report, answering the questions presented for their consideration in effect as follows:

No. 1. Is the location of the present intake on the Ohio river a proper one? Answer. No.

No. 2. Is it practicable and advisable to enlarge and improve the present pumping station ? Answer. It is not.

No. 3. Is it practicable and desirable to supply Cincinnati with wholesome water from a system of driven wells ? Answer. No.

No. 4. What source of supply do you recommend? Answer. The water should be taken from the Ohio river above the Little Miami river, and from an inlet tower or pier placed on the northern or right bank of the river.

No. 5. What location do you recommend for the pumping station? Answer. This question cannot be fully answered until further examinations and surveys have been made. We recommend that a competent engineer should be selected at once to proceed with this work. The necessity for such action will become apparent to you when we state, as we do, that in our opinion the plan of constructing a storage reservoir on the Markley farm is impracticable for reasons which will hereafter be fully given.

No, 6. What method of clarification, if any, do you recommend ? Answer. No definite plan can be recommended at present, but we believe it advisable that the engineer selected for making the surveys and examinations above referred to should also be intrusted with the duty of instituting a series of experiments on the applicability of the different methods now in use for clarifying the water by settling and filtering, and that this should be done on a scale sufficiently large to admit of its serving as a guide in arriving at an intelligent conclusion, both as to the practicability and cost of the process. We may, in our full report, deft* nitely indicate the nature and extent of the experiments which we consider necessary.

Besides the questions answered above, several others have been submitted verbally by members of your commission. To these questions we reply as follows :

It would be unsafe to rely on a single line of supply-main under any circumstances. The supply main should be of cast iron. We consider the use of a supply-main of cast iron sixty-two inches in diameter as not warranted by practical experience. The main supply pipes, where laid in embankment, should be placed at a safe distance apart. We beg leave to call your attention to the fact that surveys may be made, within a month or two, sufficient, if properly directed, to determine the general system to be adopted ; and that, therefore, the construction of new works will not be materially delayed. Early relief may In this way be received by the City if the necessary means for prosecuting the work are promptly obtained.

There are several feasible mrthodsof utilising the water taken from the intake, located, as above proposed, beyond the mouth of the Little Miami river, for supplying the city.

The one that is most practicable can be easily determined as soon as the surveys have been made and the plans prepared.

It is not practicable to obtain from the Dayton bar a permanent supply of water for Cincinnati.

In conclusion, we deem it pertinent to say that from every point of view we cannot too strongly urge prompt action in the pressing and very important matter of an increased and improved water supply for the city of Cincinnati.

While, for the reasons above stated, we are not prepared to submit an estimate, we are inclined to believe that the cost of any system of supply which we may be prepared to recommend will not exceed $6,000,000.

No posts to display