The Roanoke times. [volume] (Roanoke, Va.) 1890-1895, 1892-03-12

the city served by it develops so much
thatit would not havo been large enough
TO receive the greater amount of the
storm water due to the correspondingly
greater area of impervious surface.
After such time tho excess Of water
would have to be provided for in its
present channel to Tinker creek through
Lick run. The interceptor would not
expose the business district as was
feared, to back water during times of
high water in the river If ordinary care
were given to the management of the
system. The water in the river never
rises SO rapidly that few hours warn
ing could not be had. and the contin-
gency OF heavy rainfall during the
time OF high flood is very remote. But
even in such case the quantity of
water issuing from the overflows can
not be great.
The channels of Lick run as we'll as
OF Trout run are in this plan to be
treated merely as drains to receive sur
race water. The sewage is to be carried
away separately by marginal sewers
along the banks to tho outfall near
Tinker creek. The storm water is ex-
pected to reach the drains either in the
street CUTTERS, in the branch drain. or
In the combined sewers, from which it
might gain overflow into the drains.
In the summer of 1901 Mr.. Dunlap
suggested different plan of sewerage
for the city, as the outfall into the Roa.
noke river, proposed in the previous
plan, had been objected to by the Gas
and Water Company and the Buena
vista Land Company, who were each
developing territory below the outfall,
partly for residences and partly for
manufacturing, of which the original
designer hao no knowledge. The
typographical surveys had also
oeen extended to other parts of
the city and its outskirts, and
previous estimates of water sheds had
been corrected so that certain modifica
tions of the former plans were neces.
sary.
The new plan, as proposed by MIR.
Dunlap, abandoned the interceptor of
the first plan, and instead proposed
sewers on the combined system along
the water courses through the heart Of
the city, and thence through the chan.
mel OF Lick run to Tinker creek. A
storm water interceptor was proposed
for the northern part of the city to pre-
vent the water of Lick run, at point
above the Lynchburg turnpike, from
running into the lower part of the city.
ana instead following an easterly and
then southeasterly course, entering
Tinker creek by a shorter distance.
The oLher features of tho two plans were
substantially the same.
we observe that much discussion has
been had upon these two plans, and that
other suggestions have been made, for
instance, to use the caverns in tho lime
stone for disposing of the storm water
or part of it. AS all questions refer-
ring to this matter are of an engineer
ing character, you have called upon us
to consider them and to advise YOU az
to the best project, which in our opin-
ion' the city should carry out to satisfy
It's present and future demands for sew
age and storm water removal
After carefully examining the data be-
fore us, after discussing the possible
solutions of the problem and making
com paratlve estimates of cost of the
various projects before us, we have come
to the following conclusions:
FIRST. We do not approve of the prop
osltlon to convert the Trout and Lick
runs into combined sewers. AT present
when there still remain large areas of
pervious surface, the great test flow
in these /" water courses and their
branches is, roughly speaking, about
one-quarter of the flow which will
appear when this respective
areas are complely built up. To build
combined sewers Of the necessary ca
pacity for the future. would therefore
require an expenditure of money which
Is unwarranted. We therefore advise
keeping Lick Run and Trout Run and
theneccessaay branches free from the re-
ception OF sewage, so that as far as pos
sible they may remain open channels.
They should, when desirable, be built
with side walls, and where necessary
the bed paved, so that the accumulation
n q n nd 0fh L
removed. In short we advise the adop-
ton OF the treatment of these water
courses substantially as embodied in tho
plan of Mr.. Herring.
Second. We consider that the inter
ceptor, If it had been built, would have
satisfactorily relieved the present
tronbls from storm water, and furnished
sewerage for the territory intercepted,
and that it would have been the least
costly of the two plans. If the relief
given by 1t would be sufficiently last.
ing, 1T would have been tho best plan
to adopt. But owing to the unpar-
alleled growth of the city, further re.
lief from storm water than that fur
n1shed by the interceptor will be re-
quired at an earlier time than that an
ticipated m the first plan. We are of
tho opinion that, with the money at
your command, it will better to provide
additional channels for the storm water,
taking it down the valley 10 Lick run,
than to build the intercepting sewer.
Third. We advise the immediate con-
struction OF storm drains in the business
part of the city. We recommend that a
drain be built in Center street begin.
ming near It's junction with tho Moorman
road; thence in Center street 10 the
junction with Shenandoah avenue, and
crossing the railroad at this point, con-