Following on from a (much) earlier thread about the Tranmere / Borough Road overflow tunnels, I have typed out the following from a primary source. They are proceedings from a sub-committee from 1930. This first part is the Town Clerk's memo; I'll post the Borough Engineer's report shortly.

I have checked the content for typos etc but any remaining are down to me

-----------------------------------------------------

1930

Probable future commitments of the Corporation in connection with Sewerage and certain other matters.

Memorandum of the Town Clerk

The accompanying information has been compiled upon the instructions of the Council, and will be considered by a Special Committee on the 12th December 1930.
It is understood that particulars are required not only of the sewerage schemes which give rise to the matter, but also of any other important developments for which the Council should be prepared.

Sewerage.

The following brief description of the sewerage system of the Borough should be borne in mind in considering the matter:
The Borough is sewered on the combined system and the carriage is by gravitation to the River Mersey. There are no pumping or screening arrangements such as are often necessary in other Towns. The following are the outlets into the River Mersey:-

(a) Outfall No. 1. The Great Culvert which is laid under Corporation Road and drains about 1,570 acres of the Borough and also receives (1) the discharge of the Fender Valley sewer, (2) the waters of the River Birkett, and (3) the water discharged from Graving Docks on the Dock Estate.
(b) Outfall No. 2. adjoining the Woodside Ferry and serving an area of about 30 acres near the Ferry Approach.
(c) Outfall No. 3. The Grange Vale Sewer which drains an area of about 714 acres.
(d) Outfall No. 4. The Green Lane Sewer which drains an area of about 562 acres.
(e) Outfall No. 5. The St. Paul’s Road Sewer which drains about 30 acres and acts at times for the relief of the Green Lane Sewer.
(f) Outfall No. 6. adjoining Rock Park and draining an area of about 149 acres.
(g) Outfall No. 7. The “Dell” Sewer which drains an area of about 73 acres.

It is inevitable that each year should show an increased demand upon the sewers. Not only building operations but the greater use of water for baths &c. contribute to the demand.
In November 1913, the Corporation in their Memorial to the Local Government Board for an extension of boundaries stated “Owing to building developments within the Borough and certain of the districts immediately adjoining further provision will shortly have to be made to deal with the storm water from certain districts.”
The Report of the Borough Engineer (sent herewith) sets out particulars of the scheme for dealing with the sewerage of the southern portions of the Borough.

The Mersey Docks & Harbour Board have gradually adopted the view that they should endeavour to prevent the discharge of crude sewage into the River Mersey. In 1921 they succeeded in requiring the Bromborough Urban District Council to separate and remove solids before discharge into a new outfall, and since then they have endeavoured to place the same condition upon other Local Authorities.
As a result of the Dock Board’s opposition to the Birkenhead Extension Bill 1927 the following section was inserted by Parliament in the Act :- “65(1) The Corporation shall not after the passing of this Act, unless authorised by Act of Parliament or Provisional Order confirmed by Parliament, construct any new sewage outfall into the River Mersey so as to discharge sewage (other than surface or storm water) into the said River, unless such sewage shall prior to such discharge have been screened so as to remove therefrom all solid matter”.

The Local Authorities in the Merseysides area have also agreed to an Inquiry into the Dock Board’s contentions as to the effect of crude sewage upon the River. The Dock Board have engaged seven well-known experts to investigate the matter and a print of their report has been placed at the disposal of each Local Authority. The recommendation of these experts is that the sewage should be purified before discharge. This report is now being examined by experts on behalf of the Local Authorities.
If by any means the Corporation are placed under the necessity of separating solids before discharging sewage into the River, a considerable outlay of money will be involved.

River Birkett Drainage. The Great Culvert (referred to above) was constructed under an act of 1844 by the Birkenhead Dock Commissioners under a statutory obligation “for the purpose of carrying off the drainage waters which now usually flow through the said Pool (i.e. Wallasey Pool) from above Warrington’s Bridge”. The water which flowed into the Pool at that time was discharged by the River Birkett and its tributaries the Arrowe and Fender.
Previous to the construction of the Great Culvert the Town sewers discharged into Wallasey Pool; but, on the construction of the Docks, the sewage from Birkenhead was discharged into the Great Culvert as soon as it was completed and this has continued ever since.
It would appear that the Corporation of Wallasey are desirous of dealing with the surface water drainage of the Moreton area by discharging it into the River Birkett. Counsel have expressed the opinion that under the interpretation of the Act of 1844 the Great Culvert should be used only for receiving the waters of the River Birkett.

-------------------------------------------

Nice one dude. V. Interesting read.

I've been trying to find out more about the great culvert, I haven't managed to chase down "Warrington's Bridge".

The culvert is huge - something like 12 ft diameter and 3 miles long.

Stop messing about and give us the next installment is that the old Penny Farthing bridge.

Thanks, MrG65; I look forward to the Borough Engineer's report in the hope that it may throw some light on the Borough Rd. overflow sewer.

As it happens, I've got an old report from 1954 on the Great Culvert. I'll copy it up in due course. I did notice on a plan attached to the report that the location of "Warrington's Bridge" was shown.

Ok here's the Borough Engineer's main report - all the thinking behind the Borough Road overflow sewer revealed!

There is a further section to the Report, dealing with the 5 year forward programme of works and listing about 60 schemes (buildings, roads, sewers etc), together with cost estimates, that the Corporation intended to implement during that period. It's not really relevant to this thread, though, but I might copy it up for completeness at some point.

Report follows.........................


To The Chairman & Members
of the Special Sub-Committee.

Gentlemen,

SEWERAGE – SOUTHERN PORTION OF BOROUGH

In accordance with instructions I beg to report with respect to the main drainage of the southern portion of the area tributary to Borough Road sewer, and in particular in regard to the portion of the Orred Estate bounded by Borough Road, Storeton Road, Prenton Road West and the Borough boundary, which forms the greater part of the undeveloped land in this part of this drainage area.

It will, I think, make the matter under consideration more clear if I first describe what has already been done in regard to the lower portion of this drainage area.

The total area tributary to the Borough Road, and Grange Vale outfall sewer comprises about 707 acres and in 1899 Mr. Brownridge submitted to the Road and Improvement Committee a scheme for dealing with the main drainage of this area by enlarging the Grange Vale sewer and constructing a second sewer as a supplementary to the existing sewer in the lower or more northern portion of Borough Road, and at that time indicated that the future drainage of the southern portion of the area should be diverted through Tranmere Hill in an easterly direction to the River. The late Mr. John T. Wood, an eminent Consulting Engineer, then practising in Liverpool, was called in to report upon Mr. Brownridge’s scheme, which he approved and supported.

The supplementary sewer and other works then suggested were in 1904 and 1905 constructed from the Tranmere Pool to Whetstone Lane by the Corporation, and at the same time the Grange Vale sewer was extended by the Dock Board under the ship yard to the river wall.

In 1907 Mr. Brownridge submitted a further scheme for dealing with the remaining portion of this drainage area, and divided his suggested works into two sections, the first section provided for the construction of a supplementary sewer along Borough Road from Whetstone Lane to Glover Street and the second section provided for the construction of a sewer commencing in Borough Road opposite Temple Road, passing thence in a southerly direction along Borough Road to a point about 227 yards to the south of Prenton Road East (near what is now Everest Road) thence across the fields and under the junction of Church Road and Bebington Road, Victoria Park, down a short length of Albany Road, Well Lane and St. Paul’s Road to the river; thus diverting an area of about 240 acres from the Borough Road drainage area, as had also been provided for when designing the work carried out in 1905.

In laying out the Tranmere Hall Estate, Everest Road has been made sufficiently wide to admit of the more economical construction of this suggested sewer in that road.

At this time the existing sewer in St. Paul’s Road had been found insufficient to carry off the sewage and storm water from the area tributary to it, and the new outfall then proposed was designed to provide for the drainage of the local area as well as the area to be diverted from Borough Road.

The first section of this scheme comprising the supplementary sewer from Whetstone Lane to Glover Street was completed in 1926, and the supplementary sewers and other works which have been constructed up to date between the river and Glover Street are found to be sufficient to carry off throughout this length all except the most extraordinary rainfalls.

It should be noted in passing that in dealing with the main drainage of large areas, it is usually possible to arrange for a portion of the sewage and storm water when the ordinary sewers become surcharged during periods of exceptional rainfall, and when the sewage has become very much diluted, to be run off by means of storm water overflows into adjacent brooks or streams; but in Borough Road where there is no such stream, the sewer has to deal with the sewage and the whole of the rainfall, and as it would not be a justifiable expenditure to make the sewer large enough to carry off the sewage and the extraordinary amount of rainfall which may occur on rare occasions, the present sewers are not guaranteed to eliminate every possibility of flooding on these exceptional occasions.

At the present time there are a few occasions each summer when during exceptionally heavy rainfall, when the existing sewer in the portion of Borough Road between Glover Street and Singleton Avenue becomes surcharged and overflows onto the carriageway, but no advantage would now be obtained from the extension of the supplementary sewer beyond Glover Street as it would only transfer the flooding now experienced to the lower portion of Borough Road where the existing sewers are not of sufficient capacity to carry off the large amount of water draining from the southern portion of the tributary area.

In considering the drainage of the southern portion of the area, I have had levels taken and sections prepared from which I find it is possible to drain 44½ acres out of the 53¼ acres comprising the Corporation’s Orred Estate on the westerly side of Borough Road, by the construction of a sewer along Mount Road and Bedford Drive to the existing sewer at the top of Albany Road, and this sewer would carry off the drainage of 520 houses out of the 632 houses which can be erected on this portion of the Estate. The cost of this sewer would be about £7,000, and owing to the configuration of the land the main sewers on the Estate connecting with it would have to be laid deeper than would be required if the Estate were drained into the existing sewer in Borough Road, and this would involve a further extra expenditure of approximately £1,000 over the cost of ordinary sewering for Estate purposes into the existing Borough Road Sewer. This scheme which has recently been advocated would also leave a large area to be drained into the Borough Road sewer, for which provision has not been made, and would – when the whole of the land in the area is fully developed – lead to an increased amount of flooding in Borough Road and consequently I cannot recommend the proposal.

With a view to ascertaining how far it is possible to avoid having to construct a sewer through Tranmere Hill, I have had levels taken and sections prepared for the construction of a sewer commencing at the junction of Storeton Road and Prenton Road West by tapping the existing sewer in Storeton Road at this point, and then being continued in a southerly direction along Storeton Road until it reaches the nearest point of the Orred Estate, thence passing in a south-easterly direction through the Estate to Borough Road at its junction with Mount Road, thence continuing along Mount Road and Bedford Drive to the existing in Albany Road.

I find that this sewer in a portion of Storeton Road would have to be constructed at a depth of 31 ft. and where it passes under the junction of Mount Road and Bedford Drive at a depth of 20 ft. and it would cost approximately £25,000.

This would still leave a residue of the southerly portion of the Borough Road drainage area tributary to the existing Borough Road sewer, which, when fully developed, would have the effect of causing flooding of a not less serious character than that which takes place in the portion of Borough Road between Singleton Avenue and Glover Street at the present time, consequently, I am driven to the conclusion that the Corporation would not now be justified in departing from the original proposal to construct a sewer through Tranmere Hill for efficiently and satisfactorily dealing with the drainage of this southern portion of the tributary area.

As previously mentioned, a considerable amount of flooding takes place in Well Lane and St. Paul’s Road at the present time owing to the existing sewer being of insufficient capacity to carry off the drainage tributary to it, and with the development which is now taking place on the Albany Road and Dacre Hill Housing Sites, the Bedford Park Estate, and on small portions of previously undeveloped lands adjacent thereto, the flooding already taking place in St. Paul’s Road and Well Lane will be greatly intensified, during periods of heavy rainfall, and apart altogether from the addition of any drainage which may be brought into this outfall sewer from the Borough Road area, it is now necessary to construct a new and larger outfall sewer in place of the existing sewer.

In fact, I am of opinion that the existing flooding will in this way be so intensified that I must advise the Estates and Development Committee not to erect any houses on the Orred Estate on the westerly side of Borough Road until a sufficient outfall sewer has been provided to carry off the drainage from such development.

The new outfall sewer which I now advise should be constructed for carrying off the main drainage of the portion of the Borough Road drainage area to the south of Temple Road, should commence in Borough Road at the bottom of Temple Road and, as previously described, pass along Borough Road in a southerly direction to Everest Road, then turning in an easterly direction, pass under Everest Road and Victoria Park and the intervening land to a point in the lower portion of Albany Road, then along Albany Road, Well Lane and St. Paul’s Road to the river, where it would have to be carried to a point below low-water mark. The necessity for this scheme of work has been admitted by Mr. Midgeley Taylor and Mr. Brownridge in connection with the Corporation’s applications to Parliament for Borough Extensions in 1920 and 1927.

It is estimated that the cost of this work at the present time will be about £85,000 for the section of sewer on foreshore in St. Paul’s Road, Well Lane and a short length of Albany Road, but exclusive of any settling tanks or other works which may be insisted on at the instance of the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, and which may cost a very large amount, but in respect of which no approximate estimate can be prepared until some agreement has been arrived at between the Ministry of Health, the Dock Board and the Riparian Authorities, and £40,000 for the second portion through Victoria Park, Everest Road and Borough Road to Temple Road, but until detailed drawings have been prepared it is not possible to give a close estimate of these costs, and I would remind the Committee that within the last few years the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board have been making a determined effort to induce the Ministry of Health to require all sewage flowing into the River Mersey to be clarified by the removal of solids or other treatment, and that the sewage should be stored so that it would only be discharged into the river on the ebb tide, and the extent to which the enforcement of these requirements may be sanctioned by the Ministry of Health will have a very material bearing on the cost of the work.

.........................................................

that explains why there are no major access covers at the bottom of Everest - they will be at the bottom of temple road.

Thanks mate

Well done MrG65 !! Quite some task to have copied that lot out. A most comprehensive report. It answers some questions a few of us have been chewing over for a couple of years.

Many thanks !!

Thank you very much for your efforts, MrG65. The engineer's report raises a couple of interesting points.
Remembering that it is from 1930, at that time, the Tranmere Hall Estate, including Everest Rd. had been built, but there are references to "the Corporation's Orred estate" which essentially was bounded by Prenton Rd. West, Borough Rd., Storeton Rd. & somewhere about Cheviot Rd. The report refers to "632 houses which can be erected on this portion of the estate", which must be what is now the Mount Estate. This was not actually built until 1946/47, so it's interesting to know that it was planned much earlier.
It is interesting to see that the idea of the overflow tunnel through Tranmere hill had been considered as early as 1899.
The real puzzle is; why start the overflow tunnel at Temple Rd. & then backtrack to Everest Rd. Why not just start at Everest Rd.?
The report ties in nicely with the research I did on the overflow tunnel (Wirral History, page 5. Borough Rd. Overflow Tunnel).
Maybe someone local could have a look at the manholes on Borough Rd. at Temple Rd. & see if there are any of the distinct pattern of the ones used in Everest Rd. & Victoria Park. (over to you, DD)
Thanks again, MrG65.

[quote=MrG65][quote=diggingdeeper]I've been trying to find out more about the great culvert, I haven't managed to chase down "Warrington's Bridge".

Because of the apostrophe, I suspect that there was a firm called Warrington's that the bridge was named after.

me and d.d. had a quick look at the manhole covers tonight on our way somewhere else! sure he will post up soon!

Beat you to it Chris, I took these pictures before you asked. I'll do this in 5 separate posts so they don't get too mixed up.

On Borough Road at bottom of Temple Road - 2 manholes and a fat stench pipe!

Junction of Borough Road and Prenton Road West/East - 3 manholes

On Borough Road on pavement outside Tranmere Rovers - 2 manholes (probably Gas)

On Borough Road at bottom of Mallory Road - 1 manhole

On Borough Road at bottom of Everest Road - 3 manholes and a fat stench pipe!

On Borough Road at bottom of Temple Road - 2 manholes and a fat stench pipe!

Junction of Borough Road and Prenton Road West/East - 3 manholes

On Borough Road on pavement outside Tranmere Rovers - 2 manholes (probably Gas) (there were also 4 small square gas covers and a gas vent box)

On Borough Road at bottom of Mallory Road - 1 manhole

On Borough Road at bottom of Everest Road - 3 manholes and a fat stench pipe! (last post - sorry pictures aren't better, it was dark and I was getting targeted by road traffic)

nice work mate worth risking life and lime for!lol

Thanks, guys. So, none of those match the ones used on Everest Rd. & Viccy Park. For comparison, here's a pic of those. I wonder now whether the plan was changed & it wasn't started from Temple Rd. I still can't see the sense of starting there & then going up stream; any thoughts on that?

Interesting that the two vent/stench pipes are at Temple road and Everest road though, isn't it?

Both the pipes are fatter than normal and don't have the normal decorative cowling.

Good work dd. The one with the double yellow line on it looks as if it could have a dangling carrot below it !!!

The larger diameter stench pipes are interesting too.

Fascinating, Captain! Particularly the last one of these three covers, as it shows just how old some of this street furniture is. 'W & M SCOTT. TRANMERE' refers to William & Maxwell Scott's Tranmere Foundry, which was close to the old Tranmere Ferry. Maxwell Scott died in September 1874, and the company of W & M Scott went out of business in 1887, when the foundry was sold at auction...

Yes, that is a lot bigger than a standard manhole, being in the middle of traffic lights and a rail beside it makes it awkward to have a look through the holes

I did a bit more delving and spent some time looking for some old plans. Ended up doing a bit better than I'd expected and found a fully coloured set of about twenty linen contract/design drawings from 1934.

I made a few notes on manhole locations, depths, pipe sizes etc which I'll post up in a while.

(Is there any way to post information in a 'table' format, rather than just text?).

Also took a couple of camera-phone shots of parts of the drawings which I'll try to put up.

It very much looks like the head of the overflow sewer is located not at Temple Road, but even further north at the Borough Road / Parkend Road junction.

The reason for this apparent "doubling-back" to Everest Rd along Borough Road would have been to provide relief to the existing Borough Road sewer between Parkend Road and Everest Rd. This existing sewer took many side connections from the west, including Prenton Road West, and the parallel (but deeper) new overflow pipe allowed excess run-off from these catchments to be carried away without overloading the existing Borough Road sewer.

More soon.

Ok, I couldn't find out how to put information in 'table' format within the text of a forum post, so I'll just put it in normally.

The first thing to bear in mind is that the information I'm sharing was taken from design drawings and not necessarily "as constructed" record drawings, so possibly some details may have changed. Indeed, there are handwritten notes on several drawings commenting on specific technical details (size, depth, location, internal manhole configuration etc). Nevertheless, I'm confident what I've copied out is a fairly accurate record, although I've made some comments where I had some doubts.

Having noted that the drawings are from February 1934, are not necessarily "as constructed", and that there are some annotations indicating work-in-progress, there are a couple of other things probably worth mentioning.

The drawings show 25 manholes in total.

Between Manhole (MH) 19 and 18 (Everest Rd - Victoria Park), it would appear that Everest Rd stopped as a dead-end at the location of No.s 55/48, with a 'poultry farm' shown to the east. The road was of course later extended (albeit with a slight kink).

St. Paul's Road - eastern end. There was a new overflow added here in the mid 1990s to take flow down to The Dell and on up to Beaconsfield treatment works. The area around Russell Road / Mersey Road has probably changed significantly as a consequence. That said, the outfall was extended following the construction of the Shell Terminal further to the east of MH1, and is still operational now as far as I know.

Between MH17 and MH16 the construction changed from tunnel (used further west) to open-cut, due to the much-reduced depths involved.

From MH13 down towards the original outfall at MH1, the gradual increase in pipe size was due to intercepted connections from the nearby drainage systems.

So, on to the list. Since I can't work out how to show it as a table and didn't want to attach a file containing the information, it's shown as text. The format is MH reference No. first, starting at Borough Road - Parkend Road (MH25) and working down to the old outfall at St. Paul's Road (MH1). Then follows location information as I've interpreted it from the drawings, followed by manhole depth, pipe gradient, material and size.

I've attached an approximate plot of the line taken through Victoria Park, too.

Here it all is.

---------------------------------------------------


MH 25 Borough Road opposite Parkend Rd. Storm Water Overflow MH. Depth 14.6ft. Head of outfall system. Outgoing pipe concrete 27” diameter.

MH24 Borough Road Southbound opp Parkbridge Rd. Depth 20.7ft. Incoming pipe gradient 1/140. Outgoing pipe concrete 27” diameter

MH23 Borough Rd Southbound approx. 20ft north of Temple Rd. Storm Water Overflow MH. Depth 27.7ft. Incoming pipe gradient 1/140. Outgoing pipe concrete 33” dia.

MH22 Borough Rd Southbound near junction with eastbound lane Prenton Road East. SWO MH. Depth 34.7ft. Incoming pipe gradient 1/160. Outgoing pipe concrete 42” dia.

MH 21 Borough Rd junction Everest Rd. SWO MH. Depth 40.6ft. Incoming grad 1/200. Outgoing pipe concrete 51” dia.

MH 20 Everest Rd outside No. 17. Depth 53.7ft. Incoming grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51” dia.

MH19 Everest Rd outside No. 41 (just east of Ingleborough Rd junction). Depth 69.3ft. Incoming grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51” dia.

MH18 Victoria park adjacent to Church Rd junction with roundabout. Inside park just north of pedestrian access. Depth 70.7ft. Inc. grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51” dia.

MH17 Victoria park – see plan for approx. location. Was adjacent to old tennis courts. Depth 29.3ft. Inc. grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51”dia.

MH16 Victoria park – see plan for approx. location. Just west of path, possibly. Was NW of old fountain, SW of lavatories on old plan. Ramped outlet. Depth 13.8ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51”dia.

MH15 Victoria park – see plan for approx. location. Originally shown in wooded area ENE of fountain location. Ramped outlet. Depth 14.0ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51” dia.

MH14 Victoria park – see plan for approx. location. Approx 120ft east of MH15. Ramped outlet. Depth 14.0ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 51” dia.

MH13 Albany Rd. Opp. No. 27. Ramped outlet. Depth 15.5ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 54” dia.

MH12 Albany Rd. – Well Lane junction (in centre). Depth 14.7ft. Inc grad 1/162. Outgoing pipe conc. 60” dia.

MH11 Well Lane. Originally shown as o/s No.s 34/23. Not sure if constructed?. Depth 14.7ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 60” dia.

MH10 Well Lane between 12/14 on that side. Depth 14.9ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe conc. 60” dia.

MH9 End of St. Paul’s Rd at Well Lane. Stepped outlet. Depth 15’. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe brick 66” dia.

MH8 St. Paul’s Rd opp Alison St (now gone – MH would be sort of o/s No. 15). Stepped outlet. Depth 15ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe brick 66” dia.

MH7 St. Paul’s Rd opp No. 33 / Meadows Lane. May be opposite Alison Avenue now. Stepped outlet. Depth 14ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe brick 66” dia.

MH6 St. Paul’s Rd. Shown opposite 47/49 at junction with Star St. (gone). Probably between No. 39/41 now. Stepped outlet. Depth 13.5ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe brick 72” dia.

MH5 St. Paul’s Rd. Shown opp. Earl St. (gone). Now probably opp. Thorsway. Stepped outlet. Depth 13.73ft. Inc grad 1/220. Outgoing pipe brick 75” dia.

MH4 St. Paul’s Rd – New Chester Road junction (in centre). Stepped outlet. Depth 15ft. Inc grad 1/280. Outgoing pipe brick 81” dia.

MH3 St. Paul’s Rd. opposite Russell Road. Stepped outlet. Depth 14.4ft. Inc grad 1/300. Outgoing pipe brick 81” dia.

MH2 St. Paul’s Rd. opposite Mersey Road. Would now probably be beneath verge adjacent to north-bound by-pass just before roundabout. Depth 15ft. Inc grad 1/300. Outgoing pipe steel 84” dia.

MH1 Approximately 175ft. east of MH2. Old coastline. Made ground above. Now near entrance to Shell terminal. Depth 11ft. Inc grad 1/300. Outgoing pipe steel 84” diameter. Tide-flap fitted.


------------------------------------------------

Next, some rather shaky mobile 'phone shots which nevertheless hopefully give an idea of the drawings.

I hope this is all of some interest.

Can manhole photographers please think twice before running out across the by-pass in search of that elusive "cover shot"?

what more can I say

Well done mate fantastic find!

Great stuff. Finally some definitive info.
And to think this all started with a 2 line reference in the book "Sidelights on Tranmere".

Your excellent work MrG65 has answered a lot of questions and put some hard facts on a lot of theories about the sewer layout. Many thanks again !

Due to the depths involved, I would think a lot it would be driven tunnel as opposed to cut & cover. Driving a heading through sandstone (?) only 51" dia. must have been good for the back !!

Extracts from "Civil Engineer" or similar from time of construction might throw some light on the tunnelling techniques (an unhealthy interest of mine!).

A few folk on here owe you a pint sir !

Can you post the information you have on the Great Culvert please?

From what little I know about this, it could be one of the wonders of Birkenhead, comparable to Hamilton Square even! I would love to see photographs of it if any exist.

I'll put the Great Culvert Report up in a new thread in the near future - bit of typing for me to do.................

I did say I'd put the third and final part of the Report forming the earlier bulk of this thread up, for completeness. I can't seem to post the information in a table format, so it'll have to go up as a clump of text.

Ok, here's the final part of the Report, dealing with a forward programme of Borough-wide improvement works. Probably not as interesting as the first two parts, and posted for completeness.

The first cost given for each item is the total estimated cost; the second is the Corporations estimated approximate liability. It all looks better and much more readable in tables.

--------------------------------------

PROSPECTIVE COMMITMENTS FOR NEXT FIVE YEARS.

With regard to the Corporation’s commitments for schemes of work in hand or in contemplation, I submit herewith a schedule of the works which have been commenced and are being carried out under my supervision, and also of works upon which I have reported (with or without estimates) to the various Committees concerned.

ROAD & IMPROVEMENT COMMITTEE.

FIVE YEARS’ PROGRAMME OF WORKS ON CLASSIFIED ROADS TOWARDS WHICH THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT MAKES GRANTS.

1 Woodchurch Road widening 35,500 15,325
2 Widening Railway Bridge, Woodchurch Rd. 20,000 5,000
3 Old Chester Road widening south of Kings Lane. (Joint Scheme). 10,775 (Corporation’s proportion) 5,510
4 Bebington Road widening 14,700 7,650
5 Chester Street from a point just north of St. Mary’s Gate to the south side of the railway bridge on the easterly side, and on the westerly side from Mason St. and for a short distance into Waterloo Place. 90,000 53,400
(The estimate in connection with item 5 is based on the assumption that the licences of “The Letters” Public House and “The Shakespeare” Hotel can be transferred to other sites, and no amount is included in this estimate for the value of the licences.)
6 Railway Bridge, Chester St. 50,000 12,500
7 Storeton Road. 34,500 21,400
8 Upton – Barnston Road. 31,000 14,200
9 Pensby Road 24,000 13,000
10 Bedford Road 22,000 8,350
11 Hoylake Road 9,000 3,600
12 Boundary Road 25,000 13,250
13 New Chester Road 25,000 10,000
14 Borough Road 6,000 1,500
The estimated total cost of these works is £397,475 of which it is expected £184,685 will be a liability on the Corporation, and it is further anticipated that £20,000 of this expenditure may be incurred in the present financial year, and the remainder spread in equal payments over the succeeding four years.
With the exception of items 1 and 7, none of these works are actually in hand at the present time, but it is expected that a commencement will shortly be made with items 3, 8 and 14.
Total:- 397,475 184,685

FURTHER PROSPECTIVE EXPENDITURE

In addition to the above-mentioned works which the Council have submitted to the Minstry of Transport as their programme for the next five years, the following works are in contemplation without reference to time of completion.

WORKS IN HAND AT PRESENT ON ROADS & TOWARDS THE COST OF WHICH THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT OR UNEMPLOYMENT GRANTS COMMITTEE MAKE CONTRIBUTIONS.

15 Borough Road, Reconstruction of carriageway between Prenton Rd. and the Borough boundary. 8,600 5,375
16 Argyle St. South. Paving of carriageway from Helena St. to Hinderton Rd. 900 450
The first three of the following road improvements were included in the Birkenhead Corporation Bill 1930, and most of them will very shortly be put in hand:-
17 Well Lane Improvement 1,600 1,600
18 New Road from Holborn Hill to Thompson St. 660 660
19 Derby Road Improvement 1,250 1,250
20 Further widening of Derby Rd., over land belonging to Public Assistance Comm. 524 524

FURTHER ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ON ROADS FOR WHICH THE NECESSARY LAND OR PROPERTY INVOLVED HAS HAD OR WILL HAVE TO BE ACQUIRED BY NEGOTIATION.

21 Old Chester Rd. from Queen St. to Bebington Road. 70,000 47,500
22 New roads and sewers in development of Royden Estate 20,000 20,000
23 New road opposite Birkenhead Priory (St. Mary’s Gate). 15,000 15,000
24 Prenton Rd. East. 8,700 8,700
25 Prenton Rd. West 6,500 6,500
26 Balls Road 4,500 4,500
27 Fairclough Lane 300 300
28 Bidston Road 5,500 2,800
29 Claughton Rd. 3,000 3,000
30 Sparks Lane, Thingwall 13,000 13,000
31 Church Road 3,000 1,500
32 Greenway Rd. 10,500 10,500
33 Palm Grove (resurfacing) 4,717 2,700

SEWERING WORKS IN RESPECT OF THE COST OF WHICH ASSISTANCE MAY POSSIBLY BE OBTAINED FROM THE UNEMPLOYMENT GRANTS COMM.

34 New sewer in Park Rd. North & Cavendish St. 17,000 10,625
35 Tollemache Rd. Sewer 10,500 6,563
36 St. Paul’s Rd outfall sewer from river to Albany Rd. 85,000 55,125
37 Extension of sewer from Albany Rd. through Victoria Park to Borough Rd. at Temple Rd. 40,000 25,000
These two latter works are fully described in the first part of the report.
38 Reconstruction of defective sewers in old part of Borough between Argyle St. and Duke St. 100,000 100,000
OTHER SEWERS IN RESPECT OF THE COST OF WHICH IT IS NOT EXPECTED ASSISTANCE CAN BE OBTAINED.

39 New sewer from the Upton – Barnston Rd. valley sewer around Thingwall corner to the summit of Pensby Road 5,500 5,500
40 New sewer, Mill Rd. to Upton – Barnston Rd. 2,600 2,600
41 New sewer in Thingwall from Sparks Lane to Pensby Road. 1,100 1,100
42 New sewer to cottages, Thingwall Common adjoining Sanatorium 1,300 1,300


ESTATES & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

The erection of 182 houses on the Albany Rd. Estate at a cost of £64,174; 20 tenements between Priory St. and Church St. at a cost of about £9,350, are almost completed, and I am not including these amounts in the total figure.

43 The erection of 308 houses on the Dacre Hill Estate by the Works Department, estimated cost, with streets and sewers (Coporation liability £3.15.0 x 40 years x 308) 116,714 46,200
44 A programme which has been outlined by this Committee for the erection of 5,111 new houses during the next five years, together with the cost of clearing the insanitary areas in the town and providing for the housing of dispossessed tenants, is estimated to cost (Corporation liability £3.15.0 x 40 years x 5111) 2,190,000 766,650

SANITARY COMMITTEE

45 Garage and fitting shop 7,500 7,500

TRAMWAYS COMMITTEE

46 Tram and bus garage at New Ferry (U.G.C. Grant applied for but not yet promised)

To purchase the land 18,500


2,100 11,500


2,100
47 Mess Rooms and Cash Office at Woodside Ferry 1,400 1,400
48 Messroom, Laird St. Depot, nearing completion 4,206 4,206

ELECTRICITY COMMITTEE

49 Transformer Stations, during the next five years
To purchase of sites for –do- 10,000
2,000 10,000
2,000

FINANCE COMMITTEE

50 Provision for administrative staffs which cannot be conveniently housed in the Town Hall at the present time. Purchase of sites for –do- 15,000

2,500 15,000

2,500

M. & C.W. COMMITTEE

51 South End Clinic 7,157 7,157

HEALTH COMMITTEE

52 Extensions to I.D. Hospital at present in hand 9,000 9,000
53 New offices for the Medical Officer of Health and other officials engaged on the medical services of the Borough, including site 25,000 25,000

MARKETS & BATHS COMMITTEE

54 South End Baths (U.G.C. grant applied for but not yet promised) 47,500 30,000
55 Weights & Measures Offices at the Rendel St. Entrance to the Tunnel. 3,600 3,600

PARKS & CEMETERY COMMITTEE

56 Layout of Arrowe Park which is being carried out in conjunction with the Parks Superintendent 37,539 37,539
57 Layout and fencing to Cemetery at Landican and erection of Chapel and Registrar’s lodge, including cost of land 46,000 46,000

WATCH COMMITTEE

58 Alterations to Bridewell at Sessions Court 1,560 1,560
59 Extensions to Central Fire Station and the provision of a new Branch Station at the South end of the Borough 23,000 23,000

EDUCATION COMMITTEE

60 A programme of new schools and additions and alterations to existing schools which are in hand at the present time and which it is hoped to complete within three years, comprises 10 new schools and extensions and alterations to six existing schools estimated to cost:- 360,000 180,000
61 Purchase of sites yet to be obtained for above, including Alpha Drive, Bedford Drive, Hemingford St. Brett St. but exclusive of lands now belonging to the Corporation 70,000 35,000

LIBRARIES COMMITTEE

I have not included the cost of the new Central Library towards the cost of which the Corporation should have a sum approaching £60,000, before building actually takes place.

Totals 3,839,002 1,791,730

The above-mentioned items comprise work which I have in hand in varying stages between the preparation of the preliminary designs and the supervision of the construction and completion.
The total cost of the works is about £3,839,002, which, after deducting the grants which may be received from the Minsitry of Transport, the Board of Education, the Unemployment Grants Committee, or other sources, leaves a liability on the Corporation of £1,791,730.
These totals, however, do not include the cost of the following works for which the total capital expenditure cannot at present be conveniently or accurately estimated.

TOWN PLANNING

On Town Planning an expenditure of something between £1,000 and £5,000 per annum will be incurred in connection with works which will arise out of the promotion and carrying out of a Town Planning Scheme, if the scheme be vigorously pursued and brought to fruition. In connection with this expenditure the fact should not, however, be lost sight of that any expenditure on Town Planning at the present time before the development and building up of the undeveloped area is carried out will repay the community very handsomely in the near future.

I have not included expenditure by the Corporation on road-making and other private improvement expenses for which they are liable in front of places of Worship and many other similar items which are generally defrayed out of the annual expenditure on Revenue Account, nor have I included any expenditure which the Corporation may be called upon to bear in conjunction with other authorities for the drainage of the areas tributary to the Birket and Fender Brooks, and for which no definite scheme has yet been submitted, but this is an expenditure which will have to be met in the near future.

I regret that owing to pressure of work in various directions in the Department it has not been possible in the time at my disposal to have plans and sections of certain of the above-mentioned works made, and data obtained, so as to prepare detailed estimates, but probably the estimates are sufficiently close for the Committee’s present purposes.

(SIGNED) R.W. JOHNSTON
Borough Engineer & Surveyor.

----------------------------------

Thanks for all the work you've put in on this. Look forward to learning more about the Great Culvert too.

I'd like to thank you for your work here too. It is quite fascinating. How do you gain access to these documents please?

I am interested in the original sewers mentioned in the town clerk's report. In particular there was a reference to

(f) Outfall No. 6. adjoining Rock Park and draining an area of about 149 acres.

I assume that this would have been interrupted by the subsequent building of the bypass and more recently I imagine it's diverted into the Dell pumping station and thence to the treatment works at Bromborough. I suspect the same thing has happened to the St Paul's road outfall, but I also suspect they they still see occasional use as storm outfall under conditions of heavy rain.

I think part of the original outfall no 6 runs along the foreshore in front of the northern end of Rock park. There is a series of manholes there, and at one point a manhole cover has been replaced with a sheet of steel, which gets thrown off when there is heavy rain - I've seen a river of dilute sewage issuing from it once or twice. The incoming tide floods the tunnel which is several feet in diameter and runs parallel to the shore, then, but Ive no idea where the end of the outfall is. I guess it must be well below low water and probably has a flap valve which allows water to leave it but prevents the tide filling it. Any information on this would be gratefully received.

The St Paul's road outfall can be seen from a small boat - or the ferry when it passes that way - at low tide. It runs below the road leading to the oil terminal and seems to be a pretty large tunnel maybe six feet in diameter.

I look forward to the great culvert report too. Just a thought, by the way, would it be easier to scan the document(s), thereby saving yourself a shedload of typing?

If you want it in typed form, then perhaps interested people here would be prepared to help converting the scanned images? I would certainly happily volunteer to do this if it helps.

Hello Excoriator

It's strange, but the documents were amongst a pile of papers to be thrown out a number of years ago; I just thought they were interesting and rescued them. They've languished in a drawer in my desk for a while until the Tranmere Overflow Sewer issue made me revisit them.

I only have a couple left; the majority, including a letter with a genuine Laird (can't remember which one) signature I sent off to be archived.

The Rock Park outfall was picked up and taken back in the new (mid 1990s) Beaconsfield North Interceptor Sewer (beneath the by-pass) to the Dell and then pumped to treatment. You're right that the St. Paul's outfall is still there. I remember being given access along the Tranmere Oil Terminal jetty to have a look (had to surrender my cigarette lighter for some reason.......... ). I believe it acts as a relief overflow, as does the one at The Dell, where there is a pumping station to take foul flows to treatment.

I suspect that any seawater entering the system on the foreshore at Rock Park is "doing the rounds" and ending up at The Dell, either to be pumped for treatment or discharged back to the river. Either way, a bit of a waste.

As for the Reports and typing them up, I've tried Optical Character Recognition software and the result looked like something from the back side of the Rosetta Stone. Scanning and posting will work of course, but I don't think it's as nice as reading a post directly in a forum. I appreciate the offer for help, but I've already started, and as I touch-type anyway, it's not really so bad.......... bit of music on, pdf on one side of the screen, Word document on the right. I'll get there in a while.

Regards

Mr G65.

I think the remaining part of the Rock Park outfall still operates as an overflow, as I say I've seen a veritable river emerging from a coverless manhole on the beach during heavy rain. I assume it is simultaneously pouring from the exit which is probably below water. I can see no sign of it however.

In better weather it fills with a dramatic whirlpool on the incoming tide (this takes perhaps 20 minutes to complete, through a 2 foot square manhole, so there is a fair volume to be filled) As the tide goes out it empties and the cycle repeats. One can look down into the tunnel when the tide is out which is brick lined I think and it runs parallel to the river wall. One can trace its route along as there are leaks (and i think partial collapses) from which air is expelled as it fills with water. But the trail ends about halfway along the Rock Ferry Esplanade. I don't think there is a connection from this to the Dell pumping station.

Currently the hole is covered with a steel plate - somebody has decided it is potentially dangerous which it cetainly would be if you fell in - but it will be thrown off again next time there is very heavy rain no doubt.

Also about halfway along the Rock Ferry Esplanade is sort of stone 'box' projecting from the wall. This too was covered with a steel plate which has corroded through. there seems to be surface water running through the bottom of this. During rain, one can hear water running through it. This too might be a storm outfall, for again in heavy rain I've seen sewage emerging from it in large quantities. Whether it ends up in the same tunnel I have no idea. I have picked this up thanks to dog-walking, not dedicated examination or research by the way. Twice a day I walk along with dog, rain or shine, and have simply noticed whirlpools and bubbles. Incidentally, the trail of bubbles does a sharp left at the pier end and goes under the wall inland. I suspect it may have originally come from Rock lane or Bedford Road. Rock Lane (East and West) has a characteristic trail of ventilated manholes in the middle of the road. I can't recall if Bedford Road has them for sure, but I think I've seen them there too.

I remember the dell pumping station being built, and apart from its own outfall which involved partly tunnelling and partly cut and cover of three foot diameter concrete pipe down to a portal at low water there was no other interception work done on the beach.

I look forward to reading the stuff on the great culvert in due course though. That must have been quite a project to build!

Regards

Great read guys thanks for Info....

This is drifting away from the original "Birkenhead Sewerage" topic I think, towards your Rock Ferry foreshore posts , but just to respond.

I've mentioned the Beaconsfied North Interceptor Sewer in another thread, Interceptor link which picks up ALL outfalls from St. Paul's Road south up to and including the old Dell outfall. The majority of the outfalls were retained as emergency overflows.

Two old combined sewers come out at Rock Park, under the foreshore for a short distance, then turn at right angles north and south to meet at a point from where the old outfall took flow out into the River. The design to deal with these involved a tunnelled connection back to the main interceptor sewer under the A41.


The Dell outfall acts as an emergency storm overflow, and legislation at the time meant it had to be extended to Mean Low Water Spring Tides.

MrG65

Sorry if I'm diverting your sewerage. I'll happily start a new thread on the Rock Park Sewerage system. Let me know if you would like me to do this.

Are you saying that the tunnel under the foreshore I have seen evidence for has been intercepted and now flows back into the Dell Pumping Station via the A41? I agree that the original sewers were probably intercepted but this is somewhat different. It is the storm overflows I am interested in. Where is this outfall? It seems unlikely from what I know to lead back into the Dell sump.

It is generally possible to see where (relatively) freshwater outfalls are even at high tide. The sewage makes its way to the surface and can be seen at - say - the Dell and Beaconsfield outfalls. Additional evidence is that they often attract the attention of hungry gulls.

The Dell pumping station is supposed to be unmanned. However, it often has a clutch of United Utility vans parked near it, and seems to require considerable attention. I will call in and ask the people there what the connection is. It may well be that you are right and that they are unaware of where the thousands of gallons of seawater they are processing daily is coming from.