On 14 July 1926 the Lord Provost officially opened the western extension of the Promenade and the diversion of the Pipe Street outfall sewer.
As he pointed out in his speech, the amenity of the foreshore would be greatly enhanced by the diversion of the Pipe Street outfall sewer and the western extension of Portobello Promenade would link up the seashore walk from Leith docks with the old Promenade, giving a continuous walk along the sea front of three and three quarter miles.
The Councillors who were present during the proceedings received unmistakable proof of the popularity of the beach: Great crowds of visitors lay about on the shore in the brilliant sunshine enjoying the cooling breeze which came on from the sea, and there were hundreds of bathers and paddlers in the water.
In the past the Pipe Street sewer had poured forth volumes of foul matter on to the beach. The scheme to improve the drainage had been before the Town Council since the year 1905 and powers were obtained from Parliament in 1906 to construct a new sewer, but lay dormant until 1924, when the matter was taken up seriously by the Streets and Buildings Committee and a Government grant was obtained which allowed the work to proceed.
The original sewer was constructed in 1859 and was 20 inches in diameter and 250 yards long. The total length of the new sewer, was 2062 yards. Of this 369 yards at the Seafield end were of iron, 30 inches in diameter. 1360 yards was 6ft by 4ft wide egg shaped concrete and 333 yards of three feet diameter concrete tubes. The large 6 ft by 4 ft portion was to act as a tank in which the sewage would be held in suspension when the tide was in and would automatically empty as the tide receded into the deep waters of the Forth. The gradient of the new sewer was 1 in 600.
The work had been of a very difficult and trying nature, owing to the tidal waters and had been carried out by the firm of Messrs Bain and Brown, at a cost of between £50,000 and £60,000.
The surface, which was initially only of ashes for the moment, would, after consolidation, be laid with something of a permanent nature. There was now a continuous walk along the sea front from Leith docks to Magdalene Bridge, a distance of three and three quarter miles. It was a great asset to the city.
- Board index
- Register
- Forum
- Information
- FAQ
- The team
- Who is online
- Tools
- Delete all board cookies
- Search
- Quick Search
- View unanswered posts
- View active topics
- Find More
- Advanced Search
- Links
- Login
On The Beach
by rathbone » 30 Oct 2006, 10:36
1927 saw another attempt to rebuild the pier.
This time it was a project in conjunction with the Portobello Electricity Generating station.
The Power Station required a series of pipes to be laid out into the sea at a point about 500 yards north eastwards from the retaining wall of the Promenade opposite the east side of Rosebank Lane. The idea was to contain these within the structure of the new pier, to be constructed out of ferro-concrete.
It was proposed that the pier gangway should be 1500 feet long and 25 feet wide and that the pier head should be 120 feet long by 75 feet wide. The pier head would be large enough to take steamers of the ordinary passenger type. There would be room on the pier head for a hall or other offices should these be required. On the pier itself it was intended to construct and maintain pavilions, saloons, concert rooms, shops, kiosks, shelters and swimming baths.
The cost was estimated at £50,000. 75 % of that would be borne by the Electricity Company and the remainder (about £20,000) by the rates.
However, by January 1928 the estimate had risen to £90,000 and the scheme was scrapped.
This time it was a project in conjunction with the Portobello Electricity Generating station.
The Power Station required a series of pipes to be laid out into the sea at a point about 500 yards north eastwards from the retaining wall of the Promenade opposite the east side of Rosebank Lane. The idea was to contain these within the structure of the new pier, to be constructed out of ferro-concrete.
It was proposed that the pier gangway should be 1500 feet long and 25 feet wide and that the pier head should be 120 feet long by 75 feet wide. The pier head would be large enough to take steamers of the ordinary passenger type. There would be room on the pier head for a hall or other offices should these be required. On the pier itself it was intended to construct and maintain pavilions, saloons, concert rooms, shops, kiosks, shelters and swimming baths.
The cost was estimated at £50,000. 75 % of that would be borne by the Electricity Company and the remainder (about £20,000) by the rates.
However, by January 1928 the estimate had risen to £90,000 and the scheme was scrapped.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 03 Nov 2006, 13:09
The work on the Promenade also re-opened the debate about removing the boulders from Seafield.
Professor Jehu from University of Edinburgh, said it was quite impossile to foretell what would happen if the boulders were removed to any large extent. From the point of view of the amenities, there would be a great improvement in the foreshore provided the boulders were replaced by an accumulation of sand brought in from below low water mark and not from the adjoining portions of the beach.
He suggested that as an experiment the removal of the boulders should be carried out on the portion of the foreshore between the slipway at Kings Road and the slipway west of the Marine Gardens dance hall. If this were done it should be carried out under the careful supervision of the burgh engineer, who could put a stop to the work if there were any signs of impoverishment of the beach at that place or anywhere else within the area. After such removal the work should be stopped for a considerable time so that observations could be made as to whether or not an adequate supply of sand was being brought in from below low water mark to promote a healthy condition of the beach.
It was recommended that a wall of boulders should be formed from the promenade to low water mark in the form of a groin, to gather the travelling sand and retain it. This should also be useful as a slipway for bathing, boating etc.
On 5 July The Lord Provost’s Committee recommended that as an experiment an arrangement should be made for the removal by unemployed men of the boulders from the portion of the foreshore extending from Kings Road slipway at Portobello beach to the slipway west of the ballroom and the construction by those men of a groyne from the promenade to low water mark.
The Distress Committee intimated that they would be prepared, in the first instance, to make good any deficit on the work up to the figure of, say, £1000 and it was understood that the Parish Council would pay a sum equal to the relief that would have paid to the men engaged on the work.
By August, the work was well underway and Archibald Campbell, the clerk to the Distress Committee was advertising excellent quality road bottoming for sale.
Professor Jehu from University of Edinburgh, said it was quite impossile to foretell what would happen if the boulders were removed to any large extent. From the point of view of the amenities, there would be a great improvement in the foreshore provided the boulders were replaced by an accumulation of sand brought in from below low water mark and not from the adjoining portions of the beach.
He suggested that as an experiment the removal of the boulders should be carried out on the portion of the foreshore between the slipway at Kings Road and the slipway west of the Marine Gardens dance hall. If this were done it should be carried out under the careful supervision of the burgh engineer, who could put a stop to the work if there were any signs of impoverishment of the beach at that place or anywhere else within the area. After such removal the work should be stopped for a considerable time so that observations could be made as to whether or not an adequate supply of sand was being brought in from below low water mark to promote a healthy condition of the beach.
It was recommended that a wall of boulders should be formed from the promenade to low water mark in the form of a groin, to gather the travelling sand and retain it. This should also be useful as a slipway for bathing, boating etc.
On 5 July The Lord Provost’s Committee recommended that as an experiment an arrangement should be made for the removal by unemployed men of the boulders from the portion of the foreshore extending from Kings Road slipway at Portobello beach to the slipway west of the ballroom and the construction by those men of a groyne from the promenade to low water mark.
The Distress Committee intimated that they would be prepared, in the first instance, to make good any deficit on the work up to the figure of, say, £1000 and it was understood that the Parish Council would pay a sum equal to the relief that would have paid to the men engaged on the work.
By August, the work was well underway and Archibald Campbell, the clerk to the Distress Committee was advertising excellent quality road bottoming for sale.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 08 Nov 2006, 10:10
Perhaps also in response to the numbers turning up each summer at Portobello beach, the Coty Architect, E.J. Macrae ARIBA designed a number of bathing coaches for use on the beach.
The Corporation went out to tender for the coaches in December 1929, and on 21 January 1930 decided that 15 of the coaches should be located at the west end of the beach, near Kings Road.
The old horse bathing coaches had been withdrawn from Portobello sands so as to discourage bathing in the open sea due to the problem with effluent. That problem had not gone away. Especially along the Joppa shore, the water was frequently heavily polluted. It was estimated that the outlet pipe at Seafield needed to be extended at least a further mile out from the shore to avoid the currents which carried the sewage back on to the beach.
The same Committee considered the construction of a bathing pool at Joppa, at a cost of £50,000. Because of the effluent problem, it was decided that the Joppa pool is to be constructed above high water mark and the sea water pumped in by very costly means and filtered.
The Corporation went out to tender for the coaches in December 1929, and on 21 January 1930 decided that 15 of the coaches should be located at the west end of the beach, near Kings Road.
The old horse bathing coaches had been withdrawn from Portobello sands so as to discourage bathing in the open sea due to the problem with effluent. That problem had not gone away. Especially along the Joppa shore, the water was frequently heavily polluted. It was estimated that the outlet pipe at Seafield needed to be extended at least a further mile out from the shore to avoid the currents which carried the sewage back on to the beach.
The same Committee considered the construction of a bathing pool at Joppa, at a cost of £50,000. Because of the effluent problem, it was decided that the Joppa pool is to be constructed above high water mark and the sea water pumped in by very costly means and filtered.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 10 Nov 2006, 10:56
16 July 1931 saw overcrowding on the beach taken to the extreme.
The good weather had drawn great numbers to the beach, but the tide was abnormally high and at its height a large part of the beach was inaccesible, some of it only habitable by a single row of people who, in the most literal sense, defied the approaching waves with their backs to the wall.
From the foot of Bath Street eastward for a quarter of a mile or so the crowd on the beach crammed into a strip from about six feet to fifteen feet wide, depending on the distance from the retaining wall to the water and the outer ones had their toes in the Firth of Forth.
Contented mothers, who had paid for the hire of deck chairs sat in those chairs gazing calm eyed at the water lapping round their shoes and knitted while their offspring got cheerfully wet.
A disabled man, who had spent some time in arranging a model fort in the sand by way of earning a few coppers, stood anxiously beside the retaining wall watching the waves washing further and further up the seaward border of his fort, threatening its destruction and he looked relieved when, after one wave had very nearly carried away the entire barracks and some of the attendant soldiery, succeeding waves gradually fell back.
Motor boats and rowing boats were popular but donkey rides were out of the question owing to the fact that there was no room anywhere for a donkey to find standing room not to mention room to trot about. Theonkeys and ponies were therefore tethered in odd corners of Portobello away from the promenade and enjoyed a holiday, like everyone else.
The good weather had drawn great numbers to the beach, but the tide was abnormally high and at its height a large part of the beach was inaccesible, some of it only habitable by a single row of people who, in the most literal sense, defied the approaching waves with their backs to the wall.
From the foot of Bath Street eastward for a quarter of a mile or so the crowd on the beach crammed into a strip from about six feet to fifteen feet wide, depending on the distance from the retaining wall to the water and the outer ones had their toes in the Firth of Forth.
Contented mothers, who had paid for the hire of deck chairs sat in those chairs gazing calm eyed at the water lapping round their shoes and knitted while their offspring got cheerfully wet.
A disabled man, who had spent some time in arranging a model fort in the sand by way of earning a few coppers, stood anxiously beside the retaining wall watching the waves washing further and further up the seaward border of his fort, threatening its destruction and he looked relieved when, after one wave had very nearly carried away the entire barracks and some of the attendant soldiery, succeeding waves gradually fell back.
Motor boats and rowing boats were popular but donkey rides were out of the question owing to the fact that there was no room anywhere for a donkey to find standing room not to mention room to trot about. Theonkeys and ponies were therefore tethered in odd corners of Portobello away from the promenade and enjoyed a holiday, like everyone else.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 24 Dec 2006, 13:34
The City Engineer reported that on January 30 1937, a portion of the foundation of the Portobello Promenade west of Melville Street was undermined by heavy seas which caused the wall to subside for a distance of approximately 60 yards.
A portion had been protected with steel sheet piling and the remainder with bags.
The cost of the repair would be £450.
With regard to the improvement of the beach the first groyne seemed to be working very efficiently . The second groyne was two thirds completed and it was proposed that a further sum of £750 should be set aside for a third groyne. The work could be started before the summer season commenced.
A portion had been protected with steel sheet piling and the remainder with bags.
The cost of the repair would be £450.
With regard to the improvement of the beach the first groyne seemed to be working very efficiently . The second groyne was two thirds completed and it was proposed that a further sum of £750 should be set aside for a third groyne. The work could be started before the summer season commenced.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests
•