Mr. Tawney. You also agree with the consulting engineer of the commission with respect to the Detroit metropolitan drainage district; that is, taking in the suburban villages around here, as I understand it?
Mr. Hubbell. I think that such a plan, if it could be consummated, would be desirable.
Mr. Tawney. Two main reasons that are given for the consolidation of this area into one drainage district are, first, preventing disputes between the various communities, and, second, effecting economies and producing more satisfactory conditions generally by means of comprehensive planning. Your studies were made along the line of a metropolitan district such as is described here in this report?
Mr. Hubbell. They do not depend on that entirely for their carrying out. The success of the scheme for purifying or treating the sewage should not depend solely upon the establishment of a metropolitan district.
Mr. Powell. It could be worked out as an independent system?
Mr. Hubbell. It could be done so, although it would be an advantage to have it worked out as a metropolitan district. I might say, in connection with that, probably an easier and more feasible way of working that out would be by annexation by Detroit of territory that immediately needs development, and that would not require the machinery or legislation that the other scheme would.
Mr. Mignault. Are there many outlying districts which would have to be annexed to the city of Detroit?
Mr. Hubbell. No; there are not many; if a working basis could be arranged between the existing municipalities as has already been done through the courts in the case of Highland Park.
Mr. Tawney. In your report to the city council, Mr. Hubbell, do you recommend the same standards of purification recommended by the consulting engineers of the commission, both as to sewage and water, or do you treat the standards at all?
Mr. Hubbell. I have gone into some detail in regard to the 500 B. coli standard, and I believe it to be conservative and reasonable as borne out by data and facts.