WATER SUPPLY IN RICCARTON

Press, Volume LXXX, Issue 24369, 22 September 1944, Page 3

WATER SUPPLY IN RICCARTON

Rejection of City’s Proposal

“ EXTRA COST OF £lO9l A YEAR ” :

■Acceptance of the Christchurch- City Council’s conditions for the' interconnexion of, the city and Riccarton high-pressure'water supplies would result in a deficiency in the borough water works account of ■ about £ 1091 annually, said the Mayor of Riccarton (Mr H. S S. Kyle) in replying ;to statements by the. Mayor of, Christchurch (Mr E. H. Andrews) and the chairman of the water supply and works committee of the City Council (Cr. W. P. Glue). Mr Kyle said that by clause, 13 of the proposed agreement the City Council required an annual rental of £IOO for the use of its reservoir, but by clause 3, which requires the Riccarton pumps to operate during peak hours, the advantages of having a reservoir of large capacity were Riccarton, he said, was already electrically equipped to increase its normal water pressure from 301b to a fire-fighting pressure of 1501b.

The estimated revenue from water charges when the new fire main was installed was £477 a year, said Mr Kyle. The estimated expenditure under the 301b pressure system was £475 a year made up as follows: electricity for pumping with tower system and pumps not operating during electricity peak. £75; maintenance, £200; depreciation, £2OO.

The estimated expenditure under the 901b pressure scheme was £1568, made up of: electricity for pumping based on 901b pressure (still assuming pump not operating during electricity peak), £225; annual reservoir rental under City Council agreement, £100; maintenance, £250; depreciation, £225; extra cost for electric power to borough ratepayers under terms of City Council agreement when pumps cannot be stopped during electricity peak hours (based on 80 k.w.), £768, “Viewed from Metropolitan Aspect” Mr Kyle said that by loan poll the ratepayers authorised the borough council to spend £11,500 on the extension of its high-pressure mains and the provision of extra pumping equipment to provide water for fire fighting. Subsequently application was recejved from the State Housing Department for the extension of the borough mains westward into the Waimairi County to supply a further 467 houses. “The borough council at this stage realised that it was establishing the nucleus of a system of water Works west of the city which, if viewed from the metropolitan aspect, would determine in the future whether the City Council supply could 1 be extended into that large residential area or whether in place of this a series of detached water systems, each with its elevated tower, would be the result," said Mr Kyle.

The borough accordingly approached the City Council requesting the use of. its reservoir but stipulating that it did not require a water supply and that it would keep the capacity of its pumping equipment in advance of its domestic draw and deliver to the city reservoir more water each 24 hours than it drew from it.

Clauses Regarded as Harsb “The borough council expected an agreement having clauses preventing Riccarton from abusing the privilege of connecting to the City Council mains and probably a clause requesting the council to make good any deficiency every 24 hours, b,Ut it regarded as harsh the clauses as received," said Mr Kyle. "The borough council viewed the City Council reservoir and mains as a unit having the storage and transmission capacity to provide water throughout a metropolitan area without pumping during the electricity peak. The borough council can only ascertain its facts by inquiring, which it did with a ‘good neighbour’ policy, but it now appears from.the agreement and statement in The Press’- that the City Council’s reservoir or its mains is incapable of giving Riccarton the advantages that the present water- tower gives and is capable of 'giving for the next few years. . “When the domestic draw makes it necessary for the council to consider the erection of a further water tower, it can again allow the City Council, to submit proposals for connexion to the City Council reservoir and thus probably save the cost of an additional tower. Provided that the City Council is at that time more metropolitanminded than it is to-day it may-sub-mit terms which impose less financial hardship on the borough council. Meanwhile the borough council will proceed with the City Council standard construction, sealing the main at the proposed junction point and thus leaving the way open to the City Council to adopt a ‘good neighbour’ policy in the future which might reflect beneficially to it in the event of the later creation of a metropolitan area.”