HUTT BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 730, 1 February 1910, Page 3

HUTT BOROUGH COUNCIL.

EVEREST CREEK DIVERSION, A special meeting of the Lower Eutt Borough Council was held last evening, there, being present: The, Mayor' (Mr. li. P. : Bunny), Councillors Baldwin, Macaskill, Barlow, Hayes; Kemptliorne, X'eaico, Moivbray, Anson, 'and Clere. Four. tenders wero received for / the work of laying drains ' over, the first section' of the eastern drainage system, about 200 chains, from the soptic tank to Feisfs corner. The council accepted the lowest tender—for. an amount' not far removed from' the estimated. cost. ' ■ •

, Councillor, Baldwin moved, in accordance with notice, given, the following motion in. regard to the: Everest Creek diversion:—"That the ■ drain be constructed in accordance with the plan prepared by the borough engineer' - subject. to, the Jleight of the side walls being reduced by 9*inches, and to a circular arched top being sprung from the top to the reduced side Avails and carried up to,, the* same .height as shown in the engineer's plan."Councillor Anson seconded the : Councilor Baldwin; explained that there had been a considerable difference in the estimates of the . two 'Mr. Laing-Meason's .proposed work was ' more expensive, the culverts being wholly ferro-concrete. The borough engineer; Mr. Eix-Trott, had provided for partial ferro-concrete,, and his was: the lower.estimate..' The drain was 60'or.>80 chains'long;.and it crossed: three roads. It was Councillor Baldwin's opinion that wholly .ferro-concrete pipes were, not ■ required in. a drain'that was laid under footpaths : and i through paddocks.■■' Most of tiie drains in the city.were of ordinary concrete. He urged', that the .borough: engineer should be .instructed to proceed with the work without delay, if the weather permitted; : The, amendment as to the^.-.measurement of tho drain ; referred to in .the.motion had been agreed to. by the engineer. \ ..', . . .'• The:ilayor said, that he-would .oppose the motion.. The work was'to be paid for out of loan moneys which had been voted by the ratepayers. The' proposal was for a. drain constructed byllr. LaJng-Measori, the consulting engineer, and. the' council had no further authority from the ratepayers.' ]?or■:• that .reason, he considered ;hnt Mr; liaing-Meason .should , construct the drain. The council had unauimousjy passed a resolution' that . Mr. LaingAfeason should be asked -to report ■■■ on a' scheme.for the .constructac-h .'of the drain. Tho borough engineer,'was also, asked - to report, and the two engineers met, ' with>ut; satisfactory results; - He . opposed Councillor Baldwin's;proposal,, because it. was 'not intended to call'for tenders.' The consulting engineer; held -that reinforced concrete should be used,-. , and, .moreover, he said that Mr. Rix-Trolt's estimate was' far too/low."; . In ,the';ehd, Mr. Laing.Meason. said., r the. work would.' be found to cost, a-great deal. more. If the motion ■were, carried,, and it turned out ..that -Mr. Laing-Meason was" correct, the council would havo'ito raise,a/considerable sum for £ho; purpose of completing the work. The two. engineers differed to the extent of: about. ,£IOOO, and : he.. would not take the /responsibility'of: carrying out the :work as was proposed 'by : the motion; .The council,-ho considered, should either' accept 'Mr.., Laiag-Meason's; report on the work, ,or .obtain;, a.' further'- 'report from, "an engineer, or, to'-'avoid that,, expense call for. : tendera for the two. sohemee, thereby, getting an estimate; of ,whnt the work would • be, likely :to cost. Mr. Bix-Trotfa estimate was. iE2600, -but. Mr.. Laing-Meason. considered that the borough engineer "had considerably/ under-estimated, and 'that .his'. figures , , should 'be,; 'not .C 2600, but; iC4235.' Mr.'Laing-Meason's own'estimate for the work, as he believed it should' ba done; - was < r £lOlG less' than this—S3lß9. In Mr. ■■ Bunny's .opinion, tho .'council ought .pot to ignore the report-of the, consulting engineer. ■' ■'. . '.-,'■. ' '' i' '• .-Y.- ,: Sfacaskill.contended,that no. iuore ; money should be "wasted" on: consulting, engineers. ' It was time,': he thought, 'that : the council put more confidence in its own engineer, instead*, ofexploding all his ideas, and -under-esti-mating all he did. / • ~, , ;-„ ' ■•■■:■ .Councillor Kempthorne,, an amendment, which .was hot seconded, that 'consideration, of thework should :be. postponed'for r nine months,: ■'!■■ >'.- .'" : : - : '-. After: further discussion,, the Mayor moved an' amendment that tenders- be called for', the, alternative :scliqmes. This was lost by ■ six .votes' to -four,;' Councillor' Baldwin's' motion being.'carried..: 'Councillor Baldwin .then, moved, and Councillor Hayes seconded, that the '. any gineor' be .instructed 'to; commence the work as soon as possible./ . ';, ■It was. proposed by Councillor Mowbray, and , seconded by Councillor Pearce, that ..tenders \ should be called, for .the 'work. The amendment was defeated, the. voting being' as before, and Councillpr' Baldwin's second motion was carried. ■■;