THE DRAINAGE SCHEME.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLIII, Issue XLIII, 4 February 1909, Page 2

THE DRAINAGE SCHEME.

JIB MESTAYER'S VISIT TO NELSON. CONFERENCE WITH THE CITY • COUNCIL.. The City Council, sitting as a Drainago Committee, met Mr B. L. Mestayer, designer- of the city drainage scheme, at the Council Chamber last evcDing. There were present: The Mayor (Mr J. Piper), Crs. Turner, Field, Pettit, Bieley, Neale, McConchie, Hampson, and Grace. Replying to questions by Cr. Grace, Mr Mestayer said tfoat provision had been made for the drainage of Miltoa Grove. He thought the steps taken bo seal the eirack in the septic tank were amply sufficient to make the tank far stronger than it had been origin--ally; and he did not anticipate tho slightest trouble from tbia source. In answer to Cr. Neale, Mr Mestayer said that he had inspected the Wood area. His opinion was that there were some leaks, which the City Engineer informed him he had reported to the Council. He would certainly advise the checking of the quantity of sewage (as suggested by Cr. Neale) to enable an examination to be made; but be would first repair the leaks they knew of. To Cr. Pettit Mr Mestayer replied that ho did not anticipate trouble from brackish water getting into the septic tank. In answer to Cr. Hampson, Mr Mestayer said that there need be no fear regarding tbe emergency outlets whiicii were provided in view of posDlble accidents, and might never bo used. Eoplying to Cr. McConcbie, Mr Mestayer said that he would not feel justified in laying specially deep sowers for the benefit of one or two • r even twen-ty houses. The Corporation would find it cheaper to alter the position of the conveniences so feliat they could be connected. In reply to Cr. Field, Mr Me«tayer said that he had found defects in exeoss of what should be expected in woll-laid sewers. Pipes may have been broken accidentally or through carelessness when filling in the trenches by allowing heavy stones to fall . on them. This, was the experience everywhere in drain-laying. In answer ito Ct. Turner, Mr Mestayer said that cement laid in water .•ould set provided the water was stiW. It was, however, much more difficult to lay pipes satisfactorily in such circumstances. Ci. Neale said that Mr Mestayer had met the sub-committep of tho Council in a very gentlemanly and liberal way, and had agreed to all the Committee asked. The Sub-Committee presented the following report: (1) Mr Mestayer is wiilling to accept a present payment of the balance of the total commission of three per cent, on £55,000 in full, of all claims under his agreement, excopt for visits to Nelson in respect of all or any of the works included on .the plans already furnished, and to furnish any advice in connection with srnch plans without further fee, unless involving a visit or visits to Nelson, in which case ordinary fees to-be charged for such visit or vists. (3.) Tho committee recommend that thisoffer be accepted. (3.) Mr Meatayer informs the committee that he- ias been afforded every facility for injspecting the works already carried, nut. Cr. Turner did not think Mr Mestayer should receive commission on. more than £49,000. Cr. Hampson moved the adoption of the report, and congratulated the subcommittee on the successful termination arrived at. Mr Mestayer should have commission on the actual cost of tho -n-'orlc done. Cr. P-efcti't ■seconded, remarking that Mr Mestayer had -been very fair .and reasonable. The result of Mr Mes-.. iayer's visit was eatifactory to the Council 'and. the city. Mr Mestayer was entitled to a commission on, £55,000. Cr. Grace thought the Council was making a good bargain. Mr Mestayer was foregoing the commission on tho difference between £55,000 and £58,000 or more. Mtf Mestayer Sad met the Council very reasonably . The Mayor gave fchs> sub-committee 'Credit for the ■settlement arrived at. .Cr. Hampson 's motion was put and carried, Cr. Turner voting-against it. ; The Committee then adjourned. -