UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE

Timaru Herald, Volume XC, Issue 13297, 28 May 1907, Page 6

UNDERGROUND DRAINAGE

PRELIMINARY TENDERS. The Mayor on opening the Borough Council meeting last night, stated that the Council in Committee had authorised Mr Marchant to purchase one smoke-testing apparatus for the drainage works, at a cost not exceeding £2O. If a second was required, one might be got from the North Island, second-hand, or borrowed. The committee recommended the Council to order tenders to be invited by the Bth July, for the supply of pipes and other requisites for the drainage works; also, to approve of the engineer's specifications and advertise for tenders in the four centres and Timaru: The committee also agreed to recommend that the first work to be done should be the northern septic tank and outfall into the sea, and that the first drain to be undertaken should be the main drain from Whales creek to the septic tank. Mr Marchant would then have time to get a survev made for a larger section of the work. The Council would also be recommended to call for tenders for the supply j of 55C0 casks of EJaight-Bevan's cement, to be deHvered in 50 cask lots. The committee had perused a draft agreement with Mr Marchant, prepared by the solicitors, and recommended its adoption. At a later stage resolutions were passed adopting the above recommendations. Mr Marchant waited on the Council to ask that the agreement be altered by adding the word "engineering" in the clause referring to the survey to be made by him. and this was agreed to by resolution. Councillor Leathwick asked Mr Marchant whether be knew what sort of pipes had broken up at Palmerston North, and he replied that he did not; but they were very large pipes—lß inch—and they were not defended, as they should have been, by concrete. The Town Clerk pointed out that the Ccuncil had appointed Messrs Meason an.. Merchant engineers to carry out the work, whereas the agreement mentioned Mr Marchant only.—The original resolution wu--therefore "altered bv unanimous motion. THE ENGINEER'S AGREEMENT. An agreement prepared by the solicitor? between the Council and Mr Marchant as engineer for the drainage scheme was re.v* and adopted. It stipulates that Mr Mar chant shall provide all plans and specifications required, and furnish to contractorssuch copies of them as may be required. He is to assist the Council to obtain tenders and enter into contracts, and to superintend the execution of contracts, by mean of such periodical inspections as are bsw! and necessary; to report progress to the Council at least once a month. For these services the Council are io pay 4 per cent, on the cost of execution of all such worksexecuted under bis direction and superinN tendency. The estimated cost of the scfrm. proposed by the engineer is £40.0C0 or lesfor the main works onhr, and no percentage on any excess of £40,000 for main works will" be paid, but the same rate o percentage will be paid to the engineer on all house connections on streets or private propertv laid by the authority of th* Council under his direction and supervi sion. If the engineer cannot continue hi: duties for four weeks, he is- to appoint- rcompetent substitute. The Council wn pay for the services of all clerks of workfor the proper oversight of the works, ant provide all labour required for explorattov of existing works, and pay for all materia > required for laving out the works, and al< printing of specifications ttc.: but the en gmeer is to pay his assistant or assistant.* for taking levels and making surveys. Tlu Council i* not to employ any person aClerk of Works whom the engineer may consider incompetent, or of whose conduct in that capacity he may on good ground, dKipprove. , , Th- agreement was signed and seale-. for the Council and the engineers. WHAT ARE "CONNECTIONS"? Councillor Hawkey raised the questioi whether the "connection" for which thowner is to be allowed £lO i.taunted from the street boundary or thmain sewer. Many ratepayers-, he said. I-ad voted for the loan under the impression that the Council would lay the pipe j to th.- street boundary, and the £lO wr to be allowed for a connection with tha' branch. The question had been asked m public meetings, bv Messrs Tubb. Scott and Bradley, and th~y were told the? £1 : ".as to be spent on private property. AV. Lite old councillors who had Iven ass» i i;ited with the working out of the srlf-m .Councillors Sealey, Rothwell, Parks, Hi-n pud himself) were of that opinion, and h-. 1 d W<l Tinny ratepayers that that was the anungemeiit, and to test the feeling of th| Council he wotild move that that be

the arrangement. He must do this, to keep faith with the ratepayers to whom he had given that information. Councillor Hawkey moved, and Councillor Sealey seconded* a motion to the effect that up to £lO ha given for the cost of each connection from the street boundary. The Mayor said he was very much surprised at the last meeting of the Council when that idea was mentioned. He was certain that- he had never answered any question in such a way as to give anyone that idea, in fact the question had never been asked, and he defied anyone to find in any of the reports of meetings, anything that would support Councillor Hawkey's assertions. The quest-ion 'from the fence or from the sewer?" had.never been raised. On the other hand he knew thatmany people were surprised that some councillors had supposed the " connection " would be only from the fence; and one man, a plumber, told him that he heard it distinctly stated at the Theatre that it would be from the sewer. Some people had asked him whether they were to repay the £lO, and others whether they were to get it at all (after what councillors had bien saying) but not one had said they expected filOf to make the connection from the fence. He had not misled anyone, and could not have done so even to save the scheme.

Tlw Mayor then read a series of extracts from the minute book, as a means of showing that tha idea of giving £lO for -.aeh connection was gradually arrived at, aDd that the process implied that the

" connection" counted from the sewer, i'ho minutes were those' of committee meetings. At- a meeting on February 12th :ast, he suggested that £lO should be allowed for each closet connection, fixing that sum by the cost of an 82ft connection at Masterton, less 15s borough supervision fees, and Councillors Hawkey" and >'ea!ey moved to that effect. Councillors B cnt and Gumi 1 proposed asi art, amendment. • hat th? Council make each drain 123 ft rom the sewer free of cost to the individual. Neither motion was put, but both weiv minuted as an indication of the feeling of the meeting. On March Bth, Councillors Hawkey and Rothwell moved that up to £lO for each connection be allowed, £IO,OOO of the loan to be devoted to this purpose; and this was reported and agreedo at the next ordinary meeting of the Council. The record then consisted of jxtracts from newspaper reports of the r,nb!ic meetings in the Theatre Royal, and :is tlie Council meeting just before the poll, and none of the statements regarding he £lO to be allowed mentioned either -•a-wer or fence as the commencement- of .he connection. In reply to Mr P. Brad-;..-y, in the Council Chamber, the Mayor ;aid th? Council would be responsible for bre;ikages and stoppages in the street, and ".his was the only reference made to the •treet boundary. The Mayor added some further explana.ions as to the manner in which the £lO .illowanco" was arrived at. When Councillor Hunt proposed to make the drains l2Cft from the sewer, ho (the Mayor) pointed out that that would work in--quitabiy, as many boosts were not :o far .iway from the sewer. Then it was suggested that they should be satisfied whh taking it-to the fence, and it was said hat that would bs a good concession. Even Councillor Hunt admitted that. Finally ■Jie suggestion that £lO should bs givan tor each connection was adopted: and " connection" meant, and always infant, from the sewer. He repeated tha:. the question "fence or ;ewer?" was never Lsked. Hs had said that tlie Council would put in the branches to the fences-. to save cutting up the streets twice, but he cost of the. branches was to come out .f the- £lO. The whoL- financial cal:ulaticn showed that that was the inten.ion. Mr Marchant had put in his estimate for the main lines only, and th. Council added £IO.OOO for connections. If they were to pay the £IO,OOO for the •onnections inside the boundaries, then ■hat- part of them in tlie street was not provided for, and they would add £4OOO to tlie cost of the scheme. In the majority of cases the £lO would cover tlie cost," especially as they were going to save hr» householder the cost of a ventilating pipe (about 253). He had wished to be straightforward over the matter, and be-lit-wd he had be.-n. He was very sorry indr-r.d that there h id !>.-. n any mi-Sitnder-itandiiig about ir. and could not imagine how the councillors who had been through 'he bniiding up of the scheme came to thhik the '•connection" started at the fence.

Councillor Sealey -was sorry the mattor hud cropped Tip, but he was under theirnpifcssion that the £lO was to ba spent inside the boundary. Mr Tubb and Mr Bradley had asked questions, and were given that impression.—(The Mayor : They ard mistaken.)—-'that impression was tlu nu-ans of getting many votes for the loan. He believed that 90 per cent, of the ratepavers voted under that impression. Councillor Rothwell concurred, and added that if it had not been for that the poll would not have been carried—(Oh, Oh's). And to keep faith with the ratepayers, even if it was a misunderstanding, they should give the £lO within the boundary, or it would look like a case of false pretences. The general impression was that the drains would be laid like the water pipes, to the boundary. Councillor Leathwick recalled the. Mayor's reply to Mr Scott, regarding long connections, and the Mayor <said his reply referred to back drains from gullies. The Mayor said that if Councillors knew that such "an impression was about they ought to have corrected it; they ought to have known that there was not money enough to pay for a pipe to the fence and £lO besides. It was a very strange thing none of the newspaper reports contained any such question or answer as Councillor:; had referred to. Councillor Parks.said he ihad not been present at all the committee meetings, but he understood all' along that the Council put the pipes to the fence, and he never heard of the connection being to the main sewer till after the poll. No one, however, charged the Mayor with misrepresentation; they had simply given different meanings to what had been said and decided on. Councillor Leathwick endorsed the last remark. The Mayor wondered that Councillors had never let him know that they had that impression. ' . Councillor Hawkey found a justification for it in the fact that Mr Marchant refused to reduce his estimate for a connection below £25. He asked Mr Marchant : " Suppose we put in the wings and import the sanitary ware," and lie replied that that might reduce it one-third, but he would not say less than £ls. The Mayor gave another version of that passage, ifr Marchant said the connections would vary so much that he could not give an estimate. Councillor Hawkey argued that as the Mayor was sure the scheme could be completed for £50,000 including the connections, it would, only, mean re-allotting the total.

The Mavor said it -would mean adding £4003 to the loan. Councillor Mullin had thought the £lO was to start from the boundary, but after hearing the Mayor's explanation he must admit that he huJ thought so in error. He recommended Councillor Hawkey to withdraw his motion. Councillor Schmidt said it- had been perfectly clear to him that connections meant from (the sewer. And several people had told him they would be perfectly satisfied with £lO from the sewer. Councillor Oborn aslced why the amount of loan was not increased if the scheme was altered as Councillor Hawkey asserted. The Mayor repeated that first it was proposed to popularise the scheme by making the wings' to the boundary, then 120 ft., and finally £lO was adopted, the Council to make the wings to the fence, for convenience sake, but. it was never decided to uiake them free. Councillor Parks said he asked the qusefion at the Council table, and got a reply that the Council would lay the pipes to the fenre, the same as the water-pipes, but he could not say who gave the arsv.er. The Mayor said it was not he. After some further discussion Councillor Hawkey's motion was put and lost by 8 *o 5. "For: Councillors Hawkey, Sealey, Rothwell, Parks and Leathwick ; against: Councillors Mullin, Bowker, Waite, Oborn, Harney, Schmidt, Raymond, and the Mavcr.