DRAINAGE BOARD.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1932, 4 May 1880, Page 3

DRAINAGE BOARD.

Monday, Mat 3. The usual meeting was- held at 2.30 p.m. Present—Messrs. R. J. 8. Harman (chairman), Hobbs, Tanored, Duncan, J. E. Brown, Roes, Hall, and Blakiston. Tho Chairman said that the time had come when they should utilise the reserve at tho Sandhills, and be would suggest that a subcommittee should bo appointed. Since the last meeting, as members would observe, there had been a meeting of a certain section of the ratepayers, and as it was desirable that the fullest information should be given, he would suggest that a sub-committee should be appointed to draw up tho information to which the ratepayers were entitled, and which it was evident they did not now possess. He would suggest that the sub-committee to consider this subject should meet that day week. The report of the Engineer was road as follows: —

1. Referring to MrKing’s objections to fillingnp the canal reserve drain by the Avon Road Board, I tind that the filling up as far as the road crossing, which is the only part the Avon Road Board wished done, will not affect Mr King, as the canal reserve drain will remain open from opposite his section to No, 1 drain. 2. The Avon Road Board asked this Board to put a line of pipes in place of the open drain on the east side of the Papanui road, from the crossing of Hunter’s drain to the crossing of St Alban’s Creek. This is an important drain in winter, and I should not recommend it to be put through pipes for such a distance unless the Avon Road Board would undertake to keep them in good order, as they would bo almost certain to got silted up and choked with leaves and rubbish. The part of the drain complained of was dug by the Road Board long ago. By lowering the edges of the drain, and rounding off the side of the road, the depth of this drain could be reduced to 2ft being 3ft Gin at present. 3. I have examined the subject of complaint made by Mr Dickenson. Ho requires some low-lying fields to be drained. The best way to effect this is by a drain to be cut along side of the road, as shown on sketch, which would drain Mr Dickenson’s fields and several others at the same time, which also require draining This would be a deep drain, and no doubt would give rise to complaints whenever the road becomes much used. If a drain could bo acquired through the fields it would probably cause less public inconvenience ; but, under the Drainage Act, the cost would need to be paid by those for whose benefit it is cut. Mr Dickenson’s property could be drained into St. Alban’s Creek by a very deep ditch along the roadside, but this would be of no use to the other properties, which cannot bo drained in this direction. 4. I have postponed the consi-

deration of the drain through 1118, 1192, until an estimate is made of the cost. 5. I would renew the recommendation I made some months ago that a quick hedge be planted along the outfall drain to the estuary, to take the place of the fencing, which always needs to be repaired. The clauses of the report wore considered seriatim.

Clause 1 was passed as satisfactory. On clause 2, after some discussion, it was resolved that the work be carried out as requested by the Avon Road Board, provided that the Board take charge of tho drains. Tho consideration of clause 3, after some discussion, was postponed until next meeting. Clause 4 was passed as satisfactory. On clause 5 it was resolved that the engineer be requested to measure the number of quicks likely to be required, to report at next meeting. A letter was read from the town clerk, forwarding copies of resolutions passed at tho recent public meeting held in the Oddfellows’ Hall.

Mr Hobbs said ho thought that they were bound to give some expression of opinion, or tha members for the district would bo placed in a false position. The Hon. Mr Richardson had told him that if tho Board intended to state to the ratepayers the reasons which had induced them to carry out the now Bill, ho would be prepared to go on with it. Now he would call their attention to tho fact that, by clause 41 of Mr Clark’s report, which ho would read to them, they would see that that gentleman was of opinion that the time would como when tho Board would require further powers. [Road.] Ho would also show them by clause 39 tbat tho only exception to the carrying out of the plan of Mr Clark bad been two drains which Mr 801 l had recommended to Mr Clark. So that tho fact was they were carrying out Mr Clark’s plan exactly except making two drains. With this exception, the Board were doing what they were re-elected by the ratepayers to do —viz., carry out Mr Clark’s scheme. If they had to deal with a body of ratepayers who said ono thing one day and another thing the next, ho did not know how they were going to get on. The meeting of the other evening represented some 800 persons, whereas there were from 8000 or 9000 properties on the roll. The resolution, as coming from a meeting of that number, was entitled to a careful consideration, but was grounded upon ex parte statements by Mr Ollivier, which had no foundation in fact, and which he (Mr Hobbs) would have much pleasure in refuting, should the Board not do so.

Mr Rosa said, that as public meetings wore the worst means of elucidating the merits of any public question, he should suggest that the Board should appoint a committee to lay before the ratepayers a comprehensive statement of what they were going to do and what they had done. [Hear, hear.] Mi J. E. Brown said that he had attended that meeting, and certainly—though of course it was impossible to say how many were ratepayers —he never saw a meeting more respectably conducted, or more in earnest, in Christchurch. He felt sure of this, that the resolution arrived at was thoroughly end-rsed by those outside. [“ No, no.] Well, he certainly thought they should have attended that meeting and have given to the meeting the explanation of the misconceptions which some of tho members said existed. There was a proper way of settling the matter for all time, and that was, as the ratepayers had decided that they had no confidence in the Board us at present constituted, tho Board should resign, and if they were able to explain, as Mr Hobbs seemed to think they could, where the ratepayers wore mistaken, then they could como back to their seats. He would move —“That the members of the Board resign their seats on the Board in accordance with the resolution of tho public meeting at the Oddfellows’ Hall on tho 29th April.” Mr Hall would second the motion, with a view to allowing the ratepayers to express their opinion on the matter, and he trusted the Board would accede to it, as it must be very unpleasant for the members of the Board to have to meet this agitation. Mr Hobbs said, if he received a requisition signed by' a majority of the electors in his district, he should be glad to make way for some one else. He would desire to point out that the advent of new men to that Board in the present state of the drainage works would cost the ratepayers thousands of pounds, and he, as a ratepayer, felt it his duty to oppose any such course until he received the request of his constituents.

Mr Blakiston thought this was the proper course to pursue, and that until asked by a majority of ratepayers in their district the members should not resign. Mr Tancred raised the question whether the mStion was in order at all, as if it were passed it would not hind the members individually to take that course. Mr Harman said he should oppose the motion, because, by carrying it, the Board would admit that the charges brought against it were true. He thought it would be much better to adopt the course of putting before the ratepayers a true statement of their intentions and position. The motion was then put and lost. The following was the voting:—Ayes: Messrs Brown and Hall. Noes: Messrs Harman, Duncan, Hobbs, Boss, Blakiston. Mr Tancred declined to vote, on the ground that the resolution was not one which could be put, as having no binding effect on individual members.

Mr Boss moved— <f That a committee of four be appointed, compiising Messrs Tancred, Hobbs, Harman, and the mover, to draw up a reply to the resolutions forwarded by the Mayor.” Mr Duncan objected to serve on the committee, as the ratepayers seemed to think that ho, with other members, were the ruling powers at the Board. Ho said this was mentioned at the meeting the other night. Mr Boss said he had mentioned the gentlemen he had done on the committee because they were the best men to deal with the matter.

Mr Duncan would suggest that Messrs Harman, Hobbs, Tancred, and Ross should form the committee.

Mr Hobbs said he should desire to be left off the committee, because ho should be sure to be the cause of raising a storm of discontent. Even when ho framed the financial statement, showing the position of the Board—a duty which, he had felt devolved upon him—ho had raised the ire of the Avon district. Mr Hall said he should not be able to attend the meeting next Monday, as proposed. However, that would not matter much, as no doubt they would have everything beautifully cut and dried. Mr Roes said he had left Mr Brown off the committee because he was so fully identified with the other side.

Mr Brown thought it would not bo fair for those who had gone to the meeting and borne the brunt of it to frame this reply. Let those who, perhaps from being afraid to he present and speak to the ratepayers, draw up the reply. Mr Harman said Mr Brown knew very well when he wont there that he would not be abused.

Mr Tancred said the reason ho had not gone to the meeting was that he felt they could not accept the position of explaining the action of the Board at a public meeting. Mr Ross ultimately said that he would like to move his resolution as follows : —“ That a committee be formed, consisting of Messrs. Harman, Ross, Hobbs, and Tancred, to frame a reply to the communication from his Worship the Mayor, enclosing resolutions passed at a meeting held in the Oddfellows’ Hall on the 29th ult.j to bring up a report at next meeting.” Mr Blakiston seconded the motion.

Mr Hobbs said he should like to ask the Board to give Mr Bell permission to give the committee information on the various points raised as regarded professional matters. The Chairman said that there was a letter from Mr 801 l on this subject, which would new be road.

The following letter was read : Christchurch, Ist May, 1880. To the Chairman Christchurch District Drainage Board. —Sir, —I have the honor to submit a few notes on the subject of certain remarks made by speakers at the late public meeting at the Oddfellows’ Hall. With regard to the assertions made by Mr Hubbard, I shall not question his knowledge of the prices of work, as I know nothing about his experience in these matters, but ho assumed too much when he asserted that “ he would like to know how the engineer estimated the value of the work when he did not know himself what ho was going to do.” These remarks apply, I presume, only to the construction of the sewage tank, which is a small part of the total contract. As my plans for that portion of the work lay on the table of the office among the plans exhibited for contractors,and ns Mr Hubbard’s estimate for the tank must have been taken from these plans, I cannot see his grounds for tho above assertion. In the specification the contractors were given the choice of three kinds of material of which to construct tho tank, in case they did not ap-

prove of the plan shown on the drawings ; namely, a Concrete tank founded on a kerb of iron, and the method of building was a'so left to them. In my experience this is a very usual course in specifications for works of a lump sum contract, part of which is of such an uncertain nature as the sinking of a large circular tank in quicksand. It would bo extremely difficult to say definitely what such a structure would cost, and contractors with any knowledge of the difficulties involved would feel bound to estimate sufficiently high. As a matter of fact, the estimates for this portion ef the work did not differ so much ns I should have expected, but Mr Wadoy’s was much the lowest of all. With respect to Mr Hubbard’s quantities for the rest of the work, I find that he under-measured them in concrete, brickwork, and earthwork ; in the last item, probably, because he did not allow for a double length of timbers, one overlapping the other, which is necessary in such deep excavations in quicksands. Of course, if his clients are willing to take the risk of cutting the quantities so fine, and making no allowance for the innumerable accidents and slips which take place in such treacherous ground, they are at liberty to do so. In Mr Hubbard’s place there is some temptation to estimate the quantities very low, if the chief payment for taking them out is on condition that the contract is gained, which in my experience is the usual mode of payment for this kind of work. On investigation, however, I find that more allowance for timbering was made in taking out the quantities in this office than I consider absolutely necessary. The question of bad work in pipe connections in Antigua street had nothing to do with the acceptance of the tenders for the sewers and pumping station, as the bad work in these pipes was not found out until afterwards. Of twelve connections taken out eight full lengths and part of one were laid by Mr Wadey. The specification required— 11 That a bod of shingle four inches thick shall be laid under the pipe, on this the pipe shall be firmly bedded, a strand of tarred gaskiu of flax or rope-yarn shall be forced by proper caulking tools into the socket of the pipe. The socket shall then be tightly filled with well tempered clay, and the whole joint shall be covered up with clay.” But these conditions were hot fulfilled in the jo nts that wore examined ; in consequence of this negle-t the soil was washed through the joints and into the main sewer, and has now to be removed from tho same at considerable expense. I discovered that something was wrong with the line of pipes by noticing that the road had sunk above them. I therefore directed the foreman to examine them. With regard to this work of Mr Wadey’s no doubt blame is attributable to tho inspection, which was intrusted to a cadet, overlooked by a regular inspector, who visited the work when he considered necessary ; but, at the same time, it is difficult for any inspector to so closely watch tho work as to prevent a contractor putting in bad joints if he wishes to do so. The other four of the twelve lines above referred to were not laid by Mr Wadey. Two were existing when the work was being done, and were connected with the sewer by Mr Wadey. One of those was relaid, and the other two put in by employes of the Board. I will also offer a few remarks on the non-acceptance of the lowest tender by the Board, upon which Messrs Wadey and Hubbard’s grievances are founded. As to their right to the contract it must be observed that the advertisement calling for tenders stated that the lowest would not necessarily be ac opted, and so far that condition placed Mr Wadey on tho same footing as tho other tenderers. It is customary in public works to refer the tenders to the engineer, and to accept tho one which he recommends ; it is also usual for the engineer to recommend tho lowest if there are no reasons f ,r acting otherwise ; but if tho engineer thinks that a tender is too low, if he thinks the work cannot bo done for the money, is he bound to recommend that that tender be accepted, and chance the result ? I think not. In the general scramble for contracts in New Zealand under the Public Works, those contractors who failed because they had taken the work too low are very numerous, and I think in every case tho Government lost time and money by the failures. The contract for building the sewer tank and deep sowers in quicksand is probably the most difficult piece of work that has yet been undertaken in New Zealand, and it would take many thousands to repair a failure in these works. The assert-on of Mr Ollivier that £ 1600 of public money had been wasted by not taking the lowest tender is assuming too much, as it may, and I expect will, prove to be the best economy. At any ;rate, the engineer of the works has more interest in their success than any ratepayer or member of the Board. He is better able to judge of the chances of success and the probable cost, and for that reason, if ho object to a con tractor or to the amount of his tender, he has a perfect right to express it, and to expect the Board to support him. With regard to the permission granted by the chairman of the Board allowing Mr Anderson to tender, I submit that there are no secrets in the Board’s office in connection with quantities or any other information, and the prices upon which I based my estimate could not assist him against any other tenderer, and evidently did not do so in this case. I may give as a similar instance that I understand the engineer of the Northern Pacific Bailway in the Dominion of Canada, who laid out the line and made all the plana and estimates for the same, tendered for portions of the work and got the contract. In regard to Mr Ollivier’s remarks upon the pipe contract, I was in Dunedin when the contract was let, and made no recommendation on the subject. In reply to Mr Ollivier’s observation, that the engineer to the Board might be—as was pleased to put it —Engineer to the Suez Canal, I have never infringed the terms of my agreement with the Board in the slightest degree. C. Napieb Bell, M. Inst. C.E.

Mr Duncan said he thought the Board should express to Mr Bell their wish that in all large works connected with the Board, Mr Bell should give his personal supervision to them. There was outside a very strong faffing as to Mr Bell taking outside work, and he was glad to find that now Mr Bell had expressed his intention of declining to take any further engagements whilst th;se heavy works were about.

Mr Harman said that he might state offi oially that Mr Bell would not take any further outside work beyond that of the Drainage and Harbour Board. He thought this would allay the public excitement about this matter.

Mr Bell said, that since 1876 he had not been absent from duty for more than three weeks in each year, which was not at all a holiday, oven if he had asked for it. Mr Brown said it was stated that Mr Bell had not only valued all the General Government railways, bub that ho was consulting engineer to the Malvern water scheme and others.

Mr Bell denied that he was consulting engineer to any body outside the Harbor Board. Ho had been asked to report on the Taieri and on the Ashley. As he had said, he had not been absent for more than three weeks in any one year. After some further discussion the matter dropped. A letter was read from the Sydenham Borough Council, forwarding copies of resolutions passed by the Council with respect to the alterations in the Christchurch District Drainage Act. The resolutions were six in number. The first was to the effect that the Drainage Board should be compelled by law to charge the cost of maintaining the staff, and the cost of all works executed, upon the district for the benefit of which the staff is maintained and the works executed, the cost to be ascertained at the end of each finsnoial year, and a statement of the cost, with the rate proposed to be levied, to be sent to the Borough Councils and Road Boards concerned, who shall have the right of appeal to a Court of Revision (2) That the Drainage Board forward a copy of their annual accounts to the municipalities and Road Boards in the drainage district. (3) That the Drainage Board should be restricted from increasing their borrowing powers except the consent of the ratepayers is first obtained in a similar manner to municipalities. (4) That provision be made for the appointment of arbitrators, to decide on all questions which may arise between the Drainage Board and any municipality or Road Board as to the condition in which streets are left after the construction of sewers therein. (6) That provision bo made for giving two representatives to Sydenham on the Drainage Board, instead of one as contemplated by the new Bill. (6) That the Drainage Board be requested to reconsider clauses 10—17 of the proposed Bill, with reference to the distance named, wherein persons are to bo compelled to connect their drainage with a sower or drain for a distance of 200 ft., as the Council consider that the distance should be reduced. On the motion of Mr Hull, it was resolved “ That the matter be remitted for consideration to the committee appointed to consider the resolutions of the public meeting held on April 20;h, and to report at next meeting.” A letter was read from the Sydenham Borough Council, requesting that the Board would cause the Gasworks road to bo repaired, and giving notice that unless the work was commenced within twenty-four hours the Council would do the work and charge the Board with the cost of it. The matter was referred to the engineer, with power to act. A letter was road from the Avon Road Board, forwarding a resolution, to the effect that they considered the Avon district should have an additional member on the Board, and requesting the Drainage Board to take stops to have an additional member given to the district in the new Act. This letter was directed to be answered by the secretary, desiring to know upon what

grounds the Avon district made the request for an additional member. A letter was read from Mr Robert Wilkin, calling attention to the state of tho creek on rural section No. 102.

Tho Engineer stated this had been attended to.

A letter was read from Mr Horner, stating his willingness to allow the creek on rural section 304 to bo cleared out by the Board, and also that the Board should take over the drain. It was resolved that the drain should be taken over, and the creek cleaned by the Board.

A letter was read from Mr J. Bishop, calling attention to the bad state of the drain on Bishop’s road, Harewood road. Referred to the Engineer, with power to act.

A letter was read from Messrs Harper, Harper and Scott, asking for certain transfers from the Board on account of clients of the firm. The matter was referred to the chairman to make enquiries, to report to next meeting. A letter was read from the secretary of the conversazione to be given by the Philosophical Institute, asking for the loan of any plans, drawings, &c., which might be of public|intorest.

The matter was referred to the chairman and the engineer to settle. A letter was road from Mr Forest, submitting sketch of a house ho intended building over Free’s creek, near St. Luke’s church—in Manchester Street north.

It was resolved that the permission be granted, cubjoct to the ongineer’s'eonditions being carried out, the flow of the creek not to be interfered with. A letter was read from Mr Rountree, staling that he did not require the drain to be carried over his property, as he had drainage. He considered the Board had no right to close a drain which had been in use for twenty years. The matter Was referred to Mr Blatiston, to report upon it to the Board at its next meeting. A letter was read from tho Sydenham Council, stating that they intended widening tho Windmill road at Harman’s corner. To do this it would be necessary to fill up a part of Jackson’s Creek, and they wished to know whether the Board would agree to this being done and provide some other means of drainage. It was resolved—“ That the Board would agree to the filling up of the creek as proposed by the Sydenham Council, on condition that they put in pipes to the satisfaction of the engineer to the Board.” It was resolved, on the motion of Mr Hobbs—“ That the Board give notice of the striking of the drainage rate for the various districts according to the scale already agreed upon, the rate to bo payable on the 17th instant.”

Mr Brown wished to bring forward a question of privilege as to remarks made by Mr Hobbs at tho meeting when tho resolutions from Bingsland came up. Mr Hobbs was reported to have said that the reason for his vote was plain enough. The various local bodies were waiting for the apportionment of the rate, so that he could not agree to any postponement. Last year Mr Brown had been appointed on the committee to allocate the rates, and had not attended. The whole of the members at the late meeting had offered to remain until ten o’clock at night if Mr Brown wished to have information. Now he (Mr Brown) had moved for that committee, and instead of the mover convening the meeting, as was usually the case, he had only a day’s notice, and had asked Messrs Duncan and Hobbs to postpone the meeting, but they had declined. The statement made by Mr Hobbs was to the effect that he had been a member of the committee and bad taken no interest in the matter. Again, Mr Hobbs had said that they had offered to stop to make Mr Brown acquainted with the figures. It had taken Mr Hobbs two days to make up these figures, and he wished it to bo understood that he (Mr Brown) ought to understand them in two hours.

Mr Hobbs said in reply that Mr Brown had come up to the meeting, and had stated that ho could not stop, and had gone away. He (Mr Hobbs) told Mr Brown tbat ho must get on with the work of allocating tha rates, so that there could be no postponement. As regarded two hours to study the figures, it was quite true that it had taken two days to prepare the figures, but there was a difference between the consideration and framing of these estimates.

Mr Ross and Mr Duncan having spoken on the subject, the matter dropped. Several accounts wore passed for payment. Mr Duncan gave notice of motion as follows :—“ That the engineer be requested to furnish the Board with an estimate of the cost that would have had to be incurred out of loan, if all tho main drains at present exist* ing in the Avon district had been made in such a manner as would have required little or no future recurring expenditure.” The Board then adjourned.