MASTERTON BOROUGH COUNCIL.
ORDINARY MEETING
The ordinary meeting of the Masterton borough Coancil was held last evening. His Worship the Mayor, Mr J. M. Coradine, presided, there being also present, —Crs Pauling, Elliott, Tenjple, Hoar, Pragnell, Rag*U Morris, Ewington, Prentice.
Mr Cair wrote in regard to the blocking of a culvert in High Street. The matt«r was left in Lhe hands of the Engineer. It was decided that the re-arrang-ing of the Abattoir loan be left in the hands of the Mayor and Cr EIJiutt.
PROPOSED SEWERAGE OF THE BOROUGH. The following is the second Supplementary Report of the Borough Engineer., submitted to the Council "I have been asked to furnish an estimate of the cost of placing water mains along and co-terminus with the lines of the intercepting and subsidiary sewers within the Borough. outlined in the proposed scheme oi sew-" eraga. Upon the basis of a 3 inch cast iron mam with the necessary hydrants, sluice and scour valves, I estimate the cost at £2,526, expended in the following streets and fields. York Street, 22 chains; Short Street, 39 chains; Walton's Avenue, 3 chains; Kuripuni Street, 29 chains; Michael Street, 26 chains; Cornwall Street, 6.50 chains; Wright Street, 10.25 chains; Tararua Street, 9 chains; Pownall Street, 11 chains; Herbert Street, 40.25 chains; Dixon Street, 12 chains; River Road, 36 chains; Johnstone Street, 24 chains; Lincoln Road. 7 chains; Nursery Road, 45 chains; Park Street, 16 chains; Jean Street, 9 chains; Hacker Street, 4 chains; Columoa Road, 8 chains. Fields.— Kuripuni to Nursery Road 34 chains; Columba to Gashel, 3ft chains. — Total 421 chains at £6—£2,526. Of course it will not be necessary to place water mains in fields along the lires of the sewere, but that waa the nature of the request for a report. I do not regard any.of thi3 expenditure as imminent, and if it were it can have no relation whatever from the point of view of to the proposed scheme of sewerage. The water undertaking is essentially of a revenue producing nature, inasmuch as wherever mains exist and for 100 yards beyond, whether the water is supplied or not, ties on either side of it becomes immediately taxable, and if it be necessary in the future to extend the mains it can and should be effected in one of two ways, either by the employment of the surplus revenue of the undertaking or direct extension of the mains, of the application of the surplus in [payment of interest and sinking fund on monies borrowed for the purpose of such extensions.
It has been stated that the scheme submitted by ray predecessor did not entail any extensions of water mains to supply water co terminus with the termination of the several lines of the sewers in the scheme, it having been declared that with the exception of Herbert Street water wae in every street. An examination illustrates the inaccuracy of this statement. 'fhe following is a statement of the streets and the chainage of the water mains necessary to place water mains in thau scheme as is suggested should be done in scheme 6, which is now under consideration: — Short Street. 8.50 chains; Kuripuni Street, 18 chains; Michael Street, 15 chains; Herbert Street, 40.25 chains; Dixon Street, 12 chains; Lincoln Road, 7 chains; Park Street, 14 ,chains; Jean Street 13.50 chains; Hacker Street, 6 chains; Columba Road, 14 chains; Cockburn Street, 56 chains; between Johnstone Street and Columba Road, 16 chains; Macara Street, 7.50 chains; Elizabeth Street, 4 chains. Fields. —Kuripuni Street to Nuraery Koad, 48 chains; Columba Road to Casel Street, 30 chains.-Total, 309.75 chains at £6.—£1,858.50. It will be seen that 309f chains of
mains would have been so necessary involving an expenditure of £1,858 10s, or £670 less than the estimate for scheme 6. The Council will re member that this difference is ex- I plainable by the fact, that scheme 6
I traverses more public streets man does scheme 2, from which must be deducted the extensions of mains which has been effected since scheme 2 was submitted. I am quite satisfied with the capacity of the water undertaking to meet the reasonable and proper demand of a population in excess of 10,000, so that the Council may be under no misapprehension that the introduction ,of a scheme of sewerage will find the water undertaking unequal to the task placed upon it. When my report was submitted tn the Council it was accompan- j ied by a plan of the borough showing the routes or the several lines,
and by longitudinal sections snowing depths, grades and sizes. Scheme 2 made provision for what is described in the report as 400 connections; this 1 presume meant the provision of 400 4incb or 6inch splayed junctions moulded ir; the pipa sewers as well as a 4inch or 6inch pipe line from the junction to the street boundary, and approximately 33ft of pipe line in each case into which 400 houses or premises could be separ-
snly drained. That and thai only was tie provision made. My repoit conti mplales and it is clearly stated in the report, the provision ot 4 inch junctions in pairs right and left at every sUft of distance along the iine of the sewers in the Borough, the object being to enable existing and future premises to be connected to | the sewers without fracture or displacement. A careful record will be kept of the position and depths of these junctions fo that whenever a connection is required to be made the Engineer wi'l be in a position to indicate to the drainlayer where he will find a suitable junction. The Council should be aware Cha* they have themselves determined this question, inasmuch as the bye-law of the Borough now throws the sole financial and structural' obligation of constructing the drain upon the person requiring it from the point where the drain intersects the sewer. I am of the opinion that the cost ofthese junctions is equal to,, if not in excess of, the 400 junctions contemplated in scheme 2. If-the'Council, desire'to lay drains from the sewers to the several s»nitaryfittings wherever required alcng the lines of sewers notwithstanding the existence of the said bye-law it ia only necessary to estimate the cost and add it to the amount of the scheme, but I imagine the Council will find same opposition to the proposal from the licensed drain—layprs.
With the precautions outlined in my report the Council nued have no concern as to the suitability of the site selected for an outfall. Neitlarof the sites selected have been in anyway affected by the recent heavy,floods." i
lhd Mayor said that the whelequestion had previously been thoroughly discussed by Councillors. It d|jd not follow that every street mentioned should he sewered, H ; was of opinion that there were several streets that could be cut out tf the scheme for the present. Be favoured spreading the money over a. period of years. He moved that the; scheme outlined by the enginter bee. adopted, and lhe necessary steps betaken to put the matter before the. ratepayers for the purpose of a loan. Cr Pauling seconded toe motion.. He considered they should go on with the whole scheme. The Council could not get money at a bett.r rate thaib now.
lhe Mayor -said that he favoured spreading the loan over three years,, taking up £IO,OOO per year„ Crs Rigg aifd Pragnell, who were.absent ht the previous Council meeting, at which the proposed sewerugawas discussed, favoured the scheme. On the motion being put it was carried by 7 votes to 3. The voting was as follows:—Ayes: The Mayor, Crs Pauling, Hoar, Rigg. Pragnell, Morris, Prentice. Noes: Crs Ewington, Temple and Elliott.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAG19100720.2.24
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10045, 20 July 1910, Page 5
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,287MASTERTON BOROUGH COUNCIL. Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10045, 20 July 1910, Page 5
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Wairarapa Age. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.