Wichita eagle., 1888-08-19
COUNCIL MEETING.
ANOTHER STEP WITH THE SEWER
SYSTEM.
Positive Action Taken On Num-
Der of Observation-Disclosures
Of Sewer Estimates,

| Councllmen Healy, English, johnson,
Buckridge, Simison, Glaze, Slower and
Stone present. AS was announced the
council met at 3 p. m. as a board to hear
opposition to making assessments for curb
ing and guttering No one appeared with
objections and an ordinance at the council
meeting embodying She taxes for such i'm
provements.
The bids for hay market were referred &c
the next regular meeting
1t was moved that all cess
pool matter be put in the
! Topeka avenue sewer not less than SIX
/ hundred feet below Harry street.
Mr.. Healy opposed the motion on the
belief that the main would soon be stopped
up and unable for duty.
Slower offered an amendment that the
scavengers be allowed to dump matter off
the Lawrence avenue bridge into running
water.
Epglish-If this amendment don't put
| the scavengers to work it will do no good.
| The amendment lost with Slower and
Healy in the affirmative.
! The mayor said that it would likely
| result III an injury to the man holes.
English amended that the scavengers
! be allowed to empty cesspool water in the
! first manhole six hundred feet below
Harry and they be held responsible for
damages to sewer.
When the vote was called Healy wanted
| the roll called, which was as follows:
firmative-English, Stone, johnson,
Pratt and Glaze. Negative-Healy Sto-
yer, Buckridge and Slmison.
Healey-A complaint comes in about
stagnant water on the corner Of Waco
| avenue and First street. They claim some
recent work of the street force caused the
water to be stopped.
Stover-I have an ordinance handed to
me about the motor line extensions on
Hillside avenue.
The ordinance was from the Cen
trail and Eastern motor line
company calling for the privilege to ex-
tend from Central north on Hillside to
Frico, and east on Frisco to the city limits.
Buckeridge moved the ordinance be
placed on its passage.
1t was moved by Stone to refer it to the
franchise committee.
A vote defeated Stones motion, and
motion to place it on its passage carried,
with English in the negative.
The ordinance had been published nine
days, and according to a resolution no
such ordinance could be considered unless
published ten days The ordinance passed,
however. when the city attorney decided
that the nine day business would not eff
feet the legality.
When the sewer question was called
Judge Campbell said that the work could
be let IN part contracts If separate esti-
mates were made. Each main could be
constructed separately provided separate
estimates are made. The city engineer
said he had understood that it was desired
to have all the work put in one estimate,
and as result he had not made separate
estimates.
Judge Campbell-By making separate
estimates more than one contractor has
chance. BY having all in one contract
only large firms need bid as no
the job.
The city engineers estimate, submitted
as whole, is 1921, 1922 for the entire
work.
English-This estimate is complete as a
whole, but we want it separate SO that
the work can be let separate but as |
understand it we must let all at the same
time
pratt-There is no doubt about it that
we can get it cheaper by letting the whole
contract at once. BY dividing the work
we will have to pay more, SO | move that
we now instruct the city clerk to advertise
for bids according to plans and specifica-
tions as submitted by the city engineer.
Healy-I think we could get it done by
letting it out in small contracts.
Stover-How long would it take the en-
gineer to divide the estimate?
Mulvey-I think about two days time if
am not interrupted. Would not like to
undertake it in less time
Campbell-Two days amt an age.
Stover-I think we ought to have it di-
vided up.
Johnson-If we divide one man can bid
on each division and thus bid on the
whole
English-I would like to have all sewer
to bid on this work.
Allen-Some time ago we decided to
adopt this plan, and before
any other can be considered you Will
have to reconsider the motion passed on
the 18th of last May. l Will be compelled
10 rule all other systems out OF order until
that motion is rconsidered.
English-I don't see while councilmen
who know nothing of sewerage can be so
positive on 4 question they know nothing |
about. Why can't any company submit |
any sort of bid they please on any sys-
TEN they choose and get a general esti- /
mate of all
Pratt-As far as any new system is /
that is all ont of order | am /
TO delay for many more districts /
would like TO come in and delay for |
of estimates would bring about /
4 long delay.
When the estimate had been read call
ing for n grand total of S32l.47.27 Mr.. |
Eiealey said that he observed from the |
reading that manholes cost about $4,000 |
and he thought it ought 10 be cut ninety |
per cent as, in his opinion, the manholes
10 not call for such an expense with a
main so near the top of the ground.
'Mulvey-Don't think it would be wise
70 put in cheaper manholes.
Healy-The engineers estimate is cor
rect. but there is no necessity for such an
Mulvey-A four-inch wall would cost
ess than eight-inch As 1 have figured. but
[ would not stand.
Healy-I see no need for 500 pounds of
ron on a manhole.
Healy-How about pumps? I do not
know how that Is, for thought we were
o get water from the water company.
Mulvey-I saw the president of the COM
,any, and Mr.. Ansbury, superintendent
lere. and they were not willing 10 furnish