Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1911-01-17
COST FOR WATER
Project at Great Falls Would
Take $2,427 900.
ENGINEER MAKES REPORT
Says District Would Be Justified in
Spending 100000.
ESTIMATES EXPENSE TO 1885
Admits Question of Riparian Rights
Is Rather Chaotic, But Offers
Solution.
ESTIMATES EXPENSE TO 1885

II would cost the District of Columbia
81, 42T 900 to follow the plans laid down
in q skeIetonized water project for Great
Falls as prepared by Marshall Leighton,
chief photographer of the geological sur
vey who also figures out that based on
the present lighting of the District the
Commissioners can afford to spend over
5000, eco for the proposed plant. Mr..
Leighton said today that a statement
published yesterday that the cost of the
proposed plant would be 100000 is en-
tirely wrong
The report is still in process. A copy
has been sent to Commissioner Judson,
who has not read it, owing to business
matters which have kept him out of the
District building
Although Mr.. Leighton explains that
his project is merely skeleton plan. he
goes into every subject of interest to the
electric lighting of the city by munich
pal plant, including riparian rights and
rights of the canal company to the rivers
water. and shows several different meth
DDS of Harvesting the falls.
Riparian Rights Uncertain.
On riparian rights the report says:
From the standpoint of the govern
ment ownership of riparian rights at
vi cot uHS ID CLdOllC IL Has Dccu HcCcS-
sary to consider relative damages and to
make relative appraisal thereof. This APP
praisal has been LIBERAL because it is
assured that the government will eventu-
ally have to pay more than the rights are
worth. Such an assumption Is not mere
iconoclasnl. nor is it necessarily in derOga-
ton of those now in possession of the ri
parian rights. 1t may rather be consid
cred prudent and businesslike provi-
sion.
1T is proper in governmental, even as in
commercial, pursuits to plan for the
future with regard for the experience of
the past. In cases similar to this the
government has usually been subject to
extortiOnate charge.
Mr.. Leighton has marked as important
the paragraph i'm which he boils down
the Districts lighting needs. He figures
100000 year as the Districts light
ing cost for all styles of light. On this
he has estimated what the District can
afford to spend for a plant at Great
Falls, and carries out his figures to the
year 1885. and says:
Must Develop 1890 Horsepower.
''There is above indicated a prospec-
tive remand in the year 1888 of 1920
kilowatts, or about 1890 horsepower This
may be accepted as the smallest net ca
pacity that the District would be justified
in developing
Further on, he figured that 1880 horse
power must be equivalent to AT per
cent of the theoretical power necessary
at any site worthy of development for
the purpose in view. 'iSuch plant must
therefore have a capacity of IL 100 horse
power he adds.
When it comes to figuring just how
much the District can pay for q plant at
Great Falls, based on It's present needs.
it's payments for lights, ETC., the report
says:
'The 100000 now paid annually for
the equivalent Of LEO kilowatts will be
increased in 1885 to $l,O57,O0O for 3.12D
kilowatts. The average annual payment
for the period will be $4,000. Capitali-
cation Of this amount will represent a
total permissible expenditure on power
plant, main line. distribution system and
lamps.
Mr.. Leighton's capitalization scheme in
brief resolves itself into the statement
that the city could afford to capitalize its
own plant at S54IO.OOO basing this on
the average annual expenditure for
lights up to 1885 OF 100000