Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-04-29

received-that Of the Indianapolis Re-
duction Company, In the amount OF $780,
600 for collection from May 20, 1913, to
Jan. 1. 1919. and. $94, per year there
after for period Of five years from Jan.
/, 1919. This was considered much too
high and was rejected by the board Of
public works Oct. %. 1917.
"In February, 1918, bids were readver-
tised and but one bid was received. This
was submitted by the Indianapolis Re-
duction Company and was In, two parts
For the collection Of the garbage with
the privilege of disposing Of 1t and keep
/ ing the by-products-the amount OF the
bid was $4,000 a year. The-cost to the
city under the old contract and the same
condition was $4,000 which, because Of
additional territory added to the city,
amounted to approximately $51 900 during
the last year Of the contract. For the
collection of garbage alone the bid was
$112, 300 Under the last bid the city
1t saw fit. Both propositions were for a
three-year period. They were considered
much too high and were rejected.
SERIOUS PROBLEM
WAS CONSIDERED.
This was the status Of the garbage
collection and disposal question in Feb
ruary, 1918, with the contract expiring
In May.
Following tho rejection Of the last
bid by the board Of works serious con-
sideration was given the problem both
by the board and the board of sanitary
commissioners. The latter board was
given the power to acquire a reduction
plant by the sanitary act of 1917, but
no provision was made in this act for
the collection Of the garbage. With
this serious situation confronting the
city many Joint meetings Of the two
boards were held to work out this prob
lem to the best interests Of the city. This
board Of sanitary commissioners in
vestigated other plants and engaged the
services Of two engineers to report upon
the erection of a new plant and the con-
dition of the plant owned by the Indi-
annapolis Reduction Company and to
make a valuation Of the existing plant.
Mr.. George Fuller, a consulting en-
gineer Of New York. in his report upon
the existing plant, estimated that "in
order to increase the capacity Of the ex
listing plant, to improve the operation
and efficiency Of the same, it would be
necessary to make q number Of addi-
lions and betterments." His estimated
cost Of this was $150,000. This allowed
for an increase in capacity from the
present normal capacity Of 160 tons per
'day to 240 tons a day. This. he states
in his report. would provide a plant ade-
quate for 1890 conditions. The addition
recommended twenty six digesters, an in
crease Of ten over the present number !:
an additional 800 horse power in the
boiler room. second percolator and q
second dryer, with the necessary re-
arrangement of the conveyors, etc, to Mt
the new conditions. This contemplated
no improvements nor engagements to ex-
listing buildings.
ESTIMATE FOR
NEW PLANT.
I'm the consideration OF a new plant
for the city, after discussion Of the
different methods In use he states: His
estimate for a new and modern plant of
$40 tons capacity was $55O,0OO.
Generating against the building Of a
| new plant or even against rebuilding the
present one was the condition existing,
due to- the war. Material and labor
could not have been obtained ,<as the
Government would have placed such a
project in the list of nonessentials, even
If materials were obtainable, which was
not the case.
Mr.. NJ. A. Hofft. the second engineer.