Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1921-09-10
BOARD HAGGLES
WITH NO SEWER
IN PART OF CITY
Westfield Road Main May Not
Be Completed Before
Next Spring.
REACH NO SETTLEMENT

Prolonged delay by the board of pub
lie works in strengthening out tangle
resulting from It's failure to obtain a
right of way under the canal before it
let a contract for the construction of
the Fifty Sixth street and Westtield road
main sewer may result in preventing the
completion of the sewer until next spring,
it was said today.
The sewer will serve the entire dis
trict north of Fifty Second street aud
west of College avenue. Devlopmnt of
the district into a good residential sec
ton awaits the improvement. Excepting
the huge conduit to larry sewage under
White River from Raymond street to
the new sewage disposal plant ct Sellers
Farm, 1t is the biggest sewer project
undertaken by the city in many years.
The contract for it was 8arded to tie
Sheehan Construction Company few
months ago on bid Of S=Sl,G00.
Why the board of works dallied for
seven weeks In untangling the mess 1t
got into through failure to procure the
right of-way has been somewhat of
mystery not only to the contractor on
the lob but also to other construction
men.
The trouble first arose almost two
reaching the canal with that part of the
sewer between it and White River, dis
covered that the board had not made
! arrangements with the Indianapolis
Water Company for carrying the pipe
| under the canal.
When contractors were compiling facts
and figures for their bids upon the sewer
| early In the summer, it Is said, they
were informed by Charles Brown. an as
sstant city civil engineer in charge OF
sewers, that the water company would
drain the canal and there would be no
difficulty in getting under 1t. The Shee-
han company discovered, however, after
| II had made its bid and received the
contract upon this basis that the water
company would not agree TO let the
water out Of Its channel for such long
period.
BOARD RECEDES
FROM POSITION.
When the contractor appealed TO the
board of public works It disclaimed all
responsibility for the mistake, asserting
that It was the business OF the contractor
to make the arrangement with the water
company Upon threat of legal action the
board receded from this position and by
subsequent acts, according TO the con
tractor. has admitted practically that lis
first contention was wrong. The board
got into touch with the water company.
The utility served notice that 1t not
only would not agree to drain the canal
but that it also would not consent to
permit the sewer to be constructed un-
der 1t out OF segmental block, the ma
terlal specified In the contract. Cast
iron pipe set In a concrete base must be
used for the section beneath the water
course. the water company declared. Aft
er some delay the board of works and
| the contractor consented to this change
1 in specifications, but the matter Of how
! the sewer was to be constructed was
not settled. 1t was suggested that the
construction company Golfer dam half Of
the canal and push its pipe to the mid
! die of the stream and then move the
/ dam to the other side and complete the
crossing This, IL Is understood. did
not meet with any objection from the
water company.
Meanwhile the sheehan Construction
! Company had to sit Idly by while week
after week of splendid working weather
/ slipped past Finally, about two weeks
ago the company got Frank c. Lingen-
felter, city civil engineer, to sign an
order changing the specifications TO con
form to the water company's wishes and
allowing the company extra remuneration
for the excess cost OF the different ma
terisls and any special machinery or
equipment made necessary by IT, plus 10
per cent This was while the board of
public works was I'm a vacation period,
and according to Merle y. A. Walker. at
torney for the contractor, Mark II Miller,
president Of the board, promised that the
order would be approved as soon as II
reconvened. However, when Mr. Walker
and Eugene Sheehan of the construction
| company appeared before the board on
Aug. 81. Mr.. Miller refused TO sign the
order, stating that he wanted to submit
it to Corporation Counsel Samuel Ashby
frst
On the strength Of the engineers order
the contractor attempted to start work
at the canal on the afternoon OF Aug. 81
but the water company Immediately or
dered him not to set foot or equipment
upon its property until 1t had obtained
a satisfactory agreement with the city.
SECTION OF CITY
WITHOUT SEWERS.
Meanwhile the western section of the
extreme north part OF the city goes I'M
severed and the likelihood Of It's re-
ceiving relief this winter grows re-
| mote. Suspension OF work for seven
weeks has meant not only a big monetary
! loss to the contractor but also may re-
suit in the city helng held responsible
for such loss and the entire extra cost
| Of the changed construction under the
canal Approximately $1,000 will be
added to the cost Of the contract by the
delays and changes, one estimate says
The board is trying to show that only
about $4,000 extra cost viii be added. At
any rate the rainy season has arrived
and the sewer is only fairly started.
Meanwhile the board of works is max
ing vigorous attempts to cover up its
original error with talk of saving money
by refusing to agree to pay the con
tractor for the cost of cofferdamming the
canal. If this is the plan finally adopted.
The board contends that cofferdams are
an item to be considered In the original
specifications and not chargeable as an
extra. The contractor. however. poats
out that the bidders were Informed chat
|