The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1924-11-25
UNC0MPLETED
WORK COST IS
GIVEN TODAY
Engineers Agreed on To Go
Over Situation, Where Wa.
ter Plant Work Is Held Up
ISSUES ARE OUTLINED
Wrong Plans by Engineer
Claimed by Contractor to
Have Caused Trouble

As 4 result of conference held
yesterday afternoon in the office Of
City Attorney Young. Engineer Grif-
fin OF Mandan, representing Contrac.
tor O. +. Woodrich and Engineer
Dickinson, representing City Engi-
neer T. r. Atkinson, will take sound.
ings of the Missouri River bottom at
the place Of intake Of the new water
plant, and present findings to the
city commission to be used in settl.
ing the controversy which has devei-
oped.
There are number of points Of
controversy which developed over the
construction of the intake-the pipe
through which water is drawn from
the Missouri river into the filtration
plant. Work on the intake has been
stopped by Contractor Woodrich, and
the intake Of the old water plant is
being used, the water being drawn
to the old pump house and pumped
to the new filtration plant.
ut was agreed that the city en-.
gineer's representative together with
a representative of Mr.. Woodrich
would take soundings Of the river
bed, make plat, show where the &C.
tual bottom Of the river is and where
the intake pipe comes in, and sub
nit findings to the city commission"
Mayor Lenhart said, explaining the
results of the conference.
Points Of Issue
Among the points Of issue. as out.
lined by the mayor, are:
Mr.. Woodrich claims that the in.
take is now below the river bed,
while City Engineer Atkinson claims
that it is still about two feet above
the river bed. The specifications
provided, it was explained, that tie
intake would be four feet under low
water marb. The engineer ordered it
lowered one foot. making it five feet
under low water mark. Woodrich
claims that the difficulties Of the Job
have been due to ordering the intake
lowered one foot.
Woodrich claims that his expense
on the job to date, as submitted to
the conference. is $15,7OO on the in
take; the city engineer objected to
some items, and claimed the amount
was not this much. Woodrich claims
that if the intake is completed at
the present depth it would cost $1,000
more, steel sheeting being required.
The contractor claims that since
~
placed in on cost plus basis, this
makes the entire intake job on q
cost plus basis, replacing the origin
al contract The city engineer has
contended that only the extra foot
Of work is on the cost plus basis.
Many At Conference
Present at the conference were
John F. Sullivan, attorney fr Wood
rich, three engineers for Woodrich,
himself. City Attorney Young, City
Engineers Atkinson and Dickinson
and member of the city commission.
"Mr. Woourich asked for a confer
ence with Mr.. Young and the city en-
gineer,' said Mr.. Lenhart. "The city
commission was asked to sit in on
the meeting. It was not a meeting
as far as the city commission was
concerned. The city commissioners
were more or less bystanders in this
instance, invited in to hear both
sides, the controversy being between
the engineers and the lawyers. It
was the first time the city commits
sioners have heard both sides of the
controversy at the same time. The
case has been presented separately
by both sides, but in this conference
the engineers for the city and the
contractor were brought face to face
with each other. What our action
will be, we cannot say until report
of the engineers is made as agreed
on in the conference, and the COM
mission weighs all the evidence"
The matter will come regularly be-
fore the city commission later, when
the reports are received, the mayor
said.