C/A
-3-
8
pumping would be necessary, the height to which the water would
have to be lifted would be decreased by that amount.
11.
The disadvantages are threefold: -
(a) The area contributing directly to the reservoir would be
considerably smaller, 2,680 acres as against 4,200 at
the Lower site,
(b) The length of the dam would be greater, 1,770 feet as
compared with 940 feet, and as the height above ground
level would be about the same at both sites, the quantity
of masonry above the ground would be nearly doubled,
(c) The unfavourable geological conditions make it impossible
12.
to estimate the cost of foundations with even an approximate
degree of accuracy at the Upper site, and seeing that the
maximum depth to rock as disclosed by the boreholes is
about 60 feet at the Lower site, whereas it had not been
reached even at a depth of 150 feet at the Upper site,
there can be no doubt as to which site is to be preferred.
We therefore advised that further investigations should
be confined to the Lower site and your instructions to that effect
were sent to Hong Kong.
13. We were asked to place ourselves in communication with
Mr. R.M. Henderson, the late Director of Public Wērks at Hong
Kong, and he visited our office on January 28th 1940, when we had
a full discussion regarding the relative advantages of the two
sites for the reservoir, and handed him the information which we
had received up to that date to enable him to consider the scheme
in all its bearings.
14.
Mr. Henderson returned the maps etc. on March 1st 1940
and indicated what appeared to him to be the most suitable
development of the scheme.
15.
Instructions dated February 26th 1940 were received
from you that one of our partners should visit Hong Kong to make
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.