REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON THE 
CONDITION OF THE WATER SUPPLY 
FOR THE 
CITY OF CONCORD, 
Appointed May 28, 1880. 
CONCORD: 
PRINTED BY THE REPUBLICAN PRESS ASSOCIATION. 
l88o. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE 
ON THE 
CONDITION OF THE WATER SUPPLY 
FOB THE 
CITY OF CONCORD, 
Appointed May 28, 1880. 
CONCORD: 
PRINTED BY THE REPUBLICAN PRESS ASSOCIATION. 
l880. BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS. 
Horace A. Brown, Mayor, ex-officio. 
John Kimball, 
James R. Hill, 
Samuel S. Kimball, 
William M. Chase, 
James L. Mason, 
Luther P. Durgin. 
OFFICERS. 
John Kimball, President. 
William M. Chase, Clerk. 
Charles C. Lund, Engineer. 
V. C. Hastings, Superintendent. 
At a meeting of the Board of Water Commissioners, held at 
their office May 28, 1880,— 
Voted, That hose shall not be used for sprinkling pavements 
and grounds and washing windows, from seven o’clock in the 
morning to six o’clock in the evening of each day, without special 
permission of this Board first had and obtained. 
Voted, That the President, Superintendent, and Engineer of 
this Board be a committee to investigate the practicability of ob- 
taining water from Little Pond for use in the higher portions of 
the city, and the cost thereof; also, to investigate all other plans 
for supplying water consumers on the higher lands of the city, 
with the cost and feasibility of each plan, and obtain such other 
information as may be useful to enable this Board to act intel- 
ligently in the premises. REPORT. 
To the Board of Water Commissioners for the City of 
Concord : 
Gentlemen : The committee appointed to make an exam- 
ination, and report upon the condition of the water supply 
for the city of Concord, beg leave to submit the following 
report: 
That they find that difficulty is experienced in some of 
the more elevated parts of the city in obtaining an adequate 
supply of water, and that said difficulty has increased from 
year to year as the consumption of water has increased. 
That said difficulty is not caused by reason of any scarcity 
of water in the pond, there being at the present time be- 
tween ten and eleven feet of water over the pipe which sup- 
plies the city, and that the water is now up within two feet 
of the high-water line to which the Messrs. Holden could 
hold the pond by their dam when the Water-works were 
begun. 
That said difficulty arises from the fact that at certain 
hours of the day, when the largest amount of water is being 
used, so much water is being drawn upon the lower ground 
that the head is so reduced that it will not flow up to the 
houses on the hill. 
For the purpose of demonstrating this fact, your com- 
mittee caused the water-pressure gauge in the office of the 
Water Board to be watched continuously for one week, be- 
ginning June 18 and ending June 19, and obtained the 6 
average pressure for each hour during that period, and have 
prepared the accompanying profile, which indicates the rate 
of flow of the water during each hour. 
These observations were made very soon after the vote 
of the board was promulgated which limited the use of hose. 
If it had been made before that order, no doubt the hourly 
averages obtained would have been considerably larger. 
These observations further indicated that the largest con- 
sumption of water is generally between the hours of 7 and 
11 o’clock in the forenoon ; and that from 9 o’clock in the 
evening till 4 o’clock in the morning, the least water is 
used, and generally during that period there would be no 
difficulty in obtaining water at any point in the system 
within two feet of the level of the water in Long Pond. 
The height of the water in the pond was 177 feet above 
the datum-line of levels. 
The summits of some of the hills on the streets leading 
west from Main street are as follows : 
Pleasant street, .... 122 feet. 
Warren “ .... 121 
School u .... 142 
Centre “ . . . . 133 
Franklin “ .... 124 
Church “ .... 140 
So that, with the present stage of water in Long Pond, 
the head of water on said summits would be as follows: 
Pleasant street, .... 55 feet. 
Warren “ .... 56 
School “ .... 35 
Centre “ .... 44 
Franklin “ .... 53 
Church “ .... 37 
In the hours of the day when the most water was being 
drawn during the week covered by our experiment, we found 
that water must have been flowing through our main pipe 
at the rate of 1,282,920 gallons per day. That was the 7 
average rate of flow for one hour on Tuesday, between 1 
and 2 o’clock p. m., and the entire amount of water con- 
sumed that day was 771,205 gallons. So, that for the hour 
of largest draft, we drew at nearly double the average rate 
for the entire day. 
Now, if it were required to deliver 1,282,920 gallons here 
in twenty-four hours, at an even rate of flow, it would re- 
quire 22.21 feet of head to deliver it here ; so that on the 
summit of School street hill, there remains only 12.79 feet 
available head,—a head hardly sufficient to deliver water 
into the basement of some of the dwellings in that vicinity. 
And since the order limiting the use of hose, and since the 
above observations were made, there have been periods in 
the day when residents there could not draw water in the 
lowest faucets in their cellars. Before the order they were 
in that dilemma for a considerable part of the day when 
they required the most water for domestic purposes. If a 
fire had then broken out in that vicinity, it is doubtful if the 
hydrants would have yielded water for the use of the en- 
gines. It follows, therefore, that when the time arrives 
when the city consumes its quota of one million gallons per 
day, there will be hours in the day when we shall be draw- 
ing at nearly double that rate ; and if we are dependent on 
our present pipe to bring it here, we shall experience a loss 
of head of 57.68 feet, and the area where the residents 
could not obtain water during the hours of largest draft, 
for either domestic or fire purposes, would be very largely 
increased. 
Our water pipe, therefore, is too small to deliver that 
amount of water and keep up sufficient head to supply the 
highest parts of the compact portion of the city. 
We now propose to discuss the remedy or remedies for 
this state of things. 
1. And the first remedy is a more rigid economy in the 
use of water. 8 
Our city has purchased the right to take from Long Pond 
one million gallons of water per day, on an average, or 
three hundred sixty-five millions of gallons per year. This 
quantity will supply 50 gallons per day each for 20,000 
people. 
We estimate that about 7,000 people are depending on 
Long Pond water. It may not be amiss here to give a 
statement of the quantity per day, per individual, used in 
various cities, and we take the following from the remarks 
recently made by the Hon. E. H. Rollins, in a discussion in 
the LT. S. Senate in regard to the use of water in the city 
of Washington, because he has collected the statistics ready 
for our use. 
Providence uses .... 25 gallons. 
Fall River “ . . . . 26 “ 
Lowell “ . . . 33 “ 
Lynn “ . . . 34 “ 
Rochester “ . . . 35 “ 
Columbus u . . . . 43 “ 
Lawrence “ . . . 44 “ 
Milwaukee “ . . . . 53 “ 
Cambridge “ . . . 55 “ 
St. Louis •“ . . . . 56 “ 
Cleveland “ . . . 56 “ 
Cincinnati ‘‘ . . . 57 “ 
Philadelphia “ . . • 58 “ 
Brooklyn “ . . . 63 “ 
Montreal “ . . . 69 “ 
Boston “ . . . 75 “ 
Toronto “ . . . 77 “ 
Buffalo “ . . . 87 “ 
Detroit “ 105 “ 
Chicago “.*... 119 u 
New York “ . . . . 100 “ 
Albany “ . . . 80 “ 
Jersey City “ . . . . 99 “ 
London,England, uses ... 29 “ 
Liverpool, “ “ ... 23 “ 
Glasgow, Scotland, u . . . 50 “ 
Edinburgh, “ “ . . . 38 “ 9 
Dublin, Ireland, uses . . 25 gallons. 
Paris, France, “ . . 28 “ 
Torres, “ “ ... 22 “ 
Toulouse, “ “ ... 26 “ 
Lyons, “ “ ... 20 “ 
Leghorn, Italy, “ . . 30 “ 
Berlin, Prussia, “ . . 20 “ 
Hamburgh, “ “ ... 33 “ 
An average in these thirty-five cities of 48 gallons per cap- 
ita, very nearly ; and this, it should be understood, includes 
its use for all purposes,—domestic, mechanical, and fire,— 
and includes the supplies for tanneries, steam-boilers, pub- 
lic watering-troughs, and fountains, and the various other 
industries appertaining to the several cities. 
During the week of our observations above mentioned, 
we used on 
Sunday, .... 297,020 gallons. 
Monday, .... 501,645 “ 
Tuesday, .... 771,205 “ 
Wednesday, . . . 753,046 “ 
Thursday, .... 673,057 “ 
Friday, .... 705,078 
Saturday, .... 625,880 “ 
Total, .... 4,326,931 
Average per day, . . 618,133 “ 
This average rate would be 50 gallons per day for 12,362 
people, nearly equal to the population of the whole city. 
The largest day’s draft, 771,205 gallons, would give 50 
gallons per day for 15,424 people, a number larger than the 
recent census shows our population to be in the whole city; 
so that we are using very nearly 100 gallons per capita per 
day for the population dependent on Long Pond water, or 
double the average quantity used per capita in the thirty-five 
cities above mentioned. 
Such an excessive draft per capita was not contemplated 
when the Water-works were constructed. But it was con- 10 
sidered that an allowance of 50 gallons per day per capita 
would be ample, as it really is; and that such excessive 
draft as we are now making would not happen till at least 
14,000 people were using the water, when it was considered 
that a distributing reservoir might be necessary to equalize 
the supply. If we did not consume more than 50 gallons 
per day per capita now, no difficulty would be experienced 
in obtaining water on School street hill. 
But we are here met with the suggestion, that we have 
paid for a million gallons per day, and we want to use wa- 
ter freely within that limit. That is very true. But the 
Water-works were constructed,—as other water-works are,— 
upon certain calculations as to population and rates per 
capita, and it was not considered, and it is very doubtful 
whether those who had the work in charge ought to have 
considered, that the water was to be used for water motors, 
and the wholesale irrigation of lawns, gardens, and fields 
even, in the lavish and profuse manner in which our people 
have grown accustomed to use it. The liberal use of water 
as a sanitary measure is not to be condemned, and it is 
desirable that the supply should be ample. Everybody has 
had the idea that we were not drawing as much water as wTe 
had paid for, and therefore nobody had a right to complain 
of its use in any way. But our system was not designed 
for that, but was designed to be sufficient until 20,000 popu- 
lation should need to be supplied by it at an average rate of 
50 gallons per day. 
If self-closing faucets were put on all the service-pipes, 
we have no doubt it would do much to bring the use of 
water within reasonable limits. 
2. The cutting-off of a part of the elevated portion of the 
city from the present system, and creating a high-service 
district, to be supplied from some other source than through 
one Long Pond main. 
It has been suggested that a high-service district might 
be supplied by laying a pipe to Little Pond. The elevation 11 
of Little Pond is 480 feet above the river, so that abundant 
head could be had for any purpose. But your committee, 
after considering that subject, and visiting and examining 
Little Pond, came to the conclusion that the people of Con- 
cord would hardly be satisfied with Little Pond water unless 
the entire basin of the pond should be thoroughly cleaned 
out, and cleared of vegetable matter,—an undertaking 
involving a very large expense,—and that the volume of 
water which could be relied on from that source would not 
be sufficient to justify the expense. 
The construction of a reservoir to supply the high-service 
district, to be filled by pumping, has been suggested. But 
with our present draft of water we cannot spare any from 
our main to be pumped into a high-service reservoir; and if 
that plan should be adopted, it would involve the laying a 
main from Long Pond to the pumping-station, that being 
the only satisfactory source of supply. 
3. The third remedy will be to lay another main to Long 
Pond. 
Basing our calculation upon the use of one million 
gallons per day, it will involve a loss of head of 14.42 feet, 
provided the water comes with an even flow for the twenty- 
four hours. During the hours when the draft will be at 
the rate of two millions of gallons, the loss of head will be 
57.68 feet. But if we have two 14-inch pipes, it will involve 
a loss of head of only 3.6 feet to deliver at the rate of one 
million gallons per day, and 14.4 feet to deliver at the rate 
of two million gallons per day; and with this state of 
things, no difficulty will ever be experienced on School 
street hill. 
The cost of such a new main to Long Pond would proba- 
bly be about the same as the cost of the old one, if laid of 
the same material,—$3.13 per foot, or $56,340 for the main; 
and the cost of making sufficient and suitable connections 
with the present system would bring the total up to $60,000. 
If a cast-iron main pipe should be used instead of the 12 
cement pipe, it could be laid for about the same price. But 
we have not figured on all the details of such a work with 
its various connections, but give the above as an approxi- 
mate estimate of the cost. 
This plan, if it should be adopted, would keep up a better 
head of water under our draft than we should be likely to 
obtain from a reservoir. 
4. The fourth expedient will be to construct a reservoir 
at some convenient point near where Washington, Centre, 
and School streets concentrate, at such an elevation that Long 
Pond water will flow into it through the present system of 
pipes, to the end that it shall fill in the night-time and in 
times of small draft of water, and be ready to be used in 
times of larger draft. 
We have remarked before, that our main pipe was too 
small to deliver at the rate of one million gallons per day, 
and keep up a sufficient head to supply the more elevated 
parts of the city; and this is because of the great loss of 
head caused by friction of the water through the long main. 
The distance from the State House to Long Pond may be 
taken at 6000 yards, and we assume that to be substan- 
tially the centre of gravity of the water system. From the 
State House to the site of the proposed reservoir is about 
1200 yards; and a 14-inch pipe, or its equivalent, 1200 
yards long, will deliver a given amount of water per minute 
or per day, with a loss of one fifth the head required for the 
same pipe 6000 yards long. 
If, then, we lose 22.21 feet head on our Long Pond main, 
we should lose only 1-5 of that head if our source of supply 
were only 1200 yards off. (1-5 of 22.2 = 4.44 feet, very 
nearly.) And in this case we could maintain a pressure 
which would cause the water to flow within five feet of the 
level of the water in the reservoir, when we are drawing at 
a maximum rate of 1,282,920 gallons per day. The reser- 
voir then would act as an equalizer, or kind of balance- 
wheel, storing water in times of small draft to deliver to 13 
us in times of large draft, with but little loss by friction be- 
cause of its proximity to the place where the water is to be 
used. 
Such a reservoir, in our opinion, should be constructed 
large enough to contain at least ten days’ supply for the 
city at the lowest stage of water in the pond. At the 
average stage of water in the pond it should contain twenty 
days’ supply ; so that, in case any accident should happen 
to our main pipe, we should have an adequate supply of 
water to fall back upon while repairs could be made. At 
the present time we are so dependent on Long Pond that 
an accident to our main, which would require a week or ten 
days to repair, would involve very serious consequences as 
to the interruption of our domestic supplies, and might, too, 
involve very disastrous consequences in case of fire. We 
have estimated the cost of such a reservoir, of such size 
that it would contain one million gallons, or a day’s supply 
for each foot in depth, and find it would involve about 80,000 
cubic yards of excavation and embankment, which, in the 
situation proposed, would cost 
50 cents per yard, .... $40,000 
The cost of the gate-house, and outlet 
and inlet pipes, we estimate 8,000 
The cost of making connection with the 
present system, we estimate 5,000 
This reservoir would contain 30,000,000 gallons of water 
when full; but it could be filled only when the water in 
Long Pond was up to the higli-water mark in that pond—an 
event which happens very seldom, and has occurred only 
once since the Long Pond dam was built. 
Taking the land damages and contingent expenses into 
account, we think the construction of such a reservoir would 
cost $60,000. 
We have thus presented the facts which seem to us proper 
to be borne in mind in determining what to do. 14 
The first remedy suggested is the cheapest, and to apply 
it our people must either voluntarily deny themselves, or 
the more disagreeable method of compelling them to use 
less water must be resorted to. If meters were placed on 
every supply-pipe, and people compelled to pay for the water 
they use at meter rates, they would be more careful. But 
the expense of applying meters to every service-pipe would 
amount to $20 each, or about $40,000 for the whole, which 
would have to be paid either by the individual consumers, 
or by the city. 
The second remedy we lay out of the question for the 
present. 
The third and fourth remedies will entail an additional 
expenditure for our Water-works of say $60,000, whichever 
may be adopted ; and we leave it to you, assisted by the ad- 
vice and counsel of the city government, and of the citizens 
and tax-payers generally, to determine what is to be done. 
We may add, however, that we believe an untaxable bond 
of the city of Concord, in small amounts, can be sold, bear- 
ing interest at 4 per cent. 
The recent change in rates, by which families of more 
than two persons pay one dollar less, and families of two 
and under pay two dollars less, than they did under the 
rates first established, in the first instance reduced the 
income from the water rates about $2,400. A restoration 
of the old rates would meet the interest of the above expen- 
diture of $60,000. 
Respectfully submitted, 
JOHN KIMBALL, 
V. C. HASTINGS, 
CHAS. C. LUND, 
Committee. Diagram Showing Loss of Head and Rate of Flow of Water in Concord, N. H., June 13 to June 19, inclusive. 
&aU</7it 
>e.r, 
/134-3 
/6 04 IT 
ZZ (itl, 
Z o' 3 *9 
27 7 83" 
30 011 
3Z0U 
$4-01'? 
Si'Ho 
37 bio 
4o s 4 $ 
yVv^r 
Ztt% 
Vi 762 
4%n<£ 
*07*7 
*i<3$o 
*33-03 
SSJPkAytjS-TIW. 
The vertical lines represent hours of the day. The horizontal lines represent feet in height. The distance in feet between the horizontal line marked “ Level of Water in 
the Pond" and the shaded line represents the loss of head in feet required to deliver water here as fast as required. The figures at the right show the hourly flow corresponding 
to the loss of head opposite.