OBJECTIONS TO RATING AREA

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume LXIII, Issue 6522, 31 March 1939, Page 3

OBJECTIONS TO RATING AREA

LAKE FORSYTH PERMANENT DRAINAGE SCHEME 1 NOT UPHELD BY SPECIAL COURT AT LITTLE RIVER YESTERDAY Controversy over the cause of the periodical flooding' of Little River and of opinion over the benefits which would obtain to different areas by the permanent drainage of Lake Forsyth were outlined at a special inquiry held at Little River yesterday. The Court was held to hear objections to a special loan of £1000 to be raised by the Wairewa. County Council by the ratepayers included in the! special rating area. The loan is part of the programme of the county to raise the necessary money for the permanent outlet project. The whole of the County will raise a special loan of £4000 and the rest of the cost is to be borne by the Public Works Department.

In disallowing the objections raised, the Magistrate said that \ he was satisfied that the township dwellers w.ould suffer because of the lake being high. They must derive benefit. In the ease of the Kinloch sett-lei's they would receive a good access road. Mr H. A. Young. S.M. was on the bench. Mr A. I ( ". Wright appeared on behalf of the Wairewa County Council, and Mr K. M. Gresson for the sundry objectors to the l special rate. "National Job" Mr Wright said that the application was concerning a project for the drainage ot' Lake Forsyth. The county had to provide a sum of £5000 and the balance was to be provided by the Public Works Department. Of the £5000, £4000 was to be raised by special loan over the whole of the county. The work was considered an important one. The remaining £1000 was to be raised by special loan charged to the portion of the county deriving benefit from the drainage scheme. The special rating area included the main road from Birdling's Flat round both borders of the Lake to the township of Little River to Black Bridge. The main body of the objections was in the Little River township. The area to be charged was not any legal subdivision such as a riding so the ratepayers affected, under the Local Bodies Loans Act were entitled to lodge objections to the special rate. The work was regarded as of a pressing and emergency understanding and no poll was necessary. The Minister of Public Works (the Hon. R. Semple) considered that the work was a "national job." The special rating area had been compiled by the Council giving due respect to the benefits derived. Included in the scheme was an access bridge at the present mouth of the lake to provide access to outside bays and Peraki, thereby allowing children to attend school with ease and settlers to gain access to Christchurch. Present Method The permanent drainage included the boring of a tunnel. The present method was to let out the lake through a shingle bar, but there was periodical flooding which covered some of the best farm land in New Zealand. At the moment, of course, that land could not be worked. Canterbury University College owned part of the land but offered no objection to the rate because of the benefits which would accrue. Mr Gresson said that the background to the case was one of history. In the past provision was made for special lake drainage funds and it was equally true that the best use had not been made of these funds and consequently ratepayers had suffer-d. Then the consideration of a Christ-church-Akaroa highway had been mooted and the position of the lake was of the utmost importance. There had been considerable feeling over the special rating area, but the objectors had allowed the special act to go on the statute books relying on the provision of a legal hearing. The plea by the objectors was that they would not obtain one scrap more benefit on them than the whole county and the Akaroa county. They contended that the benefit was only one of safe access. The witnesses would testify that the lake would be practically dry, but that the township could be flooded by the congestion of flood waters in tortuous and willow-choked creek beds. John Joseph McGrath (Kinloch) said . that the nearest part of his property was nearly two miles from the lake and 1800 feet from the lake level. There would be little advantage from a new access road at the mouth of the lake, unless it was in better order than at present. Alexander Anson Hutchinson (Kinloch) gave similar evidence. Thomas Feather said that the road would bene-fit-all the ratepayers'in Kinloch and not only the first two settlers. "I will only , gain benefit from the access road only if the council can control the ocean," said David Barwick of Kinloch commenting on the shingle bar on which it was proposed to build the bridge and road to the main road. Sinjilar evidence was given by Mrs Eva Sarah Price, who stated that the sea would always conie over the entrance of the lake. Past Floods "I have had numerous losses in the floods in the past," said Francis

George Stanbury, commenting on the four properties bordering the lake. He said that there would be an immense benefit because of a low level during - the winter. On the other hand the township would not benefit by the scheme, as although the land was flooded, this was because of the banked up river and not because of the level of the lake. The Public Works Department had estimated the cost of straightening and clearing the river at £10,000. The mere fact of the lake being up would make no difference whatever to the flood waters. The other land he occupied, owned by Canterbury University College and native reserves would benefit the owners and not the lessees. Years ago he had signed a petition for the drainage of the lake. The opinion that flooding was not caused by the high level of the lake, but by congested creek was given by Charles Steans, J. Patterson, Wil? liam John Banks (Okuti Valley), Leslie Deering Stanbury, Mrs Alice Maude Crocket, Oliver Cromwell Stanbury, Harry Ford Marsh. William Clifton Stanbury said that although it had been rumoured that the Canterbury College Board of Governors would pay the rates on their land he had received nothingin "black and white." James Coop said that he had been in Little River for over 75 years and in the early days had carted timber on the lake. In those days the river courses had been straighter wider and had contained no willows. The river was solely responsible for the flooding. In 1870 the Canterbury Provincial council put in a wooden culvert costing £700 to drain the lake and this had been washed out to sea soon after. Engineer's Part Mr Wright contended that the objectors could not question the engineer's reports. These had to be accepted and the only question was one of benefit. The mere fact of the lake being high prevented the .water from getting away fast. It was impossible to derive equal benefit from rating, but they would all derive some benefit. Charels William Waite, Public Works Department surveyor said he had prepared a contour map of the flooded area. If the lake were up, the banking up would tend to hold the water back. The height which the water had risen was based on flood marks in a guage and the blacksmith shop and the debris at the side of the river. William Hugh Montgomery, a member of the County Council and chairman of the Finance committee considered that in a high flood, the lake backing up sometimes to 12 feet, increased the difficulty of getting the water away. The permanent outlet would benefit most of the properties included in the special rating area, although it would not altogether obviate the flooding. He and Councillor Chapman had defined the rating area for the approval of the council. He described the method used in defining the area. The attitude taken up by the council was that they could leave it to the Magistrate. The owners who were to receive special attention had included land for the special area not subject to floods. There was no differential system of rating and all ratepayers naturally did not receive an equal benefit. Edward John Keenan testified having taken levels on the Kinloch road bridge in the 1934 flood and the lake had risen 12 feet. If the height of the lake had been above normal at the start of that flood,-there would have been loss of life. The permari-' ent outlet would benefit the township as a whole. Frank Coop, chairman of the Wairewa County Council said that because of agitation his council had taken the scheme up. The council would not stand against the opinion about the flooding of the river, but [with such a small fall in the river, the backing up affected the township, i If the scheme went through a main highway would be declared to give access to Kinloch settlers. Similar evidence was given by J. McGowan and H. Lewthwaite. C. C, Kemp, registrar of Canterbury University College said that his body was willing to pay* the rates for lessees on its properties. Mr Lewthwaite also produced a

photograph showing the highest level of the lake Ke had seen. An inspection of the area was then made by the Magistrate.