Flood ponding compensation

Press, 15 August 1980, Page 4

Flood ponding compensation

Property owners in the; I Heathcote Valley would |i probably be compensated bv < the Christchurch Drainage Board if future flood reten- i tion measures caused more water problems, the board’s works committee decided yesterday. The works committee I recommended general compensation principles for i areas affected by temporary ; ponding of stormwater to ease downstream flooding i during storms. If there were a net -increase in loss of value for such properties — over the ! loss experienced now during I flooding — compensation I should be paid, board mem- i bers said. i The question had arisen ( because of flood retention survey work being done now as part of Woolston Cut i financing investigations. I Although a sanction for ; the Woolston Cut channel i loan had been approved in principle, the actual sanction i depended on the Ministry of ; Works and Development i being satisfied that other i

long-term flood control! measures were being considered. More study of possible channel improvements, drainage improvements, and floodwater retention in “holding” basins of Cashmere and Hoon Hay had been required. Some property owners had noticed the survey work and asked about possible compensation if their land were included in a ' floodwater ponding scheme. Board members said that landowners should be compensated 'for buildings flooded by higher water retention levels, and farm management disruptions should be considered for compensation. Board engineers said that ponding areas would be designed so that ponding basins were emptied as soon as possible after floods to reduce pasture damage. Detailed compensation arrangements were not needed yet, since no flood retention schemes had been proposed or adopted.