Market gardeners upset about drainage claim

Press, 9 July 1986, Page 9

Market gardeners upset about drainage claim

Two market gardeners in Cranford Street are angry that they have been blamed by the Christchurch Drainage Board for holding up the board’s $2.5 -million scheme to improve the upper Dudley Creek area.

A market gardener with a property on the east side of Cranford Street, Mr Gavin Case, said he objected to comments made by the board’s chief engineer, Mr Peter Hunt, on radio that the board could not start on stage one of the scheme until it had obtained a route across the market garden properties.

Mr Case said the growers were happy for the drain to cross their properties, but objected to the proposed route and that it was to be open, not piped or boxed. Mr Hunt, however, told “The Press” yesterday that he thought the market gardeners were hold-

ing up the scheme because they did not want the drain across their land.

Stage one included diverting a large part of the Dudley Creek flow upstream so that any overflow would be directed through a shallow channel from the Papanui drain across market garden land to a pumping station short of Philpotts Road, where it would be pumped through a gravity pipe across to the open drain in Philpotts Road and on to the Dudley Creek diversion. The Philpotts Road drain would become a piped drain, said Mr Hunt. Stage one would cost about $1.4 million, he said.

Mr Case said the board proposed to put an open drain about a metre deep through his 16ha property and through a market garden opposite his property on Cranford Street

owned by Mr lain Macdonald. .

Mr Macdonald, whose, 16ha property was half' covered in water yesterday, said he had told the board for about 10 or 12 years that he had no objection to a drain’s going straight across his property but he was opposed to the route planned at right angles to his property. At one point on Mr Macdonald’s property the drain would “turn a corner” and follow a path beside an adjoining property before joining with the adjoining property’s easement. The easement was at right angles instead of being straight, Mr Macdonald said. A turn in the route of the drain would increase the possibility of more flooding from an overflow. In peak flooding the water would bank up and then flow backwards, or it could cause erosion of the soil

and overflow again on to his property, he said. The growers would like the drain to be piped and run through their properties to link with Bullers drain and a further connection with the Dudley Creek diversion, thus avoiding Philpotts Road, said Mr Case. The route the Cases proposed would cost about $200,000 more once both stage one and two were completed, said Mr Hunt. Mr Case and. his son, Mr Michael Case, who work the farm together, are worried that the proposed drain would not be deep enough to take the water that would be pumped through their property in a flood or heavy rain, and so they want a concrete, piped drain rather than an open one.

“They (the board) do not seem willing to put their money where their mouths are and guarantee we would be insured against the possibility that the drain would not be able to cope,” said Mr Michael Case. “If their drains cannot take the water, then I do not want to know,” he said.

Although their property was lower than that of Mr Macdonald’s, the high level of Cranford Street prevented the worst of the flooding from flowing on to their property.

Once the drain was cut through Cranford Street, it would leave their property open to severe flooding because it was at least four or five, feet lower than that off Mr Macdonald’s property, said Mr Michael Case.

Negotiations between the market gardeners in Cranford Street and the Drainage Board had continued for about a year, but had not been successful, said Mr Hunt.

“Mr Macdonald has indicated his concern about the effects such a drain would have on his pro-

perty, and we have tried to negotiate with an adjoining property owner, but have been unsuccessful,” he said. “In order to meet the earlier suggestions of the property owners to the east of Cranford Street, we find ourselves in the position of having to do an angle drain on his property,” Mr Hunt said.

No scheme was without its risks, but the market gardeners’ perception of the risk was “slightly different” from that of the board, said Mr Hunt.

“We believe we have taken notice of their suggestions, and looked into ways of meeting their concerns about reducing the risk of flooding, but we also had to look at what would be the best for the ratepayers,” he said.

Nb scheme would be cheap, but the board believed the scheme would be beneficial to the market gardeners as well as to other residents whose properties suffered from severe flooding, Mr Hunt said.