NOT WELL FOUNDED

Evening Star, Issue 23056, 7 September 1938, Page 8

NOT WELL FOUNDED

ATTITUDE OF WEST HARBOUR COUNCIL DRAINAGE OF RECLAMATION AREA The contention of members of the West Harbour Council that there “ was something behind it ” when a proposal was made by the City Council concerning the drainage of land reclaimed from the harbour by the Harbour Board does not seem to be well founded. Inquiries made this morning show that the Borough Council does not properly appreciate the position. Tho City Council’s request was for the transfer of approximately 192 acres on Signal Hill from the borough to the city. Mention was made in the letter from the city that the West Harbour Council seemed concerned at tho loss of rate revenue amounting to about £6l per annum, but it was pointed out that to offset this the city would require to take over approximately 60 chains of the Dunedin-Port Chalmers highways together with five street lights. This would involve the City Council in an increased cost of £379 per annum and would save the West Harbour Council £55 per annum. The need for the transfer of the land to tlie city is contained in the proposals of the Harbour Board to subdivide its lands between Wickliffe street and Black Jack’s Point. Before such a subdivision can be completed it is necessary to take into account the land which it is suggested should be included in the city, as the whole of this land is within the catchment area which is the outlet across the Harbour Board’s property. It is recognised that there will be a considerable liability on the city as a result of the drainage of those areas, and for foul sewage the Drainage Board will require to provide a pumping station in tho vicinity of the Leith Canal, but it is also recognised that the council cannot hamper the Harbour Board in its development programme, and that the capital expenditure involved will have to he faced. Although the building (a wool store) on the Harbour Board’s land beyond the city boundary is drained to a septic tank, it will not be possible to deal with the whole of the drainage of the area by this means, and a comprehensive and involved drainage scheme will have to be undertaken at the cost of the Drainage Board and Harbour Board before further development of the area proceeds. As the Drainage Board has no jurisdiction over any land outside the city of Dunedin and the Borough of St. Kilda, it is essential _ that the area should he brought within the city boundary, and to deal with the Harbour Board’s area alone, without the natural watershed in the ream thus making an artificial and ridiculous boundary, would provide unnecessary difficulties in dealing with the whole problem of drainage.