PAPAKURA RELIEF

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXII, Issue 148, 8 June 1932, Page 9

PAPAKURA RELIEF

THE OVERFLOW CHANNEL IMPROVEMENT TO BE MADE. RIVERS BOARD DECISION. “That the overseer be instructed to report on improvements to the overflow channel as well as provide for the waters that will not pass under the Meanee bridge, and further to report on any breaches in the overflow banks that required repairing,” was a resolution which was agreed to yesterday by the Hawke’s Bay Rivers Board on the motion of Mr C. Lassen being amended from the following motion of which he had given notice to move: “That the overseer was instructed immediately to do such work at Powdrell’s Bend as will ensure no more water passing into the present channel as can pass Meeanee bridge, and that improvement be made to the overflow channel as will provide for the extra water diverted into it.”

“That the overseer be instructed to report on improvements to the overflow channel as well as provide for the waters that will not pass under the Meeanee bridge and further to report on any breaches in the overflow bunks that required repairing,” was a resolution which was agreed to yesterday by the Hawke’s Bav Rivers Board on the motion of Mr C. Lassen being amended from the following motion of which he had given notice to move: —“That the overseer wa instructed to immediately do such work at Powdrell’s Bend as will ensure no more water passing into the present channel as can pass Meeanee bridge, and that improvement be made to the overflow channel as will provide for the extra water diverted into it..”

In moving his original motion Mr Lassen said that it must appeal! to every member of the board. It was impossible, he said, to try and put more water, down the Tutaekuri than could pass under the Meeanee Bridge. During the last twelve months breaches had occurred in the banks that would cost £2OOO to repair. By clearing out the overflow channel the silt could be brought down on to the land at sealevel and so do some useful reclamation.

“It is the one thing that I can see that will give relief to the Papakura settilers,” said Mr J. H. Sheath in seconding the motion. “I can assure members that these settlers are watching the results of this meeting in the hope that something will be done to open up the overflow.” “OBJECTIONABLE AND UNFAIR.” Mr W. H. Campbell described the motion as being most objectionable and unfair. Mr L Harris said that there were but few settlers at Papakura for whom the position was serious. Nothing, he said, was being heard about protecting the settlers at Farndon where land in a total value would be worth twenty times as much as that at Papakura. He considered preposterous the idea of trying to make the overflow channel scour at the risk of tho Taradale and Meeanee people.

Mr Harris expressed the opinion that the motion was out of order, but the chairman ruled otherwise. Mr J. Macdonald said that if the resolution of the board to divert the river was put into effect straight away, there would be no need for the present motion. Unless the overflow was properly opened up first, he saw danger occurring to the bank between Powdrell’s Bend and John’s road. Mr H. H. Burns said he was astounded at the motion. He sympathised with the Papakura settlers for the plight they were in. but considered that it could not be improved for several months. He considered that when the break was repaired the bank should be left eighteen inches lower to act as a spillway. The district would not get any silt through it while it would mean that other parts would not be endangered. In his opinion trying to force the water into the overflow was only trying to drown people. The present channel could be widened by 20 feet on each side, and the effects taken note of.

“I know that some of the settlers will feel rather bad about this,” said Mr Burns. “They came to see me, but they came to the wrong man. I consider that this is an experiment that should not be attempted.” The chairman said that before any more water could be put down the overflow the channel had to be opened up. That was the proper place for it to go rather than to be crashing through the banks on to the settlers. He agreed with Mr Macdonald that if any obstruction was placed in the river to turn the water, the bank would have to be strengthened. A COMPREHENSIVE SCHEME. Members on the north side had always favoured a comprehensive scheme for flood control, but had always met with determined opposition even to improving the Ngaruroro. Mr R. E. Talbot in opposing the motion considered that something unfair was being put across the settlers. Many loans, he said, had been spent on the Tutaekuri, but that following the earthquake had been expended in a most maniacial manner. “We don’t appear to have a river problem at all on our side,” he said. “All we are being used for is a good milch cow for the northern end of the district and now wo are asked to do work that is absolute stupidity.”

Mr L. Harris: In tho new overflow we suggested to make it as wide as you like. We can’t offer more relief than that to Taradale and Meaenee.

In reply to Mr Talbot Mr Lassen said ho thought that the County Council would be prepared to lengthen the Brookfield bridge. Mr Macdonald said that before more water as lot clown the overflow repairs to breaches in the banks should be done and low places given attention.

At this stage Mr Lassen agreed to amend his resolution as suggested by members.

Mr Clark pointed out that certain work which had already been approved by tho hoard could be started immediately and suggested that the overseer should report on further improvements necessary.

The motion was carried by five votes to four, Hie voting being the same as on the other resolutions passed hr the board.