ECONOMIC REPORT

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume 60, Issue 4366, 8 December 1950, Page 6

ECONOMIC REPORT

KAUERANGA RIVER VALUE OF PROPOSALS DEPARTMENT’S REQUEST As a large sum of money was involved an economic report in support of the proposal for protection work upon the Kaueranga river was essential, wrote the district engineer, Mr 0. G. Thornton, Hamilton, to the November meeting of the Hauraki Catchment Board.

An economic report should show why such a large expenditure of £6377 was necessary, continued Mr Thornten. Proper valuations and details of services that might be affected, the rate of bank erosion and the responsibility for future maintenance should be stated. The apparent lack of maintenance by the borough on previous protection works was viewed with concern by the department. If the present proposals could not be justified economically then a less costly but economic scheme should be submitted as for example an improved system of permeable pile groynes' or willow or bamboo protection work.

Another question which arose was whether there was reasonable justification for a large subsidy to move two Rouses and one shed owned by private individuals. Mr Thornton concluded by asking for the information in the near future.

It was possible that the cost could be reduced, said Mr G. Davies, chief engineer to the catchment board. It was pointed out by Mr C. H. Walsh, secretary of the board,Jthat no works could be carried out on tidal rivers without obtaining an order-in-ccuncil.

Mr G. L. Banfield took ’the view that the board had responsibilities and something would have to be done. He saw & possibility of the town of Thames -being cut in two. He was amazed at the’speed of the waters in the recent flood and at the manner in which soil was swept away. > There was little danger of such a happening, declared Mr O. G. Thornton, who stated that the rate of soil erosion at Thames was very slow indeed.

Would it not expedite the board’s deliberations if the board’s chief engineer collaborated with the Ministry of Works staff and then the combined view would be available to the board? asked Mr D. G. McMillan.

The meeting resolved that it advisable that the board’s engineer and the department’s engineer cbllaborate about the matter.