DRAINAGE WORK

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 5, 4 December 1928, Page 3

DRAINAGE WORK

MANAWATU BOARD MEETING. The monthly meeting of tho Manawatu Drainage Board was held yesterday, Mr P. J. Small presiding. Other members present were Messrs E. W. I. Collins, E. Wood, M. A. Eliott, R. Tanner and D. Collis. The auditor-general returned the board’s balance-sheet, no “tags” being attached. The Manawatu Racing Club wrote agreeing to the decision of the recent conference with reference to the carrying away of flood waters at Awapuni. Mr Eliott asked the engineer if he did not consider that the action of flood waters had had the effect of snapping the bolts on the doors of the Bourke’s Drain floodgate. It seemed that the holts were not long enough. In reply, Mr A. H. M. Wright (the engineer) stated that the evidence indicated that the bolts had been deliberately broken. The flood could, obviously, not fasten the doors open with wire as had also been done. The gates were undoubtedly being interfered with. This view was supported by the chairman. ENGINEER’S REPORT. The engineer reported as follows: “No. 1 Line Drain which was badly blocked by timber during tho recent flood lias been cleared. A block in the main drain at Mr Holden’s boundary has been cleared. Floodgate joint outlet: The two lower floodgates broken off during the recent flood have boon rehung and the lifting cables removed. An examination after the flood shows that considerable scour has taken place on hanks outside the floodgate in places undermining foundation of the wing walls. As the Kairanga County Council and Highways Board are interested in maintenance of the bridge, I would suggest that a conference of their engineers and myself be held on the site in order that a method of repairing damage approved of by all may be decided on. Widening and straightening of the Mangaone stream has been carried out over a length of 17 chains in Mr Egliuton’s property above the Rangitikei Lino Bridge, and the men arc now widening in Mr Russell’s property below the bridge. Some protective work lias also been carried out in Mr Russell’s property where erosion was taking place during tho last flood.” MANGAONE STREAM. In his special report on the Mangaone stream Air Wright stated as follows: —“In the report received by your hoard some time ago the work was divided into three subdivisions:—(l) Bank, pipe culvert and floodgate at an estimated cost of £430; (2) raising of existing privately owned bridge by 4 feet, removing the centre pier and making the centre span 25 feet, estimated cost £150; (3) removing willows and obstructions from stream, estimated cost £l5O. An alternative scheme is to remove the bridge from the new road on tho northern side of the stream to connect with. Eoxton Line. Bank culvert and floodgate: The cost of this work depends on whether the alternative scheme is adopted in which- case the roadway would be taken over the bank and also to some extent on what conditions the owner of the adjoining property gives the board an indemnity against possible damage. Until such indemnity is obtained, it would be unwise for the board to undertake this work. Bridge: After making an examination of bridge, I am inclined to think that it is now in too advanced a state of decay to interfere with and, to attempt to raise the deck level 4 feet and increase the centre span to 25 feet would practically mean reneiving the whole structure as no doubt tho owner would insist on its being left in at least as safe a condition to carry traffic as at present. I am uncertain as to the price the native owners asked for the land previously, but I think it would be advisable to again approach them before doing anything with the bridge. With reference to the removal of willows and obstructions in the stream below the bridge, I am of the opinion that a larger sum than previously allotted could ho spent with advantage on this work and there appears to be nothing to prevent this work being commenced at once. My recommendations are briefly as follow: That a sum of £250 he authorised for expenditure on the work of removing willows and other obstructions below the bridge and that the work be commenced as soon as the consent of the other contributing bodies is obtained; that the native owners be again approached to see if they will now accept a reasonable compensation for allowing the roadway to be taken through their property; that all other work be held in abeyance until their' reply is received and considered.” Discussing the engineer’s special report, attention centred round that portion relating to the bridge. It was the general opinion that it would be unwise to interfere with it till the board’s liability and responsibility had been defined. Accordingly the matter was referred to the board’s solicitor and the adoption of the report was held over.

The monthly report was adopted. Messrs Small, Collis and Tanner were appointed a deputation to wait upon the Borough Council with a view to getting that body to agree to its contribution of 7 per cent, to the maintenance of the Managone stream being increased.