AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 14304, 25 February 1910, Page 7

AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL

1 COX'S CREEK DRAINAGE. . Jjjjy - ENGINEER'S PROPOSAL. % ' l| -.TEMPORARY REMEDY: •';' 6 ~ud City Council met last night, iu Mivor (Mr. C. D. Grey) presiding, tf-re also P **ent, Mc*n. B. -Tude- ' ■ At riser J- M. Mennie, G. E. Bead, K'p j.'Nerheny, B. T. Michaels, * \ Thompson, P. M. Mackay, A. J. Xtrican, H. M. Smeeton, C. J. Parr, and L.-J.'!Bagnall. • ' ", ' : .'... !:' The question at : issue between the Coun--1 and the Grev Lvnn Borough Council deeming Cox's : Creek drainage g was the Tbiect of further discussion. .It .will be i'."'.limbered that the Grey Lynn. Council L been seeking to bring about a. conference with : the City Council, with .the vie „. of coming to some joint arrangement for remedying the condition of Cox's.• Creek, ffhich is 'declared to be dangerous: to public .health. -' At ;the; previous : meeting of : the City "Council the request for a. conference wW s refused, and ; the matter was sent back to the Works 1 Committee for further con:sideration. . ' .. '•■' '..' 'v '■:■'- The Grey Lynn town' clerk forwarded | a copy of a resolution passed at the last meet- '''■ ing" the vGrey. -Lynn Council protesting against the matter being, again referred to !ithe Works Committee and urging that the : ' request for a conference - be. reconsidered. | ■ Importing on ' the ; whole question the . Works Committee recommended / that the v! proposals contained in a report furnished •' '■■, by the city engineer :'■ (Mr. W. 'E. Bush) be sent on to the Grey Lynn , Borough: S Council for 1 consideration. The- report of ';the engineer,' referred to I in thelcommittee's recommendation, ■ was to the effect that the- statement- that .he had been opposed to any measures* being taken v for the improvement of the nui--4 sance alleged :to exist :at Cox's' Creek did not.con ectly describe his attitude. ; When the matter was- first called ; to- his attention in connection' with the" Jervois golly se'*er he i advised . that act ion ■: be deferred until such time as' the settlement:of, the : main drainage scheme should enable- him to determine lines -and levels, of the intercepting sewer to ; ultimately receive the drainage of Jervois gully and that, once ■ri these latter $ ,data ? were obtained, ihe . was -1 prepared to proceed with the work when authorised. Plans had 'already" been- submitted to the Council, and he was prepared to start the t work; (to cost about £1100) itnrnediately. ■ ■He : . had;reported; in July, 1908, suggesting: various alternatives for dealing with the nuisance, inter ■ alia, ■an open concrete culvert.'in' Cox.'s ;i Creek itself, some 2000 ft long, - and•' a ' reinforced .3 concrete or masonry,, closed culfvert of similar length. . At the time both schemes, were felt, both - by the borough ;{ and the j Council, j to,< be" impracticable. -'At a; visit of'inspection iby members' of -; the \Y<rks i Committee, the. Grey Lynn Council, and Drs. Valintine > and , Purdy, a suggestion was made Jby the borough \ engineer to construct an open timber culvert large enough to take the storm water draining . into Cox's Creek, and running 'from;. the ;; present * GreyiLynnV sewer > outfall to the : ? north-west side of Cox's Creek: bridge "(to cost between £5000 and .' £4000). : 1; It-was; c then stated ■) by- the two doctors - and him- , self * that I such;' a scheme, while - valuable

as: a temporary method : of ? dealing vith storm water preliminary to reclamation, ' was ':not.-sufficiently, valuable, from i, the sanitary. point of view of the district adjoining the. J creek, to : justify the expenditure on that score alone. He'still-held the;same opinion. ■_-.*".' '•.._ % ■■<)■• ■'-. .;■ "If ;' the' only - desire ' on the r part of the ( borough and fity," , continued the engineer, j " is to provide means of carrying off sewage at present- discharging into the creek'. and sdischarging.; it :.. instead on the > north-west rside of 'Cox's Creek bridge, I . can : suggest a* far cheaper.method of . constructing a timber v flume of«■ 2300 ft in . length from the present- outfall lof the' '' '-' Grey Lynn.',2lin sewer to the north-west

side of. the bridge to cost, exclusive '.of connections, about £1150.." That cost, went on; Mr. Bush, would ..have». to 4ie borne proportionately by the city and borough, • and) the cost of connections by the Coun- , cil working them. From a sanitary stand- , point.the scheme 'would be » quite as effective as the other, but'it would have Mjs no v value beyond 'the period * when the - main . drainage scheme was ■'-■ completed. Three hundred and thirty-five- acres of the city drained into the creek, and '620 • > acres of. Grey Lynn, ; the * proportion .. being 36 per eent. to 65 per ce«t. He . had held it to be his clear duty 'to- advise , the - Council as to . what, -in ..his opinion, , was-the sanitary ; value •of any ■ scheme . put before them, and to prevent them § paying ;an undue proportion ; "of 'the scheme propounded by the borough.,.. >.'., The Works Committee further recom-mended-that, the; extension of the city fewer; as ' previously determined upon, should be proceeded with at once. . ' Mr. _ Parr thought the proposals 1 of the ';»J?"ieer were highly satisfactory and did a^ y n- th ■ the ' necessity for a ■ -.conference ' with Grey Lynn. He applauded the'suggestion for a temporary flume. "-'' ! ' f, *"■ Thompson was" very, pleased to see v the Works Committee go 'as far as'''it had now gone. He had continually "barracked" lor. the remedy of the Cox's Creek evil, and would never re^sti satisfied 'until': he -could go • there and seethe work in hand.' ' '■-■'. . ■.■.:■■ ■: Mr. Bagnall ; said the scheme .'was only a wmppry cure, but the committee were Hopeful- that; it would prove effectual in 'the . j Meantime. : :'; ,;.■'•■.-■■- --•: :'-■,> <.'"•-.-•■: • "/:.";•;: : Mr.; Mennie said the ■■ proposals. did - not conform. entirely with what Grey! Lynn wanted ! They were a modification of "the ■ on nal plan, though tho city engineer said -,-.-.; they -would meet 'the present* needs of " the >nn£fit' At the samo " time he .would" have j*ed 'to have seen the proposed conference ;. ; The committee's report and v recommendations were carried. ... i :"•:■■; ■■■-■ '. >;0 In connection with a' petition from'; Wharf «oad and Richmond-street ■, residents against '. l " extension of ithe"sewers discharging into vox* Creek, unless those ■■ were ' extended "to ■ » Mint well hoyond the guHv at the foot ™'those streets, •it was agreed to replv that ■' «- » intended to terminate the ; proposal • 'i!!K" bevond * tho foot of Wharf' Road . *™. Richmond-street. - -" ■ - • -•"■•' ' - - ' ■ -♦ ''" ::■ '