ST. JOHN'S LAKE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 16560, 8 June 1917, Page 7

ST. JOHN'S LAKE.

Sir,—As a leaseholder of a portion of the Anglican Church Estate at St. John's, I have been interested in Mr. Parr's letter, which appeared in the Herald on Monday. I think, however, that he is writing without full knowledge of the facts. When taking up my lease, I was informed of the project for draining the large area of swampy ground surrounding the lake, and also that the lake level was to be reduced many feet, and its surface circumscribed to a comparatively small area. This scheme influenced me considerably in my decision, and no doubt affected many other purchasers in a similar way. The scheme appeals to. me as being of enormous public value, creating as it does a most attractive residential area, supplying the means of making a magnificent park, and retaining a sufficient water area to ensure a beautiful and varied outlook. There appears to be no question but that Mr. Abbott is making a large financial sacrifice in the offer he has mudo, and I for one, heartily congratulate him on his project, and trust that it will secure the general approval it deserves. H. M. Smeeton.

Queen Street, Auckland.

Sir,—My letter has done good. It has drawn a much fuller statement from Mr. R. H. Abbott. Ho does not deny my main facts. He complains, however, that I am misinformed on certain details, and he rather poses as an injured public benefactor. Mr. Abbott will forgive me if I say at the outset that he too easily takes fright. Because, as president of tho Auckland Town Planning League, I ventured to criticise a proposal to destroy our only Auckland lake, he complains that I have prejudiced his scheme, and he threatens to abandon it. This indicates weakness on his part. This faintheartedness is not the attitude of a public benefactor conscious of no flaw in his armour. Ho should welcome criticism, knowing if his scheme be a good one that its merits will triumph over any opposition. I beg Mr. Abbott will not throw up the sponge so quickly. I assure him all we want is the full truth and a frank disclosure of, not some, but of all tho facts. Mr. Abbott is not, I am sure, thin-skinned. He is an astute business man, successful in many ventures. He will not, therefore, be hurt when I ask him to explain even more fully than he has done the drainage operations of a private syndicate, which seem to be inextricably mixed up with this park proposal. He has disclosed that he is part owner of an area of swamp land adjoining the lake. He says also that hie relatives are owners of some of this land. _ He further admits that a company, of which he is a director, possesses some hundreds of acres near Panmure, which, to_ use his own words, will be rendered suitable for suburban settlement oy drainage. That owners of the swamp lands have a really good thing if the lands can be drained is quite obvious. Useless swamp lands will be converted into allotments worth easily £1000 per acre. Probably no better land' speculation could be found about Auckland. Now, this swamp can only be drained by destroying the lake. This is not my opinion only. Mr. Abbolt admit* it when he says that effective drainage will reduce the level of the lake by 9ft, and leave a miserable eyesore where the lake now stands. It is clear, therefore, that Mr. Abbott and his friends are much interested. Indeed, the difficulty is to separate business from benefaction, to decide where business ends or benefaction begins in this scheme. It is admitted that we should have heard nothing about draining the lake if private owners had not wished to drain their lands. Now, I rather think Mr. Abbott controls the whole situation as regards these swamp lands. I put it to him that it would be a, much greater benefaction to leave the lake alone, or so to carry out the drainage of the other lands, if possible, as not really to damage it. I admit my proposal means that the private owners may nave to 'forego some profit. Mr. Abbott, however, as a public-spirited citizen, will not, I am sure, mind losing a little profit if thereby he can please the citizens and permit us to retain the fine scenic beauty of the lake. I notice the city is to jay the whole cost of making the park; in other words, we shall be left with the muddy bottom of the lake. I can see a very large. expense ahead for the city in handling this proposition as a park. Would the £2500 to be paid by tho city to drain these swamp lands not be better spent in giving access to the lake, and making a drive rooid 'it?. It is no reflection on Mr. Abbott to point out the business side of this transaction. He is entitled to "make a good speculation if he can, but I do not think he is justified in posing as_ an injured public benefactor. In conclusion, I welcome his suggestion to place the matter before the Auckland members of Parliament. They will consider it on its merits. In the meantime, may I ask him to show me the plans and documents relating to the matter. The fuller oar knowledge is the better. Further, lam told that the Town Planning Committee proposes to visit the spot. Would it be too much to ask Mr. Abbott to flag the proposed park and the swamp lands, so that the public may see for itself exactly what is being done. C. J. Parr.

Sir,—The total area of swamp land which completely surrounds St. John's Lake is about 171 acres. At the present time many properties have been cut up, roads formed, and a considerable number of houses built on the watershed of this swamp, and, doubtless, within the next 10 or 15 years, it must become a fairly populous district. When this eventuates, and should the swamp land remain in its present state there can be no two possible opinions that it must become a pestilential area, and I think the merest novice townplanner, must acknowledge the first work to be done would be to drain this swamp, which is now a positive eyesore, and ' in a drv season a mass of putrid water and decaying vegetable matter, and a fruitful breeding source of the mosquitoes which supply the city. At the present time it is p?3siblo for any passer-by to note by the present water-level at the Ladies Mile and Ellerslie end of the swamp -that the level of the latter is very little higher! than the normal level of the lake itself,' and thus after making due provision for! fall of water in open drains and subsidence ' of swamp, which must occur, to effectu- i ally drain the whole of tho latter would necessitate the lowering of the lake fully 10ft. In regard to. the lake itself, I may state I took systematic soundings over the whole of the lake after the formation of the Waiatarua Drainage Board some eight years ago. and found the general dip from, or near, the edge of the swamp to bottom of the lake to be 4ft to 10ft, and i thence by very slight grade to the centre of the lake, where, in a few places. I found the greatest depth to be 17ft 6in. Thus as sft out of the 10ft has to come out of the easy grade mentioned it must naturally very much reduce the area of the lake left. I may slate that to attain this object only was the Drainage Board formed. It was, however, pointed out to them that owing to the very gradual deepening of tho remaining portion of the lake, there was a grave danger, owing to shallowness of water around the outer edge, of some chains in width becoming a further raupo swamp. It was then decided to sink the outlet to sufficient depth to completely drain the lake should it be considered a"dvisablo at any future time to do so. The scheme was to let the water into a well, which could be lowered as desired, and' thence into outlet drain. Anyway the Remiiera residents can sleep in perfect bliss (except those who love the festive mosquito) in the thought that their interests will not be prejudiced by losing that same swamn and necessarily the lake practically spoilt. A question often asked is area and height of lake. The exact area is 55 acres 20 perches and normal height of surface of water 90ft above pea level. One might travel the whole of New Zealand without finding a spot better adapted for the purposes of park and recreation grounds, with its winding drive to be. and many natural gullies of rich land onlv waiting to be put into the hands of our most excellent landscape artist, Mr. Pearson, to plant with palms andpungas and convert the same into a miniature paradise. Although I am one who considered that Mr. C. J. Parr did most excellent work during his period of Mayor, of our fair city and in many other ways too i numerous, to mention, I think that bad he '•'.■ '-■:... ' V " . ■-' •'-. - ■ v • *"

tone into the matter of the St. John's ake drainage and park scheme with his usual thoroughness, that probably the let-' ters he has written would not have emanated from him. Anyway, as we are in hopes of having Mr. Parr amongst us for at least another 30 or 40 years yet, ho will have ample years to bless the day when he not only withdrew his opposition but heartily supported the scheme. J. W. Harrison, Drainage Engineer.