FLOOD DAMAGE REPAIRS

Taranaki Daily News, 4 September 1935, Page 3

FLOOD DAMAGE REPAIRS

BEDFORD ROAD REQUEST J DANGER AND INCONVENIENCE. WORKS IN INGLEWOOD COUNTY. Steps to repair washouts caused by / the February floods on Bedford Road /a/ near Surrey Road with the two-fold ob- '// ject of giving the settlers access to their properties for their farm implements and to remove possible danger spots were urged by a deputation of settlers which waited on the Inglewood County Coun- '/g cil yesterday. The deputation comprised Messrs. S. Chapman, F. Lawrence and J. , F. Pettit. - ' ' His view of the state of Bedford Road where he alleged there was the possi- // bility of a serious accident, with the // probability of the council being involved S in an action for heavy damages, was given by Mr. S. Chapman. • There were three wash-outs in which the deputation was directly interested. Three pipes ; had been washed out from a culvert in a stream near Surrey Road, leaving a narrow piece of road just sufficient for a two-wheel track which irad been very dangerous to cart over. Nothing had been done until last week, when four men had effected improvements to the ruts of the narrow road that was left but had not replaced the pipes, so that the road was still in a dangerous state. There was another dangerous place at the Mangamawhiti stream, where, owing to a wing wall having been built, he alleged, too short at the time the Public Works Department was building the bridge, there had been a scour during the February floods, with the result that there was now a dangerous drop of 15 feet from tlie edge of the metal. ; < Mr. F. Lawrence pointed out that there was also a scour under one of the piers, . vfi with the probability that if left until another flood occurred the bridge might be lost altogether. Members of the deputation had made themselves liable for a special rate for that bridge. Mr. Chapman asked that something should be done to a big wash-out at the next stream on the road, as the settlers who were anxious to prepare ground for cropping were unable to get any imple-

ments across. •OFFERED TO BUILD BRIDGE. ! Mr. Chapman pointed out that some years ago he • had offered to build a /O bridge with maire stringers over that stream for £22 and pay for the stringers, but the Public Works Department engineer and the council’s consulting engineer favoured the construction of a four feet pipe culvert with filling at a cost of £75, and asked him to contribute £25. As he '/• knew that the 4ft. pipes would not :• carry the flood water he declined' to contribute. However, when the Public Works Department put the road through the pipes had been put in, with the result that the whole lot had now been washed \ away. He still felt sore at the remark of a previous councillor, who had stated that the land was only fit to carry monkeys. If the bridge had been built there would have been no trouble, whereas now it would, be no easy matter to effect repairs. Cr. Stachurski said the council had been endeavouring to secure a subsidy on the work in order to get it done as economically as possible for the ratepayers. Cr. Pettit asked that the bridge should be painted white as it was very difficult for a stranger to see at night. Flood water from the paddocks flowing along the road had caused scour at one place. Replying to the county engineer, Mr. Chapman considered that at the first wash-out the pipes would prove big enough to cope with any future floods. He considered that the damage had been done-by timber washed down the creeks and blocking the mouths of the culverts. ,/ That timber had all gone . now. Mr. Chapman said that for over 50 years he had been paying rates, before even one ' shovel had been used on the road to enable him to get on the land. /- The chairman (Cr. A. Corkill) thanked the deputation for placing its cdse before the council. -■ . ’/J Mr. Chapman: That sort of nonsense is no good to me. DIFFICULTIES. RECOGNISED. ■ The chairman said that the council ■ knew the difficulties that faced the set- / / tiers, who had the sympathy of the council. The previous council had taken steps to raise a loan of £lOOO to do a portion of the work, but that was not /; considered satisfactory and a proposition ./ had been submitted to the Public Works ■ ' Department that the council was pre- / pared to raise £lOOO towards the cost of // repairing Bedford Road and replacing the bridges on the whole length from Surrey to Egmont Road. The council had already replaced three bridges to give settlers an outlet and was attending to three more, but it could go no further as it was a costly job. One or two culverts / -t: would help some settlers, but if one culvert was needed all were needed. It was hoped to secure subsidies for the work already carried out. The engineer estimated that the work of replacing the pipes and filling at the first wash-out and constructing a rubble / wall at the bridge could be carried out for £25.

The council authorised the engineer to carry out the two works as estimated. All applications from county councils for assistance towards repair of flood damage to roads had now been reviewed, stated a letter from the Hon. J. Bitchener, Minister of Works. The Inglewood County Council had been 'granted £1 for £1 subsidies totalling £l44s’for bridges, and he, had now been able to allocate £5OO to the council for repair of damage to roads from the small flood damage vote on the Consolidated Fund appropriations. Local bodies in Taranaki were promised subsidy at the rate of £1 15s per man week on labour by the Unemployment Board, and his department’s contribution towards roads would be paid on the basis of £1 for £l, with a limitation of £5OO on expenditure in excess of the Unemployment Board’s assistance.