CREEK OUTLET

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVII, Issue 23181, 20 April 1945, Page 4

CREEK OUTLET

Blockage During Recent Flood Investigation Into Cause Sought The committee of residents of the South End set up recently to watch the interests of householders in the Saltwater Creek area who suffered in the recent flood met I last night and decided to ask the i Borough Council to investigate the I cause of the blockage of the outlet I during the flood. Mr J. G. Leckie opened the discussion by stating that the flood was a phenomenal one, and the damage was excessive. That being so. he thought that some action should be taken in regard to the outlet. He understood that the outlet was blocked, and that photographs of the position had been taken. If the outlet was blocked, then it stood to reason that the water would back up on the airport, which had cost the ratepayers £15,000. Unless there was an inquiry into the matter and something was done, flooding would occur again, and life might be lost, to say nothing of damage to private property. He moved that the Borough Council be asked to carry out an investigation into the condition of the outlet at the time of the flood. The motion was seconded by Mr T. Dorkins, who asked why the old outlet was taken away. He had been given to understand that the present outlet at the time of the flood was taking all the water it could. If the outlet was lower than the banks of the creek flood water would get away over the top of the concrete boxing. Mr G. Rae said the correct procedure would be to make their request to the South End Ratepayers’ Association, who could appoint representatives to act with old residents of Saltwater Creek as a deputation to the Works Committee of the Council. He thought that action along those lines would be more effective than a letter. He moved an amendment along these lines. The amendment was seconded by Mr R. Brown. Mr G. R. Hayward said that Cr. W. L. Richards had informed him that the Public Works Department had stated that engineers would investigate the position and would do their best to rectify it. He suggested that the matter be held over until Cr. Richards arrived. “Outlet a Failure” Cr. Richards later informed the meeting th-- on account of the controversy concerning the airport, the Council was not taking any action in the meantime. Immediately after the flood, the Minister of Works I the Hon. R. Semplei inspected the airport, and said that the Department's engineers would investigate the cause of the trouble. Later, photographs were taken to show that the outlet did not function at all during the flood. The engineers were now of the opinion that the outlet as at present constructed was a failure. The creek area had to be safeguarded, but it would not be safeguarded by the present outlet. Neither the outlet nor the airport had anything to do with the Council at the present time. It was all under the Public Works Department, and Mr Semple had given an assurance that the trouble would be remedied. Onlv this week the Council had written to the Department asking for information as to what steps it was proposed to take. Mr Rae said that in the light of the statement made by Mr Richards, no purpose would be served by approaching the Council at the moment, and he would withdraw his motion. Mr Leckie said that the outlet was an engineering job. The Minister had undertaken to have his engineers rectify the trouble, and if he had to do that, then he should have a word with the engineers who did the job in the first place. The pipeline was an engineering job, also. It had cost £BO,OOO, and was now going to cost £15.000 to repair. That and the £15,000 spent on the airport made £30.000 the ratepayers had to find, and up would go the rates to meet it. The motion was carried. Mr Richards was accorded a vote of thanks for attending the meeting.