RIVER AVON.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 6518, 10 April 1889, Page 3

RIVER AVON.

DEPUTATION TO THE DBAINAGE BOAKD. At the meeting of the Drainage Board yoaterdaya deputation, consisting of Messrs John C. Boys, C.E., W. Thomson, A. Shaw, J. M'Lean, and Dr Moorhouse attended respecting the Upper Avon. Mr Boys was the spokesman, and read a requisition which dealt with the river question. Mr Boys said that many Christchurch residents, besides those in Melbourne and elsewhere, viewed with regret the damage being done to the river by the removal of the dam. Theloss to the City Council alone in its removal had been at least .£250 a-year, and though there had been a certain amount of opposition to the darn being replaced, the generality of tbe people had seen that if something were not done to restore the appearance of tho river by the height of the water being raised, boating could not be indulged in, and the river would be an eyesore. In urging upon the Board the need for raising the level of the water, he pointed out that tiViere need be no danger of any damage occurring through the proposed dam, as it wovuld, if a winch were erected so aa to allow of it being raised at any time, prevent any silting above the dam and also hava the effect of keeping the water clear and sweet. In fact he thought that in any case a flood-gate would be a good tiling, and inexpensive. He need hardly point* oat that the river below the site of the proposed dam required some clearing out. As regarded the position of the dam, the deputation preferred to leave the whole question to the Board to deal with, but their opinion was that the best site was just below the present boat sheds, near Antigua street, where, if the water were raised about eighteen inches, it could affect no one injuriously, and indeed would reduce in & measure the nuisance now existing at the mouth of tho sewer there and not affect it iv flood-time. They wore awaro that three cr four "sticklers" opposed the idea of erecting any dam, but they did not think t'aat two or three should be allowed to etand in the way of tbe general improvement of the river. The Chairman reminded the deputation that a very strong deputation had waited on the Board with reference to the old dam, had represented that their land waa waterlogged, and contended that the removal of the dam was necessary. As to the Board having the control of the river, they might be liable for heavy damages iv case of their taking any action which might be construed into interfering with tbe quality of the soil around. Speaking privately, he could say that the members of the Board were agreed that lowering the water had spoiled the beauty of the river, but, as a public body, they would require some further indemnity before they could make any material alteration to it. They had, however, taken no legal opinion on. the matter, and he thought it might, be as well to do bo before going any further, as it would be of value. Mr Boys said that if a dam of eighteen inches were constructed where proposed, no one could by any possibility prove that the land wag water logged by its action. It was a totally different thing to the old dam, which he believed had some effect of that kind. This one could do no possible harm, and if fitted with floodgates -which could be 111 ado to lif b easily, it would be of great advantage in keeping the river clean. The question they had \ y .o consider was the appearance of the ldver, and this would have a good effect in restoring its character. When meeting p vrsons in Melbourne who had been in Ci'iristchurch it was noticeable that they did nob talk about the Cathedral or any of thiur buildings, but always spoke in terms of .praise of the beautiful Avon, as they had .no such river in Australia. M.7 Bowman asked what effect the dam woul»l have upon the Antigua street drain. If the water was raised would it not dam the wiiter back on to the properties in St Asaph -.street and that neighbourhood ? Mr ißoys answered that the dam proposed would not raise the water to within a foot or more of the mouth of the drain, and if in floods the gates were opened there co-old be no stoppage to the water. Mr H. P. Hill Eaid that, with such siirong opinions against the dam, the Board •mould have to exercise the greatest prudeuce. Mr Boys pointed out that really there were only three or four people against the dauv, and he did not think they would oppose this proposal at all. Mr Hill asked if the signatures of all the owners of property likely to be affected could bo obtained to indemnify the Board rahonld they decide to lake action. Mr Boys thanked Mr Hill for his suggestion and said that the signatures could be easily procured. He further remarked that if the dam were constructed just below the present boating stage, arrangements could be made for the removal of the other boat shed to a convenient site above the dam. Mr Hill said it would be much more satisfactory for the Board if the owners of property were to sign a Bpecies of indemnity ; the Board's way in the matter would be made much easier. Mr Boys suggested that it would be much in the Board's favour if a legal opinion were taken as to the Board's powers. He had had considerable experience as Chairman of a similar Board, and knew that their powers were practically unlimited. If, however, they took an opinion they would know their own position best. He thanked the Board for their attention, and the deputation withdrew. Subsequently Mr Hill asked what would be done, and a slight discussion arose, but it was agreed that the Chairman and Secretary should consult their solicitor on the question.