LOWERING LAKE NGAROTO

Waipa Post, Volume 32, Issue 1782, 13 July 1926, Page 4

LOWERING LAKE NGAROTO

PROBLEM OF DRAINAGE BOARD.

LAKE ROAD CULVERT TO BE

LOWBRED.

iAn agreement between the Waipa County Council and the Ngaroto Drainage Board was reached yesterday in the matter of meeting the cost of a new culvert across Lake Road. The clerk, Ngaroto Drainage Board,, asked! the Council to replace the present damaged culvert on Lake Ro>a<? on the new level being brought up by the Drainage Board. The Board offer- i ed £3O towards the cost. Messrs G. Finch (chairman) and W. ■G. Macky waited on the Council iu support. . - Mr Finch said the Board had expended about £2OOO in deepening drains to lower the lake level. The culvert aerates 'Lake Road is of .brick, portion of which is broken away. The Board cannot progress with it s work until the culvert is lowered. Many years ago a vast area of country served was water-logged. Most of this area ha s been re-watered and in pasture. The County Council consequently receives more rates by reason of the higher valuation. The Board desires to re-water another area, parts of the ißank property, 'Mr W. G. Macky’s and others. The offer of £3O by the Board was a reasonable one. Mr Macky supported, saying that the lowering of the culvert would be a big improvement. In preparing the estimates. the Board’s engineer had allowed an amount for the lowering of the culvert, but he (Mr Macky) could not remember the amount. Mr Finch said there was a solid bottom to the culvert. This would have to be excavated. Until the culvert is lowered the drain lowering scheme could not be carried on. Mr Finch produced a letter from his Board’s engineer, Mr Farrer, who wrote that the culvert is large enough to itake all the Water, but he did not indicate the probable cost of the alterations. Mr Civil said he had inspected the culvert. The original structure had been extended sft. at each end. The northern extension had collapsed. There is about 19ft. of the structure still sound. It was built on a sandstone strata. He estimated the cost of replacement at £l3O, or if in concrete £2OO. Repairs would cost fully £SO without lowering.

Mr Finch pointed out that the council was liable for that £SO ou(tlay. Add to this the Board’s £3O, and it would not be much more expense to the Council to make ia good job of it. Mr Civil contended that the culvert had been built on a faulty foundation originally. . To Cr. Fisher, the chairman said the cost would be a Riding liability. There was a principle involved, for in other places the Council merely gives its consent to the individual land,holdters to do the work. He did not think the Board’s offer was over libeMr Finch here stressed the point that the Council got Igreater rates through the Board improving the land. The Council had been getting /that benefit for the past 25 years. ‘He personally could not offer more than £3O. This was a matter for the Board members. ~ . To Cr. Johnson, Mr Civil said his estimate of £l3O was for a sft. x sft. wooden culvert 50ft. long. That length was necessary. The work could not be done during the winter, as a flujtning would be necessary while the alterations are being carried, out. Cr. Johnteon saidi he could not quite see the fairness of a Riding having to bear all the cost. The Board’s ratepayers were operating for itheir own benefit, not for the whole of the Riding ratepayers. It was a business proposition to them, just ias almost similar works in other parts of the County were business propositions for individuals. He suggested that the County provide the £SO, and one-third of the extra cost, the Drainage Board finding the other two-thirds. ■At this stage. Mr Finch said he and Mr Macky would accept the responsibility for increasing the Board’s offer to £SO.

iCr. Macky said he thought it very unlikely that the. Riding funds could) provide for a concrete culvert. Cr. Johnson favoured a -wooden .structure, as it was in faulty country.

Cr. Livingstone thought the Board had not been properly advised by its engineer, who must have known that there was need for lowering the drain and the culvert.

■Mr Finch admitted that the waters had been dammed up for three days at the culvert white work was in progress.

This the engineer argued w r as a cause contributing to the collapse of part of’the culvert. The estimate of £l3O was for work in reasonable weather.

Finally it was decided, to accept the Board’s offer of £SO to the cofst of the new culvert in wood.

Re a bridge across the road in the same locality, it was decided to call upon the Drainage Board to accept responsibility, as the Board is carrying out work in the vicinity.