DRAINAGE BOARD.

Globe, Volume V, Issue 553, 27 March 1876, Page 2

DRAINAGE BOARD.

The usual weekly meeting of the Christchurch District Drainage Board was held this morning at 10.30. Present—Messrs F. Hobbs (chairman), Boss, Jones, Wright, Harman, Duncan, Hall, and. Tancred.

The chairman reported that the deputation appointed to wait on the Government to get them to co-operate with the Board in the matter of the Ferry road drain had seen the members of the Government, and laid the subject before them. The Government had promised to take the matter into consideration, and there it rested. It seemed, however, that the Government were somewhat disinclined to spend the money voted for the railway drain now that the Board had been called into existence. He had not yet received the balance due on drainage though the Superintendent had telegraphed to Wellington about it. As he was about to visit Wellington, he would, with the permission of the Board, bring this matter before the Government, and also some necessary amendments in the Act, which it would be as well to bring in during the next session. The principal points he would refer to have reference to the sinking fund, and also with regard to the form of debenture, the fourth schedule of the Act being somewhat different to the form they had issued. Mr Duncan moved—“ That the chairman, Messrs Tancred and Harman be appointed as a sub-committee to go through the Act, and make such suggestion thereof for the amendment as may be deemed advisable.” Mr Jones seconded the motion, which was carried. Mr Duncan moved—“ That the sum. of £SO be paid to the town clerk for services rendered as clerk pro tern, of the Drainage Board, from the 4th January to the present date,” Mr Wright seconded the motion, which was carried. The engineer’s report was read as follows: “ I have the honor to report that I have prepared sections of the proposed Ferry road drain and plans for the temporary bridges, and propose to let the work as far as Wilson’s road by contract at once. I consider the work will take about two months to complete. “ Under the consideration that this work is only of a temporary nature, I have laid it out in the cheapest possible manner consistent with efficiency, and with the object of inconveniencing, as little as possible, the people living along the road. “ Levels are being taken over the district, and I propose to hasten their completion by employing more force. ' “ Ciias. H. Bell, “ Engineer.” Mr Wright would like to see the Ferry road drain carried out as a permanent work at once, unless the engineer reported that it would not be. useful for the carrying out of the general system of drainage. Outside the sewage question, it seemed to him that it would be a matter of policy to make the work a permanent one at once. He would therefore move instructed to take steps to have that part of the drain between Wilson’s road and Christchurch quay built as a permanent sewer.” Mr Jones would second the motion, as he quite agreed with Mr Wright’s remarks. The engineer would like to say a few words in exnlanation. As he understood it. the Board wished to have relief for the storm water of the district at once ; now, if they built a permanent brick sewer it would take some nine months to build, so that there would be no relief this season. Besides, they did not at present know the levels of the district, and would have to be referred to the consulting qnginee* to make permanent

plans. They also did not know whether it would agree with the general plan. Some money must be wasted in providing temporary relief, but it would be better to carry out the work as proposed than to expend a large sum on a permanent work which might be totally useless. Mr Harman should oppose Mr Wright’s motion, because it wished to pledge the Board to carry out a permanent work before levels had been taken or calculations made by the engineers. No doubt a little money would, as Mr Bell had pointed out, have to be wasted, but still it would be better to do this than expend a very large sum on a permanent work which, after all, would not be of the slightest use. Mr Hall opposed Mr Wright’s motion on the same grounds as Mr Harman. Mr Duncan thought that Mr Wright’s motion had been rather misunderstood. He thought what Mr Wright intended was that an open drain should be used for the storm water, and a brick drain of a permanent character put down when it was needed. THe pith of his motion was that it should not be left an open drain longer than possible. Mr Ross opposed the motion, as the matter had not been referred to the consulting engineer. The chairman said that he thought it would be as well if Mr Carruthers and Mr Bell would furnish the Board with their ideas as to the nature of the sewer they would propose to build, whether of brick or concrete, so that they might make arrangements for the material required. Mr Wright asked if the Board distinctly understood that an open drain would not be allowed to exist any longer than was absolutely necessary. When the excavation was made for the open storm water channel it might be necessary to put in the invert for the permanent work which would follow. Mr Harman pointed out that the engineers had not decided as to whether a permanent sewer should be taken along that line. Mr Jones suggested that looking to the feeling of the Board on the subject, Mr Wright should withdraw the resolution. Mr Wright agreed to this, and the resolution was withdrawn. The report of the engineer was then considered and approved. A communication was read from Mr Harman, as agent for the Hon John Hall, owner of sections fronting on the proposed drain along the Ferry road, as to terms upon which permission would be granted. The terms were, the Board to undertake to fill up the drain or build a covered sewer within twelve months, and to provide also for severance if necessary. It was resolved to reply, accepting the terms offered. A letter was read from Mr E. H. Palmer, the Board for his appointment as clerk and treasurer. A letter was read from the solicitors to the Board in reference to the question of the payment of the £IB,OOO to the City Council. On thej motion of Mr Jones, the Board resolved itself into committee to consider the letter. On the Board resuming, The chairman reported that the following resolution had been agreed to in committee, viz—“ That this Boatd instruct the chairman to negotiate a sale of a draft on London for £25,000, and out of the proceeds pay the £IB,OOO due to the City Council under the Drainage Act.” On the motion of Mr Wright, it was resolved that the meetings of the Board be held fortnightly in future at the usual hour. Mr Hall brought undet the notice of the Board the inconvenience caused by the overflow of the streams in the Biccarton district from the growth of cress. So soon as the Engineer was at liberty he might look over the district and see how it could be remedied. Mr Jones moved—** That the Engineer be instructed to call for tenders for the construction of the drain from Wilson’s road to the South town belt.” * Mr Wright seconded the motion which was agreed to. Notice of motion by Mr Hall for next meeting—“ That all the watercourses in the Drainage district be kept clean and opened by the Drainage Board,” The Board then adjourned for a fortnight.