CENTRAL AREA DRAINAGE

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 5058, 29 November 1926, Page 3

CENTRAL AREA DRAINAGE

SETTLERS’ SCHEME AMENDED.

ADOPTION BY HAURAKI BOARD.

The improvement of the drainage of the land about Orchard East Road wias further discussed a«t Friday’s meeting of the Hauraki Drainage Board.

The clerk reported that Mr. Hamilton had called on him with reference to the petition presented at the previous meeting and requested that two* additional drains should be added to the scheme proposed. All the settlers who had signed the petition were in agreement with the addition. The clerk reported he had accordingly drawn up a supplementary petition, which had been -fully signed and returned. ' ' IMPROVEMENTS WANTED. The first petition was for the improvement of the Wharepoa Road; Te Kauri No. 1, Willow, and Thames Valley outlets, .the stop-banking of the Waihou, a blockage in the Te Kauri No. 1, and the instalment of fla©s in the Huirau Road

The supplementary petition asked /for the improvement to the drain known as Bagnall’s outlet, so ojs to connect same as a board’s outlet with the drain known as Ans'ford’s outlet direct .to the river, and to be taken up to the back of Mr S. W. Baignall’s boundary only. Also to provide an outlet ’from the back of Mr W. H. Taylor’s section across Mr Dean’s two sections; to connect direct with the Willow drain running east and west in the Hauraki Board’s area. Although additional work was desired, the amount of the loan was not to be increased beyond the £lOOO first stipulated. Mr McMillan pointed out that apparently the Horahia Board would have to bear a greater proportion. Mr J. ’Hamilton. said that less work would -be required on the Willow drain. Thus- it was unlikely that the cost would be increased. Mr S’. Bagnall was favourable to the drain through his property, al- ■ though he desired compensation. Mr McMillan pointed out that the compensation would be heavy. The chairman stated that the matter would have to be referred to the Horahia Board. If it did not agree to co-operate on the amended proposal the matter could not proceed. Mr McMillan voiced the opinion that"the two boards would not agreed to any scheme for the area, and that it would be advisable to get a<n independent expert to evolve a scheme. Mr Hamilton asked if the boards were going to force a scheme on the ratepayers, which they did not favour.

Mr Gray said that the petition was ■ so well signed that the board should pot ignore it, but should go ahead at once.

Mr McMillan said thflit the board could, not go ahead with the proposal as it stood, as no estimates were available. Supposing Mr Bagnall desired two or three hundred pounds compensation.

Mr Hamilton urged that the. board proceed with the prayer df ,the petition and go aheajd with the formation of the rating area desired. Mr Heappey urged discussing the matter with the Horahia Board. A joint proposal had to be evolved. This should be referred to the settlers, and if not. approved, another scheme should be evolved.; The Horahia Board had money iri hand for expenditure in the Hauraki area, and it was, essential that co-operation, be effected.. Mr Gray urged that the Hauraki Board constitute the rating area for the £lOOO loan and then go to the Horahiai Board with the definite statement that £lOOO was available. Mr McMillan depreciated this until details of the work wer& agreed upon. Mr Gray moved that the board adopt the petition for further drainage and niee tthe Horahia Board with a view to putting the matter in hand forthwith. .

Mr Hamilton seconded. . Mr McMillan said that the'scheme was so indefinite that it was dangerous to adopt it. • Mr Hamilton said that the petition was not a definite scheme, but only a suggestion.

This was agreed to by Messrs. Mules and Heappy, who contended th"t the motion was only adopting a scheme as a basis of negotiations with the Horahia Board. Detais of .the work could be altered later. Mr McMillan disagreed with this view, contending th®it the 'motion bound the board to the scheme detailed in the petition. The motion amended by adding the words “as. a basis of negotiations,”and was carried unanimously. . WILLOW DRAIN. The board’s casual overseer, Mr J. McConnell, that on the lower side of the floodgate there were twd big slips causing the water to scour out the bank on the other side. Several 'small slips should also be removed. Through a" hard bar about nine .chains from the gate the drain, should be deepened ‘for about half a chain. Above the road the weeds should be dragged out, as in places they are holding up three feet oU w’ater. The willow trees should be cut down as .a number have already been blown • down. This would be costly as in nearly every instaince the trees were across the drain

Mr H. H. Brown wrote from New Plymouth asking to be informed what work was proposed to be done on the Willow Drain. —Received.