Complaints - Please scroll to the bottom of the page
Search
« TCB Meeting 4 December 2012 | Main | Moanataiari Governance »
Friday
Dec072012

Thames Valley Water

A press release today outlines the two remaining options that staff and the Community Working Group are working on.  These are the option.

It appears that they have reduced the entire exercise to either the Apakura Stream ($5.3m over ten  years) , or total supply from the Puriri River ($12.6m over ten years).

Staff clearly favour the former, and the latter is hardly likely to get up at that cost.

But the Apakura is fraught with difficulty that remains unexplained in the written proposal.

The big question will centre around the willingness of the Hauraki District Council to give up its consent over this source "after they don't need it anymore once the Kerepehi Plant is fully operational". Just how open they are to this suggestion is anyone's guess - there is no indication in the report that HDC has been approached in regard to this suggestion. And the Regional Council will also need to be convinced that the flow required after the TCDC take, is sufficient for their own environmental purposes.

It seems to me that this is very much an 'eggs in one basket' situation, but perhaps staff have information on the likelihood of being able to secure the consent that they have not revealed in the Report - all very mysterious.

It will be financially disastrous if we are forced back into the Puriri option - clearly the Thames Valey users will only be able to meet a small part of the cost which will come back on all other rate-payers were it to go ahead.

 

 

 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (1)

Are our elected reps investigating all the options or just looking at what is provided by staff/consultants?? whatever the cost stated it is doubled over the life of the loan. To be paid by 3-400 properties. There is no need to provide potable/drinkable water. The problem is excessive water take from the three sources. MATATOKI (50% storage with chlorination for a farming community, exceeds resource consent) APAKURA (no storage or treatment, 800m3 daily as of right although 1200 m3 in dry season) OMAHU (no storage or treatment, no filter, exceeds consent, frail dam) These 3 reticulations need to be all connected with the addition of Neaseville and/or Hikutaia. To save millions let every property provide its own storage (as many already do) and have a meter, treatment and filter at the gate(as many already do). Separating stock and household water is simple. Is this too difficult for staff and others to follow?????

December 30, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterPeter H Wood,

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>