HUTT ROAD.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1739, 2 May 1913, Page 6

HUTT ROAD.

4 APPORTIONING THE COST. \ OFFICIAL INQUIRY. STRONG COMMENTS BY CITY OFFICIALS. EXTRAVAGANT CONSTRUCTION. 'It.e brour'i highway, which extends from. Wellington City to Petone, has poen the subject ot' a good deal of Vordy contention since it was constructed, ruul the matter has now culminated in an inquiry which is being conducted •by Jlr. W. S. Short, Assistant' Under-Secrc-inry for Public Works. Mr. Short is deputed to apportion tho cost of the road,. sKIOO,OOO, amongst the 'ten local bodies interested. As an assistance towards this end, a tally of the traffic passing over the road was taken towards tlio end of •last year, under 'the direction of the; iUailways Department; The purpose of tho current inquiry, which- oppned yesjterday, in Old Parliament Buildings,' is Ho give the local bodies an opportunity taf advancing, through their legal repre|ontative?, considerations which may influence the Commissioner iu arriving at jhis 'decision. The following 'local.?body districts were represented as indicated:— Wellington City, -Mr. J. O'Sliea; Petone Borough, Messrs. T. P. Martin and P. C. Kirk; Onslow Borough, Mr.. T, M. .Wilford; Lower'Hutt, Mr. A. AV.' Blair; uv'astljounie -Borough,, Mr. W. .1, Organ; Borough, Messrs. M. Myers arid V. It. Meredith; Upper Hutt Town Board, Mr. D. M. Pindlay; Hutt County, Mr. 'A. de B. ilrandon; Makara County, Mr. W. Luckie; Johnsonville, Mr. O. .lerusaiem. Mr. I'. Macasscy appeared for the iaiiway 'Department. i In opening the proceedings, the Comjiifssioncr outlined the steps already jtaken, and gave a summary of the'tally and its effect, if it were taken as'n basis of 'assessment. It might be urged, he .Faicl, that some other basis than 'that of • the traffic tally, should be I proportion of total receipts, 'proportion of capital value, or propor'tion of ratepayers. He handed to the representatives present a statement showing how each of these bases would- work out. The Commissioner stated that lie •would hear tho evidence of each body, 'oiul in the same order, the arguments : put forward by tho various representatives. Each representative, in reverse I order, would then bo given tho right of /reply.-

The Commissioner's Jurisdiction. Mr. T. 11. Wilford asked i Whether tho Commissioner would assist in the stating of a case for tho Court to consider the following questions:— ' ■ .(1) The jurisdiction of .tho Commissioner to act as such. (2) The procedure which should rev adopted by tho Commissioner in arriving at a basis of contribution'. (3) Tho right of the Commissioner to apportion the contribution on: — fa) A capital value basis. ' (b) A population basis, (c) A traffic-user basis. (■1) Whether in considering the proportion of traffic and the basis of apportionment traffic should be 'debited to the , place of origin or the place of destination? (5) Whether in assessing the proportion payable by Onslow the value of land gained by the Crown through the making uf the road through Onslow should be 'taken into consideration? Mr. Wilford submitted, in support of his request, that tho basis of computation which the Commissioner had adopted ■ was wrong. Tallies had been taken, ho 1 said, on the assumption that Wadestown was p.wt of Onslow. This being so, ho hold that, whatever might bo the CommisMuuor's judgment in the caso of On-slow should be reduced as -suggested' by this fact. Onslow, while having to submit to ' the Commissioner's' judgment, did not ' admit his jurisdiction to proceed upon the basis suggested. Mr. Wit?or<l asked that certain of the tally clerks should be called as witnesses. . Tho Commissioner said that he.had not :oimnitted himself to a/basis of computation. Mr. O'Shea naked on what ground Mr. Wilford oppostd the jurisdiction of tho Commissioner. If any question were addressed to the Supremo Court, lie thought that it should be a. genera? question as to tho basis on which the Commissioner should proceed. He had come to the conclusioh, after consultation with Mr. Morton, that a quite different method should bo adopted by tho Commissioner. This method ho proposed to submit. N . : Mr. Luckie supported Mr. Wilford's -proiposal: Ho contended that traffic should ibs debited "at tho business end of the proposition." For instance, in Mnknra .they found that a large number of motorcars went out to Titalii Bay; Tho business end of this proposition was Welling.tou, because tho cars enmo from tho city.

Air. Wilford said that thci Government, /in making 100 chains of. road, had taken from Onslow 21 acres J rood 21 perches of Jand.

1 The Commissioner said that the Resident .Engineer would supply, a plan showing how- laud had been dealt with in connection. with the making of the road.

He added that lie "did. not seo_ .how (lie point raised by Air. Wilford affected the apportionment of cost.

A Belated Proposal. Attiir hearing further argument, tlio Ccmmissioncr said that his own opinion was that he had power, to go on, and that the Act 'gave him power to proceed with the matter so long as lie did so on just and equitable lines. He doubted whether tho Supreme Court would go beyond this. In his opinion the proposal to refer tho matter to the Supreme Court should havo. been raised, at the first hearing. -An opinion could then, if necessary. havo been obtained before all the parties had been called together at considerable expense. In the letter which he had sent out to parties he had distinctly stated that tho inquiry on being resumed would have to go on to completion. However, he was prepared, after all the evidence had been taken, if. he were then in doubt as to bis procedure, to state a case for tho Supreme Court. In his opinion it would he better to stale a case then than now. He was strongly of opinion; that lie should proceed. The Commissioner ruled that he would .isk the Railway department to produce two men'from each gate if possible. The tally men cauhf attend the commission at 10 a.m. on Monday. Official Evidence. The first witness called was Air. I' 1 . C. Widdop, Wellington District Railways Engineer. He supplied particulars as to the methods followed iu taking the tallies Df traffic. IV Air. O'Shea witness said that traffic on the llutt Road would increase on a race day assuming the weather was fine. There were two race days (luring tho period covered by the tally, one wet and one line. The race traffic was included in the summary, but had also been shown separately. .Traffic would.also vary in proportion. to the 'output of the meat works. He would not Jib prepared (o ;ay whether a majority of tlio bicycles included in the tally were owned in Onslow or in Wellington. Wellington was a distributing centre for the district served by tho road. Much of tho traffic passing over tho roads went direct to tho wharves. He was not prepared to say whether a lot of traffic went from tho wharves to the Hjitt Road without stopping at Wellington. To Mr. T. F. Martin witness said that n heavy motor-car going fast would do more damage than a lorry. Tho car affected tlio blinding in the road, and tend»d te loosen the metal. .Motor-bicycles would liflve tho same effect in a minor decree, Bicye'e traffic hlul 110 Illateml jff'ect on the road. _ To the Commissioner: Tho road was of j ust as much' use to a bicycle as to a heavy vehicle. . Mr. O'Shea: Also to n pedestrian, i To Air. Blair: Witness said that traffic had been tallied with an eyo to its ultiImate destination, no note being taken of intervening local bodies. ■ To Air Wilford: It' the tally clerk put lown "Onslow" when the place ofongin was Wadestowh, there would be no way in which it could bo ■ discovered that Onslow had been 1 wrongly, debited, %

did not know whether twenty-0110 acres had boon taken from Onslow in making tho road, but ho thought not. Onslow was debited with 02 motor-ears. This meant 62 trips by motor-ears owned ni Onslow Borough, (luring the three weeks. Ho would not julinit that the road was badly and carelessly constructed from Thorndon. to Kaiwarra us compared with ■the portion from iVgahaurangn toPelone. The saino standard ot' construction was maintained throughout. . Mr. oi. H. M'Master, chief clerk in the office of the District Hallway Engineer, mis the next witness. He said that the traffic was .not debited pijly to th» places of departure and destination, but also to places at which it called en C Witnc«3 was questioned in detail by » number of the lawyers present regarding the methods followed in taking the tally. To Mr. Wilford: Wadcstown traffic was not. debited against Onslow. Mr. Wilford said that a tallyman had told him that a man who gave his place of departure as Wadcstown was put down Onslow. Witness said that a tally clerk who "did this would bo acting against _ his instructions. A tally clerk had no right id change Wadcstown into Onslow. Where this had been done tho commissioner would be unable to ascertain that a . mistake liad been made.

CASE FOR THE CITY. STATEMENT BX MK. J. O'SHEA. Stating tho case for the Wellington City Council, Mr. J. O'Shea said that for ' many years prist the road lying between the Esplanade Hotel in die city and Petone was in very bad condition. At tho end of 1001 the Onslow Borough took stops to require other local bodies to contribute towards the road that ' lay ' within iU- boundaries.. This road'e'xßnded from tho Esplanade Hotel to tho boundary post of the Onslow borough,.lieariNgahauranga, a distance of about M3.(iß": .'chains. An inquiry was held, under the Public Works Act, by a commissioner', and that • commissioner (.Mr Haselden), after an inquiry at which all parties wero represented, ami in which all considerations that had been urged during tho present inquiry wero put forward, decided that the cost of constructing' and maintaining the road should be borne as follows: —Wellington city, 7-21tlrs; Petone, 7-2-lths; Lower Ilutt, !j-2tths; Onslow, 5-2tths. . . By litigation, which -went to the Privy Council, it was decided that tliero was not. power to make the apportionment. Representations woro then made to the Government, as a consequence of which the Government passed the Hutt Jload Act, 1903, .by which was adopted Mr. Haselden's decision. In tho saino year the Hutt Itond and llailway Improvement Act was passed. Tho present commission was set up under this Act, amended in 1911. Tho emitributing authorities are now ten: Wellington City, Petone Borough, Eastbourne Borough, Hutt County, Johnsonvillo Town Board, Onslow , Borough; Lower , Hut t Borough, Miramar Borough, Makara County, Upper Hutt Town Board.

Estimate and Cost. "The work which was originally estimated to cost .£100,1100," Mr. O'Shea proceeded, "has cost over .£350,000, and by some method of apportionment the Railway Department has, after concealing every detail from the local bodies affected, fixed the amount due in respect of tho road construction somewhere in the neighbourhood of .£IOO,OOO, and this immense' sum the commissioner is asked io apportion between tho local bodies affected."

In his succeeding remarks, Mr. O'Shea objected to the basis of traffic which the commissioner proposed to adopt in. making the apportionment. "The test in my opinion that should Lo applied," ho continued, "is ■to ascertain to what extent e?ch district is economically dependent upon tho existence, in first-class .condition, of this foreshore road. Tho traffic to and from tho various places does not, in my opinion, In any way adequately indicate this -economic dependency. Another consideration, but, in my opinion, purely subsidiary,' is what advantage each district derives from the existence -A tlio road. If tho road were not thereat all, in my opinion, the ratios in which the various places depend upon this road aro set out in tho following descending scale: — "(1) Makara County, Hutt County, Onslow Borough, Jolinsonvillo Town Hoard.

"(2) Petone "Borough, Lower Hutt Borough, Upper Hutt, Town Board. "(3) Wellington City, Miramar Borough, Eastbourne Borough. "It is. in this order, I think, that tho partis to this Commission mostly desiro the road."

Asked what he meant by "economic dependency," Mr. O'Shea said that tho position was that this road gavo tho only Teal frontago to Kaiwarra. It was tho only avenue by which, apart from tho railway, the whole of the Hutt County, except the portion lying behind Eastbourne, had access to Wellington. Tho Makara, County, where it extended along tli'e foreshore, was absolutely dependent on this road.

Mr. Luckio: It is absolutely no uso to The laud is all bluff hillside.

Air. O'Shea: Wellington would not bo materially affected if the road wero not there at all, except for a few motcr-cars. , Air. Luclde: What would it live on?

■ Air. O'Shea: Thero is such a thing as a railway, Air. Lnckie, and there aro steamers. Everything that wo require coulj be brought by rail from Kaiwarra. Ngahauranga, Petone, Johnsonvillo, and the other places that contribute. Aliramar and Eastbourne wero greatly dependent on. the road, Eastbourne mora so than Aliramai'.

Air. O'Shea went on to .argue that since Wellington was tho distributing centre not only for tho Hutt County, but for tho whole of tho West Coast of tho South Island and ths greater portion of the south of the. North Island, much of its traffic ami much of the traffic along the Hutt Road culminated, not in the deposit of any merchandise in Wellington, but in its being dispatched from Wellington to remote parts of New Zealand, and 'to dis-' 1 tiiilj" portions of the world. It was quite clear .that much traffic came from outlying districts to Wellington, and was then oariied to outlying districts,' merely passing\throug l h Wellington. Atucli traffic of this naturcj; {rem the surrounding districts of Wellington was of no more value to the city' than the merchandise dealt wi:h by an express train passing through a district. It had been further suggested that the calculation should be made according to—(ti rateable value, or (2) the income of a local Ixidy. These ideas wero brilliant from the point of view of the smaller local bodies, and would no doubt acliiavo the result they desired by casting tho whole of tho burden of the road on to tlm city.

Air. O'Shea dealt in detail with the annual income of Wellington, and the manner in which if was expended, contending that it. would be grossly unfair to make the city's action in providing comfortable living conditions and maintaining tho aesthetic sido of municipal life its own undoing. If traffic were the only consideration, which lie denied, it would bo only fair, lie continued, to extend tlio Act to include Thermion Quay to tho Government railway station, and the whole of the streets leading to the wharves. lie criticised generally tho adoption of a traffic-tally as a basis of. apportionment. and contended that the set. of figures adopted had no direct bearing on the case. Amending Proposals. Tho points to be considered were:— (1) What is the economic, dependency of carli district oil the road? (2) What benefit is got by each district from the road? * (!)) To what extent docs eacji district contribute its proper share to ; tlie highways, in Wollington and tho districts affected ? (1; Much of the traffic in Wellington is merely to an entrepot. Much goes direct | to the wharf. Atuch is sent by rail to outlying districts, or is transferred in the city to otlier conveyances. (5) The liability, apart from this Act, that each body would have to undertake, is an important factor. For this purpose Atakara and Hutt County should be treated as one. The Hutt County was split up after this Act passed. (C) The nuestion of the frontage given by the road must also be considered. > An Outrageous Cost. "No doubt," said Air. O'Shea. "the cost that .is attempted' to be charged on the contributing bodies is outrageous. The Government spent what money it spent in a most unbusinesslike fashion, and tho small bodies aro now. trying one and

all to cast the burden on (he oily of Wellington. 'Jo any scheme, however illogical, that will carry out this purpose, they will give their undivided support, ami you can therefore weigh tlu-ir approval accordingly. "Another method that can be suggested, and when handled by an expert municipal administrator such as the City Euginer (Mr. Morton) is of great value, is to determine the position:— "(1) ]ly arai. "(•-') By contiguity." In the concluding part of his statement Mr. O'Sliea referred to I lie- decision of the Commission that formerly inadn an apportionment of liability in respect of the one and three-quarter miles of the llult lioad adjoining tho city of Wei-' lingtoii. The C'jiumi»ion now had to deal with five and a half miles, ami the extra three and a half miles lay beyond the one and three-quarter miles previously dealt with. In tiie former apportionment Wellington' paid 7-24 of the llnti. Wood then in Onslow. It, was now asked to pay 7-1G of the whole cost of the roadail advance of fifty per cent., and there was double the distance of road. He was quite certain that Wellington City would never have consented to this legislation if there had been any suggestion that tlu! apportionment already made would not have been tho basis. Mr. O'Sliea contrasted as under tho percentages under the old warrant and the proposed finding :— Old. Xew. Wellington 29.1(1 43.55 Petone '. 29.10 15.25 Lower Ilutt 20.83 12.87 Onslow 20.53 4.-17 There wore now, Mr. O'Shea. pointed out, six/additional contributing authorities. •' A Great Injustice. "I therefore contend," he said in conclusion, "that twenty per cent, is tho amount that Wellington ought to pay, and that if more than 20 per cent, is allotted to Wellington t.he finding of tho Commissioner will be a great injustice. I make these remarks at this stage as I think the Commissioneroughfc to have a. clear appreciation of Wellington's position before attempting to settle this difficult question. As I shall probably have to fight all the other parties who are, in my opinion, attempting to o.scape from their" just liabilities, I ask to be allowed a right of reply in order, if necessary, to demonstrate in detail the futility of testing the matter by'traffic alone." Tho Commissioner said he had already ruled that counsel should have tho right of reply in reverse order to that in which •they stated their cases. MR. MORTON'S EVIDENCE.

PROPOSED BASIS OF CONTRIBUTION. Tho whole of the afternoon sitting was taken up. in hearing the evidence of, Mr. W. H. Morton, Wellington Ci'ty Engineer, who was callcd by Air. O'Shea. Mr. Morton said that he had read the reports as to traffic and the letter of the Commissioner. Ho did not think that the system proposed was of any real valuo in a district bordering on a city, in determining a basis of contribution. Such a system might be of some ,uss where an arterial road ran right through the districts concerned. His objection was that much of the traffic from outside districts in this case came to Wellington as a terminus. Tho requests for _the improvement of the Hutt Road, ho understood. came from tho districts outside the city, and not from the city itself. Wellington was in some respects, more a temporary receiving depot than a distributing centre. It. was in this way the scene of a great deal of trade from which the city itself derived no benefit. If AVellington were not a 'terminus, the proposal to assess contributions on traffic would not bear so heavily on the city. There was no doubt that a great deal of traffic came into the city which passed direct to the wharves. Also much inillc, etc., was sent in from outside, and sold in the city;

Mr. O'Shea: Which .of the parties cited in this inquiry would'the road bo most useful to?

. Mr. Morton said that he had scarcely looked aifc it in that fashion. Ho had looked at it mainly jn regard to contiguity and area of tho districts concerned.

Mr. O'Shea: Would Wellington be as desirous as Makara, Onslow. .Tohnsonville, and Hutt C-ounty of having this road?

' Mr. Moitfon: No: I think not. _ "Wellington is more self-contained. Wellington is not dependent upon these outlying districts in any shape or form that I can gee, whereas these districts arc dependent on Wellington, lie went on to state that Petone h/tl a greater interest in ths road than Lower Hutt. These outlying districts might lie expected to grow in population and in industries much mora rnpidly from now on than the city. Onslow liad the road on its main frontage. It could get down l»v a* back road, bnt this also led to the Hutt Road. Johnsonvillo had two roads, one of a poor character

' Mr. Lnckie pointed out that it was not a case of road or no road. It was a case ■of cost of improvements. The ontlving distriots' had always had'road access. Mr. O'Shea: Used to have to swim tvhen I first came here. Mr. Luckie: It has dried up since then! Mr. Morton's Assessment, The outlying suburban districts in the oity, Mr. Morton stated, were .no moro concerned in this nfatter than the outside districts. For instance, Island Bay was no move interested than Miramar. The business part of tile city, which was really served by tlio llutt Road, was confined to ii very small area—at tho very outside,,an area of 1200 acres. Air. Alorton now proceeded to explain a comparative statement which ho had drawn up of the value of the road to the different localities interested. In some cases ho had divided tho area of<a district into two portions, the area immediately served by the road being separated from that 'whic'h derived less benefit .from the road. To each area, Jlr. Morton further -explained, he had applied a numerical factor, so as to reduco all the areas to a common basis of comparison. In establishing this compari»;.'i he had divided Wellington City int« areas of 1200 acres, multiplied by 3, and 5300 acres multiplied by I. The other local bodies stood, in his comparison as follows:—Onslow, 10(10 acres multiplied by 3, 1000 acres multiplied by 1. I'ctonc, 10G0 acres multiplied by 3. lower llutt, 3255 acres multiplied by 1. Eastbourne, 1380 acres multiplied by l-3rd. Aliramar, 2250 acres multiplied by i-3rd. Hutt County, 300,2i1) acres multiplied by one-fortieth. Makara County, G4.640 acres multiplied by one-twentieth. Johnsonville, 1110 acre's multiplied by one-half. Upper Hutt, 1280 acres multiplied by one-third. Upon this basis, Mr. Alorton added, the comparative liability of tho various local bodies would be assessed as follows:—

* Wellington City 21.!) ' Onslow 12.53 J'etone 10.22 Lower Hutt v .. 10.41 Eastbourne J... 1.51) Mirapiar 2.11 'Hutt County 21.1 Alakara County 10.38 .lohnsonville 1.83 Upper llutt. 1.1 An Extravagant Work. ' "The wholo work," said Air. Morion, "is one of such extravagance that it is impossible that the cost can bo satisfactorily borne by the? various local bodies concerned in it. I do not think that they can possibly havo had any idea of what they were in for when this work was .sanctioned." Mr. Short: "That may be a matter that you can bring under the notico of tho Government. I can ofi'er no opinion upon it." Air. Alorton: "I had that in mind in saying what I did." Ho added that it would be very rough on .lohnsonville, Alakara, and Upper Hutt, and-other districts il' they had to meet the liabilities ho had indicated. At tho same time, if their contributions could not bo lessened in any other way, they should not bo lessened at tho expense of tho city. "The Old Canal." Examined by Air. Kirk, Jlr. Alorton said that he considered that tho road would be of more value to. Petono than to 'the city of Wellington. It mado Petone much more accessiblo than by way of the old canal that they had to got over in years gono by, and had the effect of bringing Petone nearer to the city." .Mr. Kirk said that evidence before the previous Commission., had shown that traffic to and from Petone over the road was a mere bagatelle. Mr. O'Shea; The Commissioner charged you the same as he did us. Mr, Morton suid that in arriving at the.

proportion which Pelono should pay lie had considered area iuul contiguity.

.Air. Kirk remarked (hat some i!0f) or !lt)0 acres ill Pelono was elevated hill-laud lit' small value, and cross-examined Mr. -Morion at length as to his of coinputation. .Mr. Morton c-vontiinily dismissed fho subject with the remark: '"I'liat is what I. have done. ft is for the Commission la say if I. am wrong." -Mr. Kirk said (hat the lolal tif capital values in Pecone had been gradually diminishing since 1010. Jlr. Morion sard that the same thing applied to. practically tho whole of the Wellington suburban districts. . To Mr. Luckie: In framing his calculation he had nut ( aken into account the intrinsic value o[ the various areas. About half of the Makara Counly did not use the Unit Road at all. That the factor applied to the llutt County was onefortieth, and that applied to tlie .Makara County one-twentieth was due to the fact that much of the Unit County was further afield. Contiguity had lo bo taken into account. In apportioning the cost of tho road, no account should be taken of the existing railway. The inquiry adjourned at 4.10 p.m., and will be resumed to-day at 10 a.m.