NEW BRIDGES

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 56, 30 November 1920, Page 3

NEW BRIDGES

ON WEILINGTON-WAIRARAPA ROAD

LOCAL BODIES CONFERENCE Messrs. John Barclay, M. Welch, A, de B. Brandon (Hutt County Council), Shortt (Eastbourne Borough Council), L. DarouXiand T. Quinu (Upper Hutt Town Board),. J. A. M'Ewan and W. Cox (Potone Borough Council), J. R. Palmer (Wellington City Council). C. M. Banks. Mantuli, and L. R. Uurbridje (Wellington Automobile Association), J. Jlitcholl and E. Guineas (Lower Hutt Borough Council), xnet in conference yeßterday afternoon to conelder matters in connection with the proposed erection of new bridges iiv reinforced concrcto at Stokes Valley' and Pakarafcahi—both on the main road from Wellington to tho Wairarapu-. The conference ..was called by the Hutt County Council, which body is responsible for the erection of such bridges, and which maintains that their cost should be contributed to by all the benefiting local bodies. Th'i chairman (Str. Barclay) stated that tho County Council had been advised by the Minister oi* Public Works (Hon. J. 6. Coateß) that the bridges mentioned were unsafe, and would havo to be entirely rebuilt. The conference was .called'to consider'ways and means, as the bridges constituted part of tho inaia road from Wellington to the Wairarapa t< and the Hutt County Council was of opinion that the local bodies who had been invited should contr'buto to tho cost of the bridges. The engineer of the County Council (Mr. 11. P. Toogood) had drawn plaii3 and made estimates for the proposed worke. The figurea were a® foll°wPakaratahi Bridge, £3800; Stokes Viillay Bridge, £923; special culvert (ltimutaka, Hill-Road). £440; legal expenses, £2W; total, £5369.. This expenditure it was proposed to yprcad over the local bodies concerned in tho following proportions:-— Hutt .County, 30 per cent.; Wellington Uity. Council, 35 per cent.; Lower Hutt Borough Council, 10 per ccnt.; Eastbourne Borougn Council, & per cent.; ilirarmir Borough Council, 5 per cent.; Petone Borough Coun-, cil, 10 per cent.; Upper Hutt Road Board. 6 per cent. m , Mr. J. It. Palmer, speaking for the \\ ellington City Com,cil, said that, -so tar as ho was aware, a copy of the proposed allocation had not been forwarded to tho City Council, and he considered thai it would not be right for him or any other local body representative to commit nls body until it had/been consulted, lie noted that tho Oity Council was belnjr asked, to pay 35 per cent, of the cost. 11 that were the Cue, they would want to know all about It. and would want a.big say in it. ile thought that the "J' 00 ' 1 ' tion was much too heavy,- and that the Hutt County Council (which, alter all, benefited most) should be prepared to carry at least 50 per cent, of the burden. Messrs. J. A. M'Ewan and, B. Shortt protested against the allocation on bohalf of tho Petone and Eastbourne Borough Councils respectively. ■ Mr L. E. Partridge Bald that the Auto mobile Association favoured the worls being done, but held that work such as thiß on through arterial roads should be carried out by the ®° ver !V? e ". .i The chairman Bind he did not mintt postponing the conference for a month,, in View of the points raised b> Messrs Palmer and M'Ewan; it was either that or submit the whole matter othe a location to a commission. He, defended, tno allocation Ecnerally,.and pointed out the damage that was being done to the roaa by through motor traffic, particularii hj the city milk departments heavy l°r"®B- - Kan said there was another way 'of collecting the cost, by erectint,. objected, stating'that the Automobile Olub of New Zealand had jUBt agreed with the Government on a, heavy tvre tax for the upkeep of the roaas, and it would not be at all fair to exact a, On >U Mr. B Palmer stating that, after all, the Hutt County Council wou-d be the biggest gainer by the erection 01 the bridges, derisive laughter came from the Hntt Countv Council s delegates. Mr..'Shortt: "Well, you rate on these chairman: fhe land on these hillsides is not worth the cost ol _ tnese bridges-there are not rates comma fr jlr again protested delegates being asked to commit themselves, and imned to adjourn the conference for a month. The ■ motion was seconded and carried. Subßeuuejitly. owing to the intervention of the holidays. ll w decided not to meet again until January

10 During the conference the point wa? raised by some speakers it would be +>irrt\vinff money away to erocfc a"St/lkcs Yallev, as it ivas in an elbow, and it was inevitable that the road must be straightened at that point. Tlie engineer explained how his csti i.. r nt> 4ii e nropbped. work had been arrived S. Hia plans have already been approved by the Public Works Department.