PIER ON HUTT ROAD

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 112, 9 February 1928, Page 5

PIER ON HUTT ROAD

RENEWED PROTEST BY HIGHWAYS BOARD - DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ALLEGED COMPLAINT TO GOVERNMENT Following a discussion on the decision of the Government to proceed with the erection of the central pier for the new railway bridge over the Hutt road, the Wellington City and Suburban . Highways Board yesterday passed a resolution renewing its protest against the erection of the pier and complaining of the differential treatment accorded to Wellington as compared with that accorded Auckland when similar protests were made. The matter was brought up in a letter from the Public Works Department, dated January 16, stating that the original plans would be proceeded with, and asking the board to carry out the paving of the extra widths of bitumen track on either side of the pillar. The Mayor'of Petone (Mr. D. McKenzie) said that the board would be doing less than its duty if it did not at once enter the strongest protest against the erection of this barrier on the Hutt Road. He hoped the board would go on protesting on the grounds that the proposed pier was bad engineering, and that it would be a danger to the public. It would be wrong if they Ceased to protest against this very unwise action on the part of the Public Works Department. Mr. I J . W. Manton called attention to an accident which had occurred only a day before through the presence of a central post in the road between Nelson and the Port. The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, had endeavoured to justify the central pillar by giving a list of American roads in which supporting piers had been placed, but Mr.-Furkert did not say how many accidents occurred as a result of these pillars being in the roadway; that was what the board wanted, rather than a

list of roads with centre pillars. There was one pillar supporting an elevated railway in central New York which had an average record of one death per day. Mr. Manton referred to the favourable answers given to members of deputations which had waited upon the Ministers, and to the consequent marked surprise whet) Mr. Coates stated that the central pier would be proceeded with. It appeared, he said, that Mr. Furkert had decided from the very first that the central pier should be erected and was still so decided. “No Necessity for Central Pier.” Mr. R. McKeen, M.P., said the Prime Minister had'stated there was not the slightest necessity for the pier. The Minister of Public Works did not favour

it, jet the Department seemed to be strongly of opinion that they could build it cheaper than they could alter the grade and make a curve - from a point further out in the harbour in order to cross the road in one span. When they bad centre poles to the tramways system in Wellington they were always having accidents, and far more of those accidents happened to vehicles and people in them than to the passengers in the trams. Mr. A. J. Curtis said this pier* was going to help to spoil the road, and they, as the responsible body for the road, should certainly protest against the work being proceeded with. Future Traffic of Hutt Road. The chairman (Mr. G. A. Troup) said it was perhaps unfortunate, but when the reports on the work were before the board some eighteen months or two years ago no protest had been made. He fully agreed with all that had been said, more especially on the grounds that the traffic of to-day along that road would not compare with the traffic of the future. He held that it would be a mistake to place a centre pile on the Hutt Road, and did not see why there should be differential treatment as between Auckland and Wellington. Motion of Protest. Ou the motion of Mr. McKenzie it was decided to protest against the action of the Public Works Department in proceeding with the erection of the central pier in the proposed new railway bridge across the Hutt Road. ' Mr. D?R. Hoggard seconded the motion, saying that even if the single span bridge was to cost another £lO,OOO it should be done rather than risk loss of life under the present scheme. _ The chairman: Aren’t you going to say something -about differential treatment ? ; The motion was altered to include a reference to the difference in treatment accorded to the Auckland people, as against the army of protestauts in this case. A Dissentient. . Mr. W. T. Strand: I wish to dis- ( associate myself from the protest. Air. Hoggard was a member of this boat'd | when it had approved the thing it now I protests against. ' Mr. Hoggard : I have no recollection : of the thing coming up when I was a member of the board. i Mr. Strand; The board blows hot and | cold. .We did have the plans before > us, and wp approved of them. ’ The chairman: I do not think that | was -the case—we went into that at the | last meeting. ) Air. Strand: Well, at least we did not . protest. Under these plans there is | room for four ways of traffic, and that < is all this road will ever carry. Alem- I bers of this board have themselves been against any further widening of the i road, and those people who have lived : at the Hutt for years, coming in ami I going out almost daily, believe the road ■ would be much safer were there a central barrier the whole length - of the road. ! Mr. W. H. Bennett: I was a member ! of the board when the plans were be- j fore us, and then expressed the opinion that the central pier was a mistake, j The then chairman of the board inter- ; viewed the head of the Public Works I Department, who said that it was im- [ possible to alter it, and that the High- j ways Board had no jurisdiction in the matter, The motion of protest was carried J without a dissentient voice. Mr. H. D. Bennett reminded ‘the > meeting that the Public Works Department had asked the board to push on

with the work of widening and paving the road. They should probably instruct the city engineer not to commence the work until they received a definite reply from the Government to the protest. ’ On the suggestion of the chairman it was resolved to take no action in the matter pending a reply from the Department as to their protest.