MANUREWA RAILWAY BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 33, 8 February 1916, Page 7

MANUREWA RAILWAY BRIDGE.

DEPUTATION OF OBJECTORS. A deputation consisting of Messrs. Enos Pegler, T. J. Corrin, and G. Smith ■waited upon the Manukau County Council to-day to bring under the notice of that body matters connected -with the overhead bridge at the railway crossing, Manurewa. Mr. Pegler, who acted as spokesman, read articles that had already appeared in the Press objecting to the bridge as proposed to be erected <by the Railway Department. Mr. Pegler said their contention was that with a little more expenditure the bridge could be made much safer for traffic, and he claimed as the work was of a permanent nature the extra expense involved shouki be faced in the interest of the public. Their ward member, Mr. Muir, had interested himself in the matter, and the deputation -was there to back him up. Mr. H. R. McKenzic (chairman) said the bridge was in the same style as others erected by the Railway Department at Penrose and elsewhere. He understood that if the bridge was altered as wanted by those represented by the deputation, it would have to be twenty feet high, and the grade would be too steep. Mr. Smith thought that something shouid be done in respect to the curve on the Manurewa side. Mr. McKenzie said ifc was for the Railway Department to decide the style of bridge it erected over crossings. Mt. Hattaway: They certainly spoiled the road at Panmure. Mr. Muir said the Department would not put a bridge across at an angle. Mr. Hattaway considered it a grea£ mistake to make these elbows in the roads at bridges over railway cTOssings. Mr. Muir pointed out that the work at Manurewa had been in progress twelve months, and nobody had made any objection until now. Mr. Pegler replied that it was only! within the last month or two that the danger of the present proposal was so obvious. Mr. Corrin said it would be quite possible to put a skew bridge, which would obviate the necessity for the sharp elbow. Mr. Pegler contended that the level crossing would be better than the proposed bridge. Mr. Hattaway: Oh no, anything is better than a level crossing. Mr. Muir pointed out that the crossing would be six feet lower than the road when the work was completed. Mr. Dickson, foreman of works, -when asked his opinion, said it seemed to Wm a case of looking at a job before it was completed. The road would be metalled for a width of twenty feet, and the bridge would be thirty feet wide. When the work -was finiehed he did not think there would be much cause for complaint. The deputation then retired after the chairman had remarked that it was for the objectors to get an expert to convince the railway engineers that the bridge would not do.