UPPER HUTT

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 219, 16 June 1925, Page 10

UPPER HUTT

PROPOSED BOROUGH COMMISSION TO SEEK EXTENSION OF TIME The Royal Commission set up to consider the petition of the Upper Hutt ‘town Board for the constitution of a borough opened its proceedings in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. The commissioners are Messrs. \V. G. Riddell, S.M. (chairman), Thomas Brook (Commissioner of Crown Lands), and F. N. Martin (District Valuer, Wellington). '1 he ehairman stated that in addition to the petition under consideration three other petitions had been prepared by the Wellington Racing Club, the Siivcrstream residents, and 'residents on the riverward side of the main road. It was the desire of these petitioners that their petitions should be joined with the present one, which necessitated the documents being gazetted as required by the Act. On behalf of the Upper Hutt Town Board, Mr. O. C. Mazengarb outlined the history of proceedings since 1923, when a previous commission held that the area was not suitable for municipal control. The chairman of the Upper Hutt Town Board (Mr. A. J. McCurdy) was the prime mover in that petition, and the Wellington Racing Club were strong opponents'. Air. Mazengarb said that there appeared to be a discrepancy in the Act, as the whole of the petitions could not be dealt with as one. In his opinion the commission could consider the original petition, and perhaps go outside its functions and hear evidence regarding the others. On the other hand, it could hear the original petition only, and in the event of a borough being constituted, application could be made for the other areas to be added. The latter course, however, would be a cumbersome procedure, as it would necessitate the taking of other polls after the borough had been formed. He suggested that the commission should adjourn without taking evidence, and application should be made for an extension of time in which to report. This would enable the other petitions to be gazetted, and the Department could also be approached to have provision made whereby all petitions could be heard as one.

Air. T. C. A. Hislop, on behalf of the Hutt County Council, agreed with the suggestion. Air. I’. Levi, who represented the other petitioners, regretted that a technicality should have arisen, and pointed out that he had written the Department of Internal Affairs, suggesting that the petition with which he was concerned should be gazetted, and that a new commission should be issued giving the necessary power for the whole matter to be considered. A reply had been received to the effect that there was no power to gazette an additional area. As the commission expired on June 28, counsel suggested that application should be made for an extension of time,, and that in the meantime a Bill might be put through Parliament, enabling a petition to be gazetted for the whole area. The chairman adjourned the commission until June 22. and an application is to be made for an extension of time

From figures supplied by Air. AlcCurdy, it is shown that the area of the proposed borough is 2287 acres. The population of the town portion is 1764, and of the outer district 1124. The rateable capital value of the town district is £202,486, and of the outer district £227,418. Town district improvements are valued at £140,158, and the outer area (not including the Trentham Racing Club’s new grandstand), £136,026.