COMMISSION OPENS INQUIRY

Dominion, Volume 38, Issue 2, 27 September 1944, Page 8

COMMISSION OPENS INQUIRY

Hutt Development Plan PROPOSALS FOR NEW HARBOUR Appointed to inquire into and report on certain proposed developmental works, including the provision of harbour facilities, near the mouth of the Hutt .River, a special commission began in Wellington, yesterday, a silting which is expected to occupy a fortnight. Ihe chairman is Sir Francis Frazer, the other two members being Messrs. J. Wood, C.AI.G., M. (Wellington), and D. Holdcrness, M.I.C.E. (Auckland). The commission has under consideration what is described a s the first fully co-ordinated scheme of development in New Zealand with a balanced economy of land usage, public utilities and services. Transport access to Hie fast-growing industrial area of the Hutt Valley is one of the main features being investigated, with a great deal hinging on Ihe practicability of establishing a harbour there. Represented at the opening of the commission's inquiry yesterday were the Lower Hutt City Council aud Hutt River Board, the Hutt Valley Chamber of. Commerce ami Industry, the Wellington Harbour Board, Wellington City Council, Petone Borough Council, the Railways Department, and the Transport Department. Arrangements have been made for evidence to be given next week on behalf of Wuirarapa local bodies. The sitting of the commission has arisen in the first place out of the urgent necessity for replacing the pipe bridge over the Hutt River. It is considered that the location and design of this structure will affect vitally the development of land and harbour and transport facilities iu the vicinity. Proposed River Diversion. Developmental works which have been suggested include the diversion of the Hutt River from a point near Gear Island to permit the construction of a harbour for overseas shipping within the present mouth of the river; as an alternative, the construction of a harbour between Point Howard and the present mouth of the river; in addition, the construction of a spurliue of railway to serve such harbour works and industries as •may be established. (Questions to be determined by the commission include whether the construction ol a harbour is necessary in the pub-' lie interest, where it. should be located, should the river be diverted, what berthage and depth of water should be provided, what facilities, including rail and road access, should be provided for its efficient operation, and what should be the approximate cost of such a harbour. Allied to these aspects are the questions of how soon it should be constructed, to what extent the proposed diversion of the Hutt River is likely to affect the Petone foreshore, and, if a harbour is not considered necessary, what transport facilities-should be provided to enable the residential, commercial and industrial life of the area to be carried on efficiently and economically. This includes the bridging of the Hutt River and its use as a waterway. At the opening of the inquiry Mr. N. T. Gillespie, who appeared for both the Hutt City Council and the Hutt River Board, intimated that no decision had yet been reached by the city council concerning the necessity for the harbour. However, some adequate transport facilities —a great deal more than those of today—must be provided for the Hutt Valley. If that involved the construction of a harbour, the Lower Hutt City Council would welcome it.

The attitude of the Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce and Industry was very similar, said Mr. E. F. Rothwell,’who appeared on its behalf. It was possible that at a later stage of the Commission’s sitting the evidence adduced might place the chamber in a position to take a more definite view. Town Planner’s Views.

Mr. J. AV. Mawson, Town Planning Officer attached to the Organization for National Development, submitted as evidence the report which he had prepared in 1939 for the Government in the Hutt Valley development scheme. He said he was not an advocate for or against a harbour for tile Hutt’ Valley. He had coordinated the plans and policies of specialists who had considered the devolpment of the area. It went back to the middle ’thirties when about 100 acres were reclaimed under a Government work scheme. There had been maintained, in the compilation of the report, the fullest collaboration with the harbour board, local bodies and industrial and commercial undertakings. The. provision of deep-water harbour facilities was absolutely essential at the mouth of the Hutt River to develop fully the Hutt Valley area, and it would involve a diversion of the river. Neither on economic nor technical grounds had he heard the report seriously challenged. The harbour there, if provided, would be one of the safest in the Dominion at all stages of the wind and tides and would offer no dredging problems. Actually, the provision of shipping facilities at. the Hutt would be an integral part of the Wellington harbour undertaking. It was inevitable that sooner or later economic considerations would force decentralization of industries at present located in the Wellington city, and the tendency would be for them to go to the Hutt area under the pressure of ground space and restricted internal transport facilities. The future policy of the Government, regarding Industry, particularly heavy industry, would have an important bearing on the development of the Hutt; Valley. The reclamation area of 300 acres at. the moutfi of the Hutt River was about the only area loft in New Zealand where heavy industries could be established in close, proximity to deep-water harbour facilities. Point Howard Proposal. Sir Francis Frazer said that since the preparation of this report there had. been mooted an alternative suggestion for the development of a harbour at Point Howarth obviating the diversion of the Hutt River and providing shelter for shipping from Hie southerlies. Mr. Mawson said he understood that this scheme did not meet, with particular favour. The dredging of a turning basin at the mouth of the Hutt River would provide enough spoil to reclaim another 150 acres of land—a tremendously important economic factor. It hail been originally estimated that with the use of modern luaeliinery. the diversion of the Hutt. River would cost £BO,OOO. It had been suggested that the fuel power plant might be moved from Evans Bay to this site, which would be admirable for the establishment, of any graving dock or ship-building activities. It would be an ideal location, too. for the establishment of iron and steelworks, which would require direct access to deep-water harbour facilities. Harbour Board Policy.

Appearing for the Wellington Harbour Board. Mr. J. F. I>. Stevenson said it had always been assumed by the board that: if any scheme on that, side of the harbour were Io be approved. Point Howard was the better place. That was the view of the present acting chief engineer of the board. The board's view, though not. a concluded one. as the matter had not: been fully investigated, was that the Hutt area generally whs not suitable fur a harbour, but if anything was decided on. Point Howard would be the better locution. The opinion was held that the construction of a harbour near the mouth of the Hutt Valley was unnecessary, as the present Wellington port, facilities were more than adequate for all that could be foreseen in the near future. The effect: of the construction or a harbour there on the flow of the Hutt River, if Ute Commission considered such facilities were necessary, had to bo Considered. said Mr. Gillespie. It: was a technical question. The River Board agreed that as present, planned the river diversion was not likely to affect this, but any other scheme might. Tito board was reasonably satisfied witli ir as at present planned. The board asked to be apprised by the Commission of its duties in respect: of Goar Island. The board actually hold t,ie I< ' e simple of this in its title by purchase, but under the provisions of the Hutt River Board (Gear Island) Empowering Act, .1926, its use was limited to a virtual trust as a recreational area.