THE NEW HUTT BRIDGE

Evening Post, Volume LXXIII, Issue 30, 5 February 1907, Page 7

THE NEW HUTT BRIDGE

CONFERENCE OF LOCAL BODIES. LAND-OWNERS TO BE APPROACHED. n A conference of local bodies interested was held at tho Town Hall yesterday to consider the proposal to erect a new bridge over the Hutt River to carry the pipes for the water supply (thereby replacing tho present "pipe" bridge), and to cany heavy vehicular traffic. There wero present — tho Mayor of Wellington I (Hon. T. W. Hislop), the Mayor of! Petono (Mr. G. London), tho Mayor of Eastbourne (Mr. F. G. Bolton), Chair- ; man of tha Hutt River Board (Mr . W. G. Foster), Councillor Clark (Hutt Borough Council), Councillor Moore (Hutt County Council), and the City Engineer. Repie- j sentatives of land companies interested j wer© also present. It was stated that the ne\r bridge would cost about £8000, and -that the City Council was prepared to pay 65 prr cent, of that amount. The repte- j sentatives of the various local bodies gave expression to their views on the proposal. Th* Maj-or of Petene 6aid he was not possessed of plenary powers from hifl council, but Petone was favourable to the scheme provided that ito proportion of the cost was reasonable, and that the i road from the bridge to-rards Petolos connected with the continuation of Jackson* street. To this the City Engineer replied that there were difficulties in the way of such,a proposal. 16 would mean putting the bridge ia a different position. No definite decision was come to on tho subject. The Mayor of Eastbourne pointed out that the bridge would bs of very little use to his borough, the principal means of access to which was by water. Tho borough's nearest point to the bridge was four or five miles away, and any contribution the borough made ought to be very small.' He also pointed out that tho Hutt County and the various land 'companies and property-oVnefs on the eastern side of tho probosed bridge were the people who would most benefit, and it was for them to say what contribution they wore prepared to make. The Hutt County w6uld also largely benefit by increased rates.' The Mayer of Petone stated that Mr. Ward, of Lower Hutt, had some time ago promised £500 towards subh a bridge, aud althoUgh, it -was understood, he had sold his' property, it was believed that the offer was binding on the purchasers. Councillor Clark (Hutt Borough) said he had nd authority to agrc.s to any allocation, but it was problematical whether the borough would benefit at all by the scheme In any case, he added, tho amount contributed by the Hutt Borough would probably come oUt of the pockets of those directly interested in the bridge. Mr. W. G. Foster said tho River Board was in favour of the movement, but he doubted whether th>? board had any power to contribute Councillor Moore recognised that tho bridge would benefit the Hutt County, and that their assessment should be g-reater than that of Eastbomrno or theHutt Borough, but he did not desire that the land-owneTs should be directly approached, a& that would be done by the Hutt County Council in determining the amount of its contribution. It was pointed out that it would be t^cessary to bridge the Waiwetu stream as well as tho Hutt River. The City Engineer said he thought he could safely 6ay that £8000 woud cover the whole cost an the bridgd over tho Waiwetu would bs a very small one. It ivas decided that the City- Engineer should consult with the Petone Borough Engineer with respect to the proposal, and that an estimate, based on working plans, should be mads and submitted to a future meeting. The Mayor of Eastbourne proposed that ihe land companies interested should be asked what direct contribution they were prepared to make towards the cost of such a bridge as was proposed. This was seconded by tho Mayor of Petone, - and after discussion carried unanimously.