THE HUTT RIVER

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 127, 31 May 1934, Page 12

THE HUTT RIVER

MELLING DIVERSION

NEW BRIDGE PROPOSAL

REQUEST FOR CONFERENCE

Taking advantage of a report by the board's engineer (Mr. H. Sladden) on the condition of the river at Melling, Mr. W. T. Strand at yesterday's meeting of the Hutt River Board made a strong plea for a diversion cut.and a new bridge. ,

Mr. Sladdeu. stated that he hoped the members of the board would not overlook the fact that shingle was accumulating very rapidly above Melling bridge; and very shortly would seriously interfere with the channel. The remedy was a diversion cut, and with this question was bound up the provision of a new bridge, which it was the duty of the Borough Council to provide. ,

Mr., Mitchell said that the council could riot see its way to proceed with the bridge at the present time. ' Mr. W. T. Strand said he entirely agreed with the engineer that this was a job which should be gone on with at once. His own view was that this porsion of the river was in a dangerous condition, though the engineer thought otherwise. Mr. Laing Meason had said it was the weakest place in the river. It did not matter what the board did in the lower reaches if the blockage was allowed to go on at Melling. The Government was making good offers at the present time to enable men to be employed in useful work, continued Mr. Strand. At the Waimakariri River the Government was finding work for 100 men, and he believed it would subsidise men for the Melling job by 30s per- week per man. This would enable men. to get five days' work a week. It was the duty of local bodies to absorb men in useful work—England was giving a lead and Australia was following by raising a loan of £26,000,000. New Zealand could not continue to go on as at present.

Mr. Strand then movedv that the board members should meet the Borough Council to discuss the question. The engineer said he did not think there was the slightest danger of the water breaking the banks, but the accumulation of shingle was seriously affecting the formation of a good gradient in the bed of the river. At present the river had been got into such a good state that this-was the only point where the proper alignment and gradient were prevented. t There would always bo a serious interference with the travel of the shingle- until the cut was made. ,

Mr. Brasell said he would strongly oppose.the building of a bridge at the present time. Rates were already too high (Mr. Mitchell: "Not River Board rates."). This was not the opportune time for a bridge to be built.

Mr. M. J. Hodgins said he would like to see the work done, but like Mr. Brasell he did not think the people would agree to a loan.

Mr. J. Mitchell urged that the work should be proceeded with at once. Money could be got very cheaply today. .

In answer to the chairman, the engineer said a rough estimate of the cost of the diversion cut would be £6000.

Mr. Strand: We would get a twothirds' subsidy on that.

The board then agreed to ask the council to meet members in conference on the subject.