Linking Sumner and New Brighton by Estuary Bridge.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18805, 6 July 1929, Page 35 (Supplement)

Linking Sumner and New Brighton by Estuary Bridge.

Will Pontoon or Girder Bridge be Selected?

AFTER being lost sight of for many years, the proposal to connect South Brighton with Sumner in the vicinity of Shag Rock has again been revived, bringing with it the prospect to motorists of being able to make a round trip embracing the two seaside suburbs. Two schemes have been mooted—one, to erect a bridge across the narrow stretch of water, and the other to provide a motor pontoon. There is, south of the present terminus of Estuary Road, an area of about 200 acres of land that it is believed would be rapidly built on if easy and short access were provided to the tram. A meeting to discuss the project will probably be held at an early date. The Bridge Proposal. The proposal for the erection of a bridge to connect New Brighton with Sumner dates from before the war. Just prior to the war the land lying between the South Brighton domain and the naval reserve was subdivided and sold. It was a stipulation that every purchaser of a section should undertake to contribute £ls towards the cost of the proposed bridge. These guarantees furnished a sum pf over £7OOO that could be called on.

Twelve months were occupied in securing the approval of the Lyttelton Harbour Board to the proposal and a further twelve months in arranging for a lease of the naval reserve, which was to form the Brighton approach to the bridge. Eventually the lease was obtained for a period of thirty years. Plans were prepared by Mr Cyrus Williams, then engineer to the Lyttelton Harbour Board, and the estimated cost of the bridge was £7500. Just when all preparations for going ahead with the work had been completed, the war broke out. About half the section owners joined the forces, and all thought of the bridge had to be abandoned. After the war the matter was revived again. It was then found that the estimates of the cost had increased from £7OOO to £15,000 odd. so that those interested in the project found that the necessary money was not in sight, and, for a time, the whole project was again abandoned. More recently an effort was made to induce the South Brighton ratepayers to push the proposal, and agree to the rating of the district to provide the necessary finance. For a time this proposal gave evidence of prospering, but attention from the matter _ was diverted to the South Brighton bridge. This bridge was built and the whole district rated for it. so that the sponsors of the estuary bridge proposal had the mortification of seeing the money

they had hoped would he used on the latter structure diverted to another purpose. It was proposed that the estuary bridge should reach from the sandspit of the Naval Reserve to Shag Rock, and that the space between that rock and the land should be filled with rock to make the Sumner approach to the bridge. It is considered that approximately 200 acres of land south of the South Brighton domain would be built on if the bridge were erected, and that a tremendous difference would be made to the district from the residential point of view. Pontoon Favoured. Those people who favour the provision of a motor pontoon take the view that the only type of bridge that could be erected would be so costly as to be quite impracticable at the present time. On the other hand they say a motor pontoon would not be a costly undertaking and would serve the present needs quite adequately. A motor pontoon is favoured by Mr R. B. Owen, who expressed the opinion that the only type of bridge that could be erected would be far beyond the present financial possibilities of the city He pointed out, that if a bridge were erected, it would have to be of such a type that it would not impede traffic

on the waterway. There would be needed, in fact, something in the nature of the Tower Bridge, and such a structure could not be thought of at the present time. A motor pontoon was, he said, most desirable. It would not be costly, and it would not impede the waterway The bridge might come in the future, but the type of bridge required was not a thing for to-day. The motor pontoon was, however, practicable, as the cost would be small. It would give people who resided at that end of New Brighton access to the Sumner tram. “ It is useless,” said Mr Owen, “ suggesting a bridge there that is going to interfere in any way with the free use of the Estuary. In the Estuary lies the city’s great future.” The motor pontoon, he said, would be situated just to the north of Shag Rock, where the water was always calm enough to permit of its safe operation. On the other side of the rock, the sea was frequently too rough to permit of the use of a pontoon. Mr H. M. Chrystall regards a motor pontoon as quite a feasible idea. He put the cost at, roughly, about £SOOO. The necessary revenue to meet the charges on such a sum might easily be secured by way of a small levy on each car using the pontoon. Motorists, probably, would not mind paying 6d for the trip across, and, as many thou-

sands of cars would probably take the round trip and make use of the pontoon, it should not be difficult to secure £SOO a year. Such a sum would probably meet all the expenses. The advantages of a pontoon bridge were also pointed out by Mr Chrystall, who said that probably a bridge of this type would suit the purpose better than a punt ferry. With such a bridge provision could be made for floating a section aside to permit of the passage of boats, as was done in other parts of the world. “It will never happen,” was the verdict of one well-known civil engineer regarding the building of a bridge. The reason, he said, was that the Estuary was tidal water, and if a bridge were built it would have to be of a type that would open. That particular part of the structure would be very .expensive, and he did not think that New Brighton and Sumner would rate themselves for it, particularly as it did hot affect the direct access to the city, and was really for pleasure only. For some years during his residence in Christchurch, Mr S. M. Stewart, pow of Auckland, was an active advocate of the bridge proposal, and it is probable that, when the meeting to discuss the matter is held, he will visit Christchurch for the purpose of addressing it. A Tramway Bridge.

Certain Suggestions for a bridge across the Estuary are to be found in proposals which were made in 1906, when it was suggested that the trams should run from Brighton to Sumner. In December, 1906, the engineer to the Lyttelton Harbour Board, at the request of the engineer to the Tramway Board, prepared a report setting out the Harbour Board’s requirements with regard to any bridge across the Estuary. This report, which made it clear that the Harbour Board did not commit itself in any way, stated. that, in view of the possibility of harbour works being constructed in the Estuary, it was considered that, in the event of a permanent structure being erected, a clearway of at least 150 ft in width, with no obstruction overhead, would be necessary. Such a structure, it was pointed out, would probably be so costly as to cause the abandonment of the scheme. An alternative suggestion was a swing or lift bridge giving a clearway 50ft wide. Such a bridge might be allowed, subject to the proviso that the owners would remove it if called upon by the Harbour Board to do so. In January, 1907, the Tramway Board’s engineer submitted estimates of the cost of a steel viaduct with a 50ft opening, operated by electricity. The cost of this bridge was set down at just over £35,000. The project, however, was not gone on with.