PROPOSED PIPIROA BRIDGE

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 794, 15 October 1929, Page 7

PROPOSED PIPIROA BRIDGE

FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES From Our Ou» Con'espondeiit NGATEA, Monday. Difficulties in connection with paying for the construction of the proposed Piako River Bridge at Pipiroa were discussed at the meeting of the Hauraki Plains County Council, following receipt of a letter from the Faeroa office of the Public Works Department, asking whether, in the event of the Main Highways Board agreeing to proceed, the Council would find its contribution toward the cost. Cr. C. W. Harris, county chairman, who represents part of the area that would be affected, pointed out that if the rate was over the whole county it would be infinitesimal. On the other hand if the revenue from tho Pipiroa Ferry were set aside for a few years sufficient money would be obtained to pay the council’s share, which was only about £5,000. Objection was voiced by other members to depriving the general account of these ferry profits, particularly as other ferries were not making a profit, and the capital costs had not yet been recovered. The suggestion of giving away a good paying asset as the ferry for a big bridge liability was inopportune considering that 80 per cent, of the ferry revenue was earned from through traffic. Cr. W. Madgick. the leader of the opposition and the council’s representative on the Highways District Council, advocated strong representations to get the Highways Board to make a free grant as had been done for bridges in other parts of the country. There were many other works in Hauraki Plains which had better claims to be made a charge on the wholo county than Pipiroa Bridge. Cr. C. W. Parfitt, leader of the bridge advocates, said that the increase in traffic during the past four years indicated that, despite the reduction in ferry fees the profit would shortly be £I.OOO a year, and 80 per cent, of the gross earnings would be from outside the county. He moved: “That this | council agrees to find its quota for the j construction of the Pipiroa Bridge, I provided the subsidy’ is not less than I£2 for £l, and that the council’s j share be found out cf general account, j to be spread over three years; that the i treasurer be instructed to conserve

such sums of money’ as can be conveniently set aside to meet the liability upon its completion, and that the same procedure be adopted for the construction of the Ngarua Bridge after the completion of the Pipiroa Bridge. After discussion the motion was lost.