BRIDGE COMMISSION

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 839, 6 December 1929, Page 11

BRIDGE COMMISSION

(Continued from page 1.) To the Chairman: He would propose using round caissons. They would be floated out to the site and upended. If the depth of the foundations were too great, a shallower site would have to be obtained. Mr. Furkert: And if you could not get one? Witness: A longer span at a greatly increased cost would have to be provided. Mr. McVeagh: Is it not important when erecting a harbour bridge to leave no doubt as to possible interference with navigation? Witness: The bridge I suggest will not interfere with the class of vessel likely to use the upper reaches of the harbour. VANCOUVER AND AUCKLAND Evidence regarding points of similarity between North Shore, Auckland, and North Vancouver, a district served by a harbour bridge, upon which the estimated revenue to be obtained at Auckland is largely based, was given by A. H. Williamson, journalist, of Auckland, and late of Vancouver, British Columbia. He said the two districts were very similar except that there was more rural land behind North Shore. Auckland. To Mr. Meredith: When he left Vancouver a few months ago there were approximately 75,000 cars in the province, of which number 26,008 were in the vicinity of Vancouver The population of Vancouver was approximately 300,000. To. Mr. McVeagh: The Shipping Federation complained of several navigation accidents at the bridge. He knew of one or two accidents, but be did not think they were frequent. To Mr. Greville: He thought the tourist attractions of the Auckland North Shore were great'er than those at North Shore, Vancouver. A. E. Greenslade, Mayor of Northcote, gave evidence regarding proposed sites. It was considered that the Shoal Bay site would interfere with future harbour development in the Bay. A site from Fansliawe Street to Northcote Point was favoured as being the one most suitable for motor traffic. (Proceeding.)