WAIPUKU BOUNDARY BRIDGE

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 393, 19 May 1910, Page 2

WAIPUKU BOUNDARY BRIDGE

QUESTION OF CONTROL. At the Stratford County Council meeting yesterday the chairman read a copy of the letter lie had forwarded to the Assistant Under-Secretary of the Public Works Department in reply to a communication asking the Council to state the reasons why it desired control of the W&ipuku boundary bridge. The matter at last meeting -was left in the hands of a sub-committee consisting of the chairman and Cr. Porritt, who had; gone into the question thoroughly.] The chairman had drafted the following letter: —"The bridge is of far more con-j sequence to us than to Taranaki, being only o'/g miles from Stratford borough! ( the headquarters of Stratford County j Council), as against twenty miles frotnj New Plymouth (the headquarters ofi Taranaki). (2) The .present .proposal| provisionally agreed to by both bodies is to erect a concrete arch to replace the present steel bridge. Stratford County lias a highly qualified permanent engineer; Taranaki, wo believe, has none; and we claim that in a work of this class we are entitled to safeguard our interests to the fullest in having entirely satisfactory work done under reliable supervision and control. (3) We say that the past control of the bridge by Taranaki- has been most unsatisfactory to us. The original wooden structure was replaced in October 1904 by a steei bridge, the work being carried out by Taranaki and this Council ipaying half the cost. In April 1908 the Council drew attention to the serious corrosion that was going on. In October, after we had again drawn their attention to the matter, Taranaki had it what they called "scaled" and painted (we, ofi course, paying half). Less than twelve' months afterwards (September 17, 1909)1 we again had to draw their attention to fresh serious corrosion. A conference was then arranged between our engineer| (Mr. E. C. Robinson) and Mr. Orbell (on' behalf of Taranaki). We enclose copy of Messrs. Orbell and Mackay's report to Taranaki, in -which Mr. Robinson concurred. My Council considered 'further 1 expenditure upon the present structure waste of money, and both Councils agreed to rebuilt in reinforced concrete. Taranaki's letter of December 10, 1909, was as follows: "I am directed to inform you that this Council recognise the necessity of reconstructing a reinforced concrete bridge over the Waipuku stream, but are not in a financial position at the present time to undertake ihe work. However, as soon as suitable arrangements can be made this Council will then consider t'he matter." We enclose a newspaper clipping showing that Taranaki is now again (notwithstanding the report of the two engineers) inviting, without having again consulted us, tenders for chipping and painting the bridge. We most strongly object to this method of handling this, to us, most important structure, and claim that control should be vested in us. We are sending them a protest against this proposed further expenditure. e would ask for an- early settlement of this dispute in view of the great danger of collapse, as pointed out' by the engineers. We are, .of course, j -prepared to abide bv the original agree-j ment of each paving half. ' We might I say that this bridge is on the main,' trunk road from Hawera to New Ply-1 mouth, and is subject to all classes of i trailic, including traction engines."—j (Signed) A. Marchant, —Copy of Report Referred to.— I "Chairman Taranaki County Council, New Plymouth,—Sir: As instructed by instructed .by you we have, in company■ with Mr. E. C. Robinson, Stratford' County engineer, inspected the bridge in question, and have to report that the steel is in a- very bad state of corrosion. We are doubtful if anv process of .painting will effectually prevent further corrosion, but if the bridge is thoroughly cleaned -and given "three coats of cement paint it would -undoubtedly lessen to a great extent further damage in this direction. .We estimate the cost at £4O to £SO. Wc beg to leport that a traction engine weighing L 5 tons would cross the bridge at considerable risk, as the factor of safety for a load of this weight is only a.nout V/s to 1 at the most in the lower booms of the bridge chord. (The usual factor is 4 to 1.) In view of this fact and the bad state of corrosion, we recommend the Council to take into consideration the building of a new superstructure in reinforced concrete, our estimate of which is £4so."—(Signed) Orbell and Mackay, engineers. 1 The chairman also read a letter written to the Taranaki County Council on May 4, drawing attention to the fact that he had noticed an advertisement inviting tenders for chipping and painting this bridge, and protesting against this as a waste of money in view of the condition of the bridge. He also drew the attention of the County Council to the foregoing report by Messrs. Orbell and Mackay. The chairman stated that so far he had had no reply from the Taranaki Council. • Members were of opinion that the letter to the Under-Secretary fully covered the nosition.