NEW MANGERE BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIV, Issue 78, 2 April 1913, Page 7

NEW MANGERE BRIDGE.

HEAVY VKHIUUIiAR TRAFFIC. EVIDENCE BEFORE CJOMiHSeSON. The bearing of evidence by the Mangere Bridge Commdaßion was continued yesterday afternoon, the Cominiflsioner, Mr C. C. Kebfrle, S-M., presiding. John Rowe, Mayor of Onehunga, eta-ted thai on Sunday last he counted 40 cms going over the bridge in 75 mjnntes. There was also a good deal of heavy vehicular traffic. He coneidered that motor car traffic was as hard on the roade ac heavy cart traffic. Replying to Mr Stanton (Auckland City Council), witneee stated that the Mangere Bridge was undoubtedly of more uee to Mangere than Onehunga. •Thie concluded the evidence for the Mangers Road Board. For the Onehunga Borough Council, Mr R. McVeagu stated that fche benefits accruing from the presence of tie bridge by the people of Onehunga were not eueh ac might appear at first sight. Mangere residents preferred to do their businese in Auckland rather than in Onehunga, owing to the expeditioue means of transit between Onehunga and the city. Trevor Arthur George, grocer, Onehunga, whose store is 600 yds from the bridge, gave evidence that the Mangere people traded more ■with Auckland than they did with him. Norman Brain, livery and bait stablekeeper, Onehunga, said that Mangere people very often left their vehicles at his stables and then went by car to lAuckland to transact their business. John Snmmere, motor car proprietor, gave swnirar evidence; and George Joseph Brown, formerly postmaster at Onehunga, also stated that the Mangere people preferred to shop in tlie city. the crnrs position. The Mangere Bridge Commission resumed this morning. Mr C- J. Parr (Mayor of Auckland) waij tlie first witness culled. He said the City provided, free of charge, lor residents of outside districts, many public conveniences. Practically all the city conveniences were provided free, fox not only the citizens, but also residents of outside districts, such as Mangere. He instanced libraries, parks, art galleries, and markets as among the public conveniences for which the city ratepayer aloiie bore the burden. The City had provided- the Grafton Bridge at a coat of £-10,000. That was paid for by the city taxpayer alone, and it would be admitted that pgictically every cart and vehicle from Mangere passed over that bridge. The City made no demand upon outside bodies, either for capital cost or maintenance of thathridge, or of its other conveniencee. No dtetinction was made by the City Council between its own in•habitants and those of other districts as to the uee of those conveniences. He should cay the Mangere Bridge was absolutely vital to that district, as it was the- ehoriest way for getting to the city. The bridge would vastly appreciate property at Mangere, and also to some extent Onehimga, but ho could not see it would have the same effect in the city, to any extent, because that was only ono of many routes leading to the city. At the present time a tally was being taken 'it the Whau Bridge to ascertain the traffic. Evidently this was only the beginning of a campaign by local bodies to seek contributions all round for the purpose yof supporting the coat of the bridges. There were smaller bridges on the old North Road, also the Tamaki Bridge, which carried a lot of traffic. If similar demands were made for tlrose other bridges, it could not be paid out of the general rates, and would ncceeeitate going to the ratepayers for a loan. The general rate, at present, wae admittedly insufficient for maintaining the city streets. The population of Auckland city was now approximately 47,000. The population of the districts immediately contiguous to the city was about 80,000; , that did not include Onehunga and other further away districts. The traffic across the Mangere Bridge at the present time was absolutely abnormal. The reason was that the tallies were taken in the summer, when there was much more traffic than during the winter months. Then, too, the Great Sooth ißoatl was practically impaaeable at the present time. That deflected the traffic on the bridge and Mangere noads which would otherwise go by Great South iR-oad. The only solution of the main roads problem was for the Government to tax the population, and maintain them.

In answer to Mr Skelton, Mr Parr said he was not aware there Tvae a park at Mangere. In spring the motor traffic across the bridge would not be nearly 60 great as in the summer. Of course the motor traffic went on daring fine weather, and even on sunny days in the winter." The city could get £1 license fees from care, but had to divide it with other local bodies. Mr Skelton pointed out that a portion of Mangere produce could reach Auckland bj railway.

Mr Parr said he considered that the M-anukau side of Mangere would be shortly part of Onehunga. Land wae being cut up for sale in small sections there. He thought the •Waika.to and

bubter-fat had done more for Awckland'e prosperity than ihad Mangere.

By Mr McVeagh: As the caTs passed through Onehnnga, they could not be mneh benefit to that borough, beyond what was epent at the hotels and tea and cake shops. Auckland certainly sold benzine, but the profit on that was not large. He thought Mangere farmers came into town regularly, whether it wae summer or winter. Jlr McVeagh pointed out that the dates in the tally booka did not include the Christmas holidays. Mr Parr said his remarks were based upon the assumption .that the holidaye were included in the traffic returns given. By Mr Stanton: The utility of the Grarfton ißridge would apply to all traffic on the eastern side of the city. To ask the bodice using that bridge to conlri-« bute would be as just as this demand made upon the city for Mangere Bridge. TALLY OF TRAFFIC. Charles M. Buelcworth and John Negus both deposed to having taken a tally of the traffic over the Mangere bridge from the 22nd of December to January 11th. H. S. Gulliver, assistant town clerk, deposed that he made up a summary of the tally taken, a copy of Which was handed in. He stated that for the year ending March 31, 1912, there had been ,121 cars plying for hire licensed by the City Council. The registration fees paid .for private motor cars -were not divided between the local bodies, but those pajd for vehicles plying for 'hire were divideU on a population basis. The City Council Teceived less than half of the nett amount distributed. Mangere did not receive any benefit from these fees. The City Council did not receive any proportion of license fees from Mangere. Mr. W. E. Bush (City Engineer) said that the Mangere Road was not a trunk road. The cost of the upkeep of roads incurred by the City Council waa greatly augmented b* the vehicular traffic from .

tne suburbs. The motor traffic wiich originated in the city was a decided benefit to Mangere, as it advertised the district, and made it easily accessibleTo the Magistrate: The bridge and the motor cars were fche making of Mangere. Continuing, witness eaid there was not a very serious amount of damage tone by the motor cars. Up to a certain point, traffic had not a very detrimental effect on the road surfaces. The. Domain drive was quoted as an instance.

To J*lr. Staunton: The Mangere if>ads had a very good surface, and did not show sign of undue wear.