SPANNING THE WAITEMATA

Northern Advocate, 8 November 1934, Page 2

SPANNING THE WAITEMATA

TALLIES OF TRAFFIC. COMPANY CRITICISED. t Special to “Northern Advocate.”] AUCKLAND, This Day. In an effort to help the project of the Auckland Harbour bridge, the Northcote Borough Council is to take tallies of vehicular and passenger traffic to and from the North Shore. The Mayor, Mr R. Martin, said at the council meeting on Tuesday night that from information he had received from the company there was hope of the bridge. The tally is to be taken at the request of the Auckland Harbour Bridge Co., Ltd., who suggested in a letter to the council that figures supplied by Northcote would be considered as authoritative by financiers in London. Correspondence from certain financiers to the Auckland City Council was enclosed. The financiers expressed confidence that finance could be secured if the tallies could show that traffic had increased since the commission of 1929; and that the failure of the City Council to supply the tallies asked for some time ago had been a major factor in the breaking down of negotiations. Mr N. S. Davidson, who is the representative of the council on the directorate of the company, said that in the 1929 commission a total of 780 vehicles was given as crossing the harbour by vehicular ferry. The next year an unofficial total was shown as 907. “I think the time has come for the bridge,” said Mr W. C. Ellis, “but I think the less we have to do with the company the better. They have had years of trial, and they have failed. They should surrender their charter,” He had been in touch with the company, said the Mayor, and he had received infoi’mation which had surprised him. From what he had been told in confidence by the company there was hope for the bridge. He thought that the tally would be useful.

Mx’ Davidson: 4 “I feel sure that if Mr Ellis knew as much as I do, or the Mayor does, he would be prepared to support the company. Things are a lot rosier than they have been for a long time.” “I am surprised to hear that things are rosy,” said Mr Fowler. “I think that the company is discourteous to ask the council on whose judgment it evidently relies to spend money and time on something about which it gives no information.” Mr A. G. Osborne excused the company for its failure to supply information, on the ground that it might be highly delicate. If the company failed now, the position might be reviewed with the object of allowing some other authority to try to finalise the project. It was decided to take the tally. Mr Ellis was the only dissentient.