H.—35

8

bridge would mean a direct saving to the residents of the county of about £4,000 per annum over existing charges, principally in freight on dairy-produce outwards, and on manures, &c., inwards. The Mayor of Takapuna stated that his Council supported the construction of a bridge, as it would give a stimulus to the growth of population, would improve business, and would result in a substantial appreciation in property-values. His Council was in favour of a toll bridge on the principle of the user paying, a local authority to be set up with power to raise the necessary money on the security of the bridge and tolls, guaranteed by the State, or the granting to a construction company of a charter to construct a bridge, the company taking the tolls to cover interest, sinking fund, and maintenance for a fixed term, at the end of which the bridge to be handed over to some local authority for administration as a free bridge. The Mayor of Devonport presented the official view of the Devonport Borough Council. After submitting borough statistics, he stated that the ferry service was efficient and satisfactory, though at times there was congestion on the vehicular ferry, and no vehicular ferry was available between 11 p.m. and 7 a.m. The Council considered that existing financial obligations precluded the ratepayers undertaking new commitments in respect of a bridge. Estimates of fares via bridge and causeway across Shoal Bay, and by ferry, were furnished, and attention was drawn to the large capital expenditure that would be required to provide buses to carry over the bridge passengers now travelling by ferry. Comparison was also made of the estimated cost of carrying goods via bridge to Devonport and by ferry. Summarized, the Devonport Borough Council's view regarding Devonport's interest in the bridge project was : (a) The effect would depend upon the site selected ; (b) no route would produce any advantage for general passenger transport, but diversion of Takapuna passengers now travelling by bus to ferry might cause curtailment of Devonport service or increase of fares ; (c) the owners of motor-cars would use the bridge route, but (d) the vehicular ferry would be the most economical. The Mayor of Northcote, on behalf of the Northcote Borough Council, put in borough statistics. He set out the advantages likely to accrue from the construction of a bridge, as follows : The unsettled areas on the North Shore, up to eight miles from the Chief Post Office, would become populated ; the east coast beaches would become health resorts for city dwellers ; the Waitemata County would become settled in small farms up to twenty miles away; the metalling of the main highway to Whangarei would cause traffic to be diverted via Northcote, which was the most suitable location for the northern bridgehead. Regarding finance, the witness considered that this should be provided by the State, failing which a company should be allowed to build the bridge, recouping itself from tolls. The cost of the bridge should be found by the State in a similar manner as provision was made for main traffic routes from the Public Works Fund. A toll bridge would be the last alternative. The Mayor pf Birkenhead submitted borough statistics. His Council was of opinion that a bridge would be of great value to the North Shore boroughs and also to the development of North. Auckland. The Council supported the erection of a bridge in whatever location was considered desirable, but regarded the Point ErinBirkenhead site as the most suitable. He favoured the charging of tolls, but the Council would not object to a flat rate struck over the whole area, to be served, as security for any deficiency. He was opposed to the application of the betterment principle. The Chairman of the Town-planning Committee of the Auckland City Council, by direction of the Council, presented the report of the committee on the question of the bridge. If the bridge would be an advantage to the trade of the city and province the Council would favour its construction, subject to satisfactory arrangements for its construction and maintenance, and to its location harmonizing with city development. While the bridge would be a great advantage, it was not a present necessity for the development of the city area, and would not be so for some time to come. For present needs and for the maintenance of the present rate of progress, for some time to come there was abundant land available on the south side of the harbour, which should be utilized fully before any additional inducement was offered for the population to spread on the north side of the harbour. Whether a bridge