‘Build it once’: Council still keen on new Mataura River bridge
The Gore District Council considered two big projects at its first meeting on Tuesday, and community consultation as well as the costs will be considered before any decisions are made.
The council voted to continue to investigate building a bridge to carry water pipes across the Mataura River.
It also voted to continue talks with the Invercargill City Council, Recycle South and Bond Contracts Ltd about resuming recycling in the district.
The council needs to get pipes across the river to supply drinking water to residents. It had previously applied for consent to build a cable-stayed bridge with walking and cycling access, but it lost a case in the Environment Court after some residents opposed the location and design.
On Tuesday, councillors considered whether to continue with the option of a bridge or consider drilling under the river to get the pipes across, but not without some debate.
Councillor Bret Highsted said the council needed a high-level report with costs and visuals of the options before it consulted with the community.
Councillor Keith Hovell added that the cultural impact and timing, as well as the complexity of gaining consents, also needed to be considered.
Councillor Glenys Dickson said there had been some talk in the community about installing pipes into the riverbed, but the council’s Three Waters manager, Matt Bayliss, said that option was highly unlikely to get resource consent, although he would investigate the option.
The option of putting pipes on the State Highway 1 bridge was discussed. Councillor Stewart MacDonnell said there was too much flood risk on the river and questioned how the pipes would be protected. Bayliss said he would look into it further but there was unlikely to be room for more pipes in the existing service ducts.
Councillor Neville Phillips said he was annoyed at the fact the council was four years down the track, had spent a lot of money and was no further ahead.
He favoured building a bridge at Maitland St. ‘‘Let’s build it once – it may cost a little bit more but build it for the future and then at last we can say we have done it right,’’ he said.
After considerable discussion, the bridge was the favoured option, although the cost, location and design were not settled on. Councillors voted for a high-level report to be prepared before the public was consulted.
Recycling services debate
The council also voted to continue talks with contractors to resume recycling services in the district from July 2023, but questions were raised about cost.
The Gore District Council knocked back its kerbside recycling in 2020 in the face of rising costs, a collapsing market for recyclable product, a contentious and ultimately abandoned tender process, and a lack of direction from the Government on waste minimisation.
No costs to resume the service were listed in a report from the council’s general manager of critical services, Jason Domigan.
Highsted said the costs should be put through the Annual Plan process if they were significant.
Dickson said last time the council discussed recycling the costs were quite high. She also questioned whether clear glass could be separated from coloured glass, and whether government funding was available if food waste was to be separated from general rubbish.
Mayor Ben Bell asked whether any consideration had been given for a system where residents paid a contractor themselves to pick up their rubbish and the cost was not covered in their rates. Other councils had moved to that model, he said.
Domigan said that had not been considered but generally speaking it would be cheaper to work with other Southland providers and councils.
Bell also questioned whether the service could resume sooner than July 2023, but Domigan said ‘‘probably not’’.
Councillors voted to consider the costs while continuing to make decisions about resuming services.