SOUTH ROAD.

Press, Volume LXIV, Issue 19462, 8 November 1928, Page 10

SOUTH ROAD.

HIGHWAYS BOARD AND COUNTY COUNCIL.

LOCAL AUTHORITY IGNORED.

Beference was made at the meeting of the executive of the Progress League to the manner in which the Highways Board had decided on a heavier and more costly reconstruction schemo for the South road than the Paparua County Council desired, or was in a position to finance.

Mr G. Magiuness detailed the history of the matter on tho lines already published. He said that he desired to stress the fact that the Paparua County Council had protested against being overridden by the Highways Board; and also that there was no question of bitumen versus concrete in the proposal. Concrete might be the better road, or it might not. The County Council was working on the principle that it was more desirable to have mileage than heavy construction. Dealing with the specifications for the Lincoln road, he referred to the requirement that a kerb should be put in on each side of the reconstructed roadway, and said that it involved tearing up a portion of a well-consolidated road, at a cost, he understood, of about £IOOO per mile. The specifications for bitumen on that road were too drastic when the nature of the foundation was considered. The excessive character of the specifications for the SockbiirnBolleston stretch of the South road was shown when compared With those for a Wellington road. For the last-mentioned 10,000 tons of material were called for in respect of 500 chains, compared with 10,987 tons for 313 chains on the South road.

In Canterbury they were favourably Bituated so far as material was concerned, but they wore losing that advantage by the Insistence of the Board oil thick Saving and .unnecessary Kerbs, What was needed in Canterbury was the laying of 2 j inohos or 3 inches of bituminous concrete Ofi existing road sur. faces. If this were done, they could get double the mileage for the s&jne cost, (Hear, hear,) Mr G. M. Hall asked if the District Highways CoUfcciJ had anything to do with the matter f

itr Maglnndsfi Said th» Highways Coiihcij we*e Simply one of those demo* cratic ideas that did not function. Mr Hall suggested that at the present juncture the matter Should be left to the Highways Board and the County Council

Mr P. B, dimie Said that there was an important principle involved—the ignoring of the local body. The meeting went into committee to allow Mr MttginnesS to giv* SOnie information regarding the negotiations pending.

On resuming Mr 0. H. Olibborn said the matter raised the question of the statutory powers of the Bpard. If the Board was acting within its legal powers they might as well shut tip, or take steps to get the Act amended. Another aspect was as right of the Board to ignore the character of reconstruc- | Hon preferred by the local body. He J moved: "That the matter be referred tp I the Highways Committee to go into it and report as soon as possible.' ? Mr G. H Judd Seconded the mMO». Vital PJUtcipW InydivW. M* f a. Fieshef ie,k thftt there *** a vital principle involved. If the466al body had to contribute a*a if the tod was using money to it iftfidi; contributed,by motorists, surely invthe spending of that money the Bow should take into consideration the condition*, such as those on the ;fit»u# roadj wh>*e the depth of Shihgif #ft£ rtmted a different kind ff| dpnltrUfltion; from that in any other part Of Canterbury.. The Board had in hand South Island money totalling £50(1,000, .and proposed to spend on tiebnsiiructittjft between the Selifryn and S&Jtwate* Credit £300,000 in Siic setflwttm,W yeariy. ■ ■ ■',•;.•■' "'-■'•■ ' ;\.-'- : a Btm mm &m -'What we want,'* Flesber, "i»> sebatate Board Ut the South island, with headquarters in Obristchurch) with its staff heft loew supervision, so that mti mt& tioii would be paid to the of people who knew }m\ eohditiojldj ;f U Highways Sdard Should not attest W settle south mm fm\m %? m$ tioiiS applicable to the North JtjWnd. Five of tb? si* member! of the Boß>d are North island people, siibjeetti' th> push of the North Island, and what; eliiiiiee had the solitarjr South lii&ftd representative lit sufch With a Separate 1 Boaifd for the Kfltttb fslatid sudh a iitimtf as would hot have We Wi ft right to insist on tbeY 868 th 4 HI»Hd money not beini* wasted, to « titl nted would be done in/this parti6ularr else* The lieague 1 should get behind on agit&tion of that kind [with the View tf benefitingthe p6op> m ieprtieiit by getting value for fte^frd^yVV The motion.Was >gfeed toy Stopb&ed doipWpW. :\-'\V Mr Pj iiangbeitii Sesidtfni flngifleeri Ptibil* Woiki and representative of the Highway* Bojufd W -Cariterbufy, told a representative of Tire tym Jesterday that th« Bo*ra had submitted a proposal to the Papfirua Caiihty Council that M tiOUhiJr»B |»tt*e of the cost, of th<* reconstruction of tte South road should be £1250 |# mil)*, the estimate of the Under the original conditions the County Council WAs to pay one-fourth of thb cost.

the Board's proposed compromise has yet to be edtteidoiea by the Odunty Council