CONTROL OF STATE HIGHWAYS

Press, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22269, 7 December 1937, Page 9

CONTROL OF STATE HIGHWAYS

PROVIDING FOOTPATHS DISCUSSION BY GERALDINE COUNTY COUNCIL Responsibility for the cost of providing footpaths on State highways was discussed at a meeting of the Geraldine County Council yesterday, and it was decided to take no action about the provision of footpaths within the county until the legal position was clarified. Mr F. Langbein, Main Highways Board representative in Canterbury, advised that the board at its meeting on November 17 had revoked the delegation of any of its powers to the council in respect of the ChristchurchDuncdin main highway from Winchester to the southern boundary of the county. It should be noted, the letter continued, that in future the board's control extended only to the "trafilcable" width of a roadway and did not cover items such as lighting, cleaning, footpaths, which before the inauguration of the State highways scheme were not admitted in claims for subsidy Answering a question whether the liability for constructing and maintaining footpaths on State highways fell on the local body concerned, Mr F. N. Martin, counsel to the New Zealand Counties' Association, advised that a local authority would no longer be liable for any contribution toward the cost of footpath? as from the date when the highway was classified as a State highway, subject to obligations not having been incurred at the date of classification. The chairman (Mr K. Mackenzie!• We must not incur any liability until the position is defined. Cr. F. R. Flatman: Yes. There is a difference of opinion and we will have to mark time. The chairman: It seems absurd that the Highways Board should take over part of the highway only. It will still mean dual control. The engineer (Mr C. E. Bremner) • Automobile Association signs are on the side of the road and they are subsidised.