MINISTER FAVOURS BARRIER FOR RICCARTON CROSSING

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27816, 15 November 1955, Page 14

MINISTER FAVOURS BARRIER FOR RICCARTON CROSSING

Barrier protection of the Riccarton road railway crossing is now likely. After a deputation from the Riccarton Borough Council and his second personal inspection of the crossing in a few days, the Minister of Railways (Mr J. K. McAlpine) yesterday said that he would be happy to break the precedent of the Railways Department not to provide barrier protection at one-line crossings if the borough council would apply to the National Roads Board for an extra grant to cover half the cost of the installation. “If you are turned down, we will have to have another look at it,” Mr McAlpine told the council and representatives of the Christchurch Transport Board at the crossing late yesterday afternoon. H* said he was going to be in real trouble by breaking a precedent unless the council gave him some help. “We thrashed this matter pretty hard before your appointment as Minister of Railways,” tne Mayor of Riccarton (Mr E. J. Bradshaw) told Mr McAlpine when he received the deputation at the National Party centre. The borough council ha A been very concerned over the crossing since the keeper was removed in November. 1953, after trams were stopped. The crossing was then protected only by sets of lights on the left-hand side, and the council asked at that time for barrier protection or, as a minimum, sets of lights on both sides of the road. After a good deal of correspondence and “nagging” by the council, the then Minister (Mr W. S. Goosman) ordered lights to be installed on both sides of the road. Concern was felt over the protection of the crossing and, after submissions, improvements were made to the visibility. “But we are still of the opinion that the crossing requires, at any rate, barrier protection,” said Mr Bradshaw. "We really feel it needs an overhead bridge. If we ask too much, the department says barrier protection is not required on single tracks; but we sav it is required, because Riccarton road is an extarordinary road, carrying the greatest volume of traffic in the South Island and the greatest in New Zealand without a road barrier.”

Dangerous Traffic .vA taken . in JuI ?’ 1954 - showed that 71,000 vehicles used the crossing m a week, or an average of 10,143 vehicles a day, Mr Bradshaw said. Between 4.30 pun. and 5.30 p.m. on a Friday, 2000 vehicles, or 33 a minute, crossed. Drivers had no chance of observing the lights and signs, and the principle of follow-the-leader applied. The few trains on the single line were a danger, as the smallness of the rail traffic led to contempt of the crossing by road users. With ■ the volume of road traffic, the users needed all the safeguards and protection they could set. Three cases of “near escapes” were recently reported by the Transport Department, one truck driver, who had been prosecuted, missing a train by 12 inches, said Mr Bradshaw. “I know this crossing as well as anyone in the room, as I have lived here all my life and have travelled over the crossing many times,” said the Minister. To make himself acquainted * with the situation, he had gone to the crossing the other evening, and in five minutes by his .watch, 105 vehicles made the crossing; so the deputation • did not need to impress him with the importance of its case. ■ _ ' _ .The difficulty from the railway operating point of view, said Mr McAlpine, was the system under which priorities ior crossing protection were assessed. Giving *k e details of the system, he said the Riccarton road crossing was in a high category. Because of the obvious greater danger, with two lines, the standard was that barrier protection* should not be given to single . .*T feel that it be a very good idea if we went out and had a look at the crossing and discussed it on the

spot,” said the Minister. “My inclination is to break die precedent and give you a barrier now.” Agreeing that it would be better to discuss on the spot the benefits of a barrier rather than talking, the chair-, man of the Transport Board (Mr C. C. Holland) said the board regarded Ric carton road as a dangerous crossing and as a potential death trap. It might be that there had been no serious accidents since the removal of the crossing-keeper, but there was always a first time and, in the case of a serious accident, the first was always one too many. Although the board’s drivers had to stop at the crossing under the regulations, familiarity bred contempt, and they could have their minds distracted by other traffic and quite easily miss the lights. The board had three routes operating over the crossing, and in an ordinary week 1764 used carrying an average of 9000 passengers a day.. That a traffic officer was on dutv* at _the crossing on race days indicated the danger. The board would probably approve of an overhead bridge as a compromise; they were, m Canterbury, built in the country areas and not in the areas with heavy traffic. Transport -officers could not be at the crossing every hour of the day, said Mr J. Shankland, jun., a busdriver and president of the Tramway Workers Union. Hg said he-could give the Minister three instances where tragedies could have occurred at the crossmg in one month, busdrivers haying flagged cars to stop when the lights were flashing and the' bells ringing. Quite frequently both sets of lights were obscured. Express trains travelled at xairlv high speeds over the crossing, r.nd the time when the lights came into operation when the trains were near Kilmarnock street was too short. . ’ B s c »king a Osedent Although he was inclined to break precedence by ordering the barrier to be installed, it did not necessarily mean that the Railways Department would be protecting the people of Riccarton, and if the road was a' main highway the National Roads ifcard would pay half the cost. The KfStorton borough received 22s 6d a year Ifor every person resident from road taxation and perhaps might contribute something. Mr Bradshaw: You are asking us to create a precedent now. The Minister’s suggestion would be against the law, because the council was required to spend the road taxation contribution on roads until they were in order, said Mr R. Serjeant, Riccarton <* town clerk. “You can apply to the Minister for permission,” replied Mr McAlpine. “I mean it seriously. It is not entirely our responsibility.” The council was handling ratepayers’ and road board money and there was no responsibility on a local body to pu * u P a Carrier, said Mr Bradshaw. Mr Holland: Many who use the crossing are not residents of Riccarton. You might as well charge Dunedin people. When the Minister inquired the cost of a barrier, Mr A. T. Gandell (general manager of railways) said it was £l2OO. . Mr McAlpine: ’That helps. I thought it was more. Barriers in City After the Minister and Mr Gandell had inspected the crossing shortly before 5 o’clock, Mr McAlpine said they had come to the conclusion that the real hazard was the stopping of buses. . When Mr McAlpine suggested that the borough should ask for a special grant from the National Roads Board towards the cost of the barrier, Mr Bradshaw asked: “Are you getting any contribution from the City Council for barrier protection on the Lyttelton liner* “No,” replied Mr McAlpine. °I think Riccarton should get something as an extra contribution from the roads board.” Mr Bradshaw promised that the council would make an early request for financial assistance from the roads board. '