TARANAKI HIGHWAYS.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 20 May 1926, Page 7

TARANAKI HIGHWAYS.

WORK OF ADMINISTRATION. MEETING OF THE COUNCIL. The No 7 District (Taranaki) Highways Council met at Stratford on Tuesday. There were piesent: Messrs T. M. Ball, district engineer of the Public Works Department (chairman), E. Walter, M.R. (Stratford County Coun. oil), J. S. Connett (Taranaki County Council), J. 13. Murdoch (Hawera County Council), C. J. Belcher (Kltliam County Council), \Y. C. Green (Egniont County Council), and it Stuart (Inglewood County Council). An apology lor absence was received from Mr. E. Long, Waimate West County Council." The. appointment of an executive for the ensuing year, which had been held over at the previous, meeting, was again deferred until the position of the chairmanship of the icspective county councils was defined, it being intimated that the previous executive would continue to officiate in the meantime. LEVEL CROSSINGS. Arising out of the discussion which took place at the previous meeting, when it was suggested that local bodies of the district should contribute onethird of the cost involved in eliminating level railway crossings of a dangerous nature, the chairman, in accordance with notice, moved: ‘‘That the resolution of May 15, 1925, that in the opinion of the council the cost of eliminating level crossings on main highways should be borne- equally by the Railway Department and the Main Highways Board without any contribution from county councils, be rescinded, and that the council reconsider the matter with a view to approving contributions bv local" alithorities.” “The mone.v set aside by the Main Highways Board to deal with level crossings is very' limited,” said the chairman, speaking to the motion, •‘and unless county' councils are prepared to offer assistance we cannot expect much progress "in the near future.”

Mr. Green was of the opinion that the Railway' Department should be held responsible for the elimination of level crossings. He thought that the Main Highways Board and the district council had sufficient to do in dealing with load reconstruction without taking action ;n what he considered was the province of the Railway Department.

Mr. 'Walter, M.P., * seconded pro forma. He instanced- the ease of the Waipuku crossing, which, he thought, could undoubtedly be regarded as dangerous, but it would be uni air to expect the Stratford county to bear the whole amount of the contribution when traffic from all parts of the group would benefit by "the elimination of the level crossing. He agreed with the chairman that the elimination of level crossings was a good system to aim at, and if local Ihi dies were not prepared to assist in meeting the expense, the work locally' would consequently have to take its turn with the thousands of level crossings which should be done away with throughout the country, and would probably not be effected for many years to come. He suggested that if local bodies in the group would agree to a contribution from the heavy traffic license fees the suggested third of the cost could he, favoured easily. Further, the traffic which would benefit to the greatest, extent would be finding the mo ue v.

Air. Alurdoc-li said he would have to vote against the motion, as his council was of the opinion that the country should provide for safe crossings over railwa vs.

Air. Belcher supported Air. Murdoch and said that All*. Long had given an intimation of a similar attitude on behalf of the Waimate West County Council.

During further discussion. Mr. Green suggested that an opportunity he given for a discussion of the question by the Taranaki local body representatives at the forthcoming conference. He accordingly moved an amendment that the motion be held over until after the conference. Mr. G'onnett seconded, and this was subsequently carried. FENCING DANGER SPOTS. Tlie chairman’s report, published elsewhere in this issue, was adopted. During the discussion, Mr. Murdoch referred to danger points on the.road over Mount Messenger, and asked it any provision was being made for fencing.

The chairman explained that such work was not provided for in the original programme, the main object being to provide the required road surface, but that safety provisions at danger points such as those instanced would probably be adopted when the essential work was completed. Referring to representations which had been made by Automobile Associations, lie gave the opinion that if the associations were prepared to subsidise the cost it would afford an inducement for moie to be done, and that a Government subsidy oil £1 for £1 basis, or even £2 for £l, would be available.

Mr. Murdoch said lie recognised that local bodies in certain instances had taken action to provide safety fences, but lie thought the principle should lie given better recognition generally.

He moved, that the Public Works Department and local bodies be recommended to have fences erected at danger points. Mr. Walter pointed out that the erection of safety fences involved certain. liability to the respective local authority. Whilst no protection was afforded, the authority could not he held liable in case of accident, but once it was provided liability was incurred. Consequently strong- feuc.es would have to be erected and would have to be maintained as such. Mr. Uelclier seconded and the motion was adopted. ESTIMATES. The estimates of the work for the ensuing year were reviewed by the chairman, who pointed out that the construction work proposed by the Public Works Department and the local bodies of the district amounted to £101,507, matte up as follows: .Public Works Department (including Mokau bridge) £30,000, Taranaki County Council £6BIS, Inglewood County Conn, oil £20,897. Stratford County Council, £2420, Waimate West County Council £BB. ICgmont County Council £35,6*57, Whangamomona County Council £il2s.

The estimated expenditure on maintenance of the 3(17 miles of main highways in the district amounted to £33.210. comprising £9OOO to be expended by the Public Works Department on good roads and £24,210 to be expended by local bodies. The latter amount was made up as follows: Clifton County Council £1240. Taranaki County Council £2900,-Inglewood County Council £2296, Stratford County Council £3367, Eltliam County Council £2315. Hawera County Council £3377, Egmont County Council

£2620, 'Waimate Vest County Council £1327, 'Whangamomona County Council £I4OO, Borough £260, Inglewood borough £330, Stratford borough £550, Eithnm borough £3uo, ITawera borough £260, O-punake Town Board £145, Manaia Town Board £298, Normanby Town Board £386, Kaponga Town Board £295. 'rise estimates were approved, and it was -decided to recommend the payment of subsidy to the local authorities. LDA X EXPEND 1T ERE. Referring to the alio oat ion of £36,.495 by the. Main Highways- Board lor subsidy on i'e-construction work in tire district during the corning year, the chairman explained that a- visit li-ad been paid by Mr. T-indle, the engineer to the hoard. Mr. Tin die had intimated that ho recognised the .sum was insufficient- to cope with the work contemplated, but had pointed ‘out. that, as only' a- cedtam sum was available, it would be nece.-wy. to bring the work as nearly as possible within its scope. Air. Green instanced the case of the Figment- Cbtmby, where lie explained a !oan of £60,000 had been approved belt) ie the beard commenced operations. At present the county had the sum of £35,000, a portion of the loan, lying idle, as the council, was tin,able .to obtain the au.thoiity for its expenditure on a. subsidy basis, the board - not approving of a subsidy beyond the amount- which would be available immediately. This meant that the completion of the-, council's .rending programme would be delayed, the council in the meantime having to meet- the interest, changes on the loan money which had been received, but which could not he made- use of without inclining the- risk of losing the- subsidy. He understood that the position of the board was that it- could not approve and. could not- make commitments until the money lor the subsidy was aval labile. His council suggested that to cope- with, the difficultly the hoard be asked to -approve- of the programme of work and allow it to be proceeded: with-, on. the understanding that- the subsidy would be- paid when available. His council was not asking for the immediate- payment of the subsidy, but merely wished to be given an assurance -that it would ultimately be- received.

Alt. Murdoch supported Air. Green and pointed out that, local authorities bad, when placing loan proposals- before- -r-ait ©payers, to indicate the whole co,st of contemplated, work and could not arrange, to liaise the .amount required in sums which would be dependant- periodically; on the amount- of subsidy available. He thought that a resolution approving of the- suggestion outlined by Mr Green would .strengthen the ha-iuta o-f the, bo,aru and that the board, could possibly arrange the matter of .subsidy, thus alio,wing ’county councils comfronted with a problem similar to that facing the Egniont County to carry on with leconstrlucfcion work. Ailtei- fuTlthor ds&iussion it was decided, on the'.proposal of Air Murdocli, to forward the following resolution as a recoin,mend,abion to the Alain Highway;.'! Board : “That where proposals ate submitted by local bodies for which loan moneys, lire, available, the board, if satisfied with, the proposals, should approve- same -and permit the local, hotly to- proceed with the work to the- extent of the .money available, with an assurance that subsidies will be forthcoming over a- period to be stated by the hoard, even though in bhe> latter part of -the period the subsidy may be the only money available for expenditure.”