SOUTH ROAD CROSSING

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 27 July 1927, Page 4

SOUTH ROAD CROSSING

MOST DANGEROUS IN DISTRICT.

SUGGESTED ELIMINATION

NE'GO Ti ATI ON S R EVIENVED

Negotiations between the Hawera Borough Council and the District Highways Council with reference to the elimination of the railway level crossing on the Main South Road at Hawera were reviewed in a letter which was forwarded this week to the District Highways Council. The letter, a copy of which was tabled at last night’s meeting of the Borough Council, was forwarded in reply to a. letter from the 1 Highways Council, dated July 7, to which objection was raised at the monthly meeting of the Borough Council.

In outlining the facts, the borough’s leply diew attention to the letter from the Highways Council to the Mayor on IMay 19, 1925, stating that the crossing ‘‘had been reported by No. 7 Highway Council as the most dangerous crossing in the highway district, and tr.e Main Highways Board lias decided tiiat the crossing should be eliminated as early ns possible”; that the approximate cost was £4400, and inquiring what contribution the borough would make, and also suggesting that the Borough Council should confer with the County Council, to which an appeal had also been made. To this the Borough Council had replied, stating that in view of the resolutions passed by the Taranaki Local Bodies’ Association and the Hawera County Council tile Borough Council was not prepared to make any contribution, and had replied similarly, betting out reasons, to a letter received in August. LOCAL BODIES’ RECOMMENDATION. The letter proceeds as follows: “Nothing further occurred until memhens of the board visited Taranaki recently, when, according to newspaper reports, they suggested that the Taranaki Local Bodies’ Association should reconsider the matter. The association at its annual meeting on May 31 last accordingly went fully into the position, and a resolution moved by Mr. Con nett and seconded by Mr. L. Nairn was carried, as under:

“That in the interest of the province, that local bodies in No. 7 highways district be recommended to contribute 10 per cent, of the cost towards elimination of level crossings, 5 per cent, from heavy traffic fees and 5 per cent, from the individual interested local bodies’ general fund.

“Prior to moving the motion, Mr. Connetb, who is a member of the Highways Council, gave the following summary of the position, reported in ‘The Hawera Star' of June 1:

“ ‘The chairman (Mr. J. S. Connett) said that the Railway Department was prepared to set aside £25,000 per annum for the elimination of level crossings. This would be subsidised by the Highways Board. The speaker had suggested at the Highways Council meeting that Taranaki should contribute five per cent, from heavy traffic fees and five per cent, from the local bodies interested. Ten per cent, would amount to between £4OO and £SOO. This was not excessive, and would be an indication that the association was willing to assist in elimination. The offer would be acceptable to the Railway Department and the Highways Board.’

“The Mayor, as the borough’s representative. supported the motion, and when the matter came before the Borough Council it was approved and a copy of resolution sent to the Higliwavs Council as follows:

CONTRIBUTION APPROVED. “ ‘That this council approve the general principle of making a contribution towards tiie cost of eliminating level crossings on the lines of the resolution passed by the Taranaki Local Bodies’ Association, namely: (a) As regards South Road crossing, the Hawera Borour Council and Hawera County Council to provide live per cent, of total cost in equal shares; (b) to join with other local bodies in the No. 7 highways district in pioviding five per cent, out of heavy traffic license fees of total cost "of eliminating abovementioned and other crossings in such district; (c) the proportionate part of the lastly mentioned live per cent, to be ascertained on basis of heavy traffic tees collected by tiie various local bodies; and th(is council urges the Public Works Department to put local work in hand at once, for the reasons that it is the most dangerous level crossing in Taranaki, and the work will assist the district in providing work for the unemployed during the winter.’

“Tour reply of July 7 states- that the board is unable to understand the outlook of the boorugh, which in one part of its letter states that this is the most dangerous crossing in Taranaki and work of elimination would assist to overtake the unemployment difficulty, and in another part of the same fetter says that its interest is only 24 per cent. In view of this attitude the board has no other course but to divert its finances to other districts where the local bodies take a more reasonable view of their responsioilities.

“The council considers it is most regrettable that such a reply should have ceen sent, combining as it does both discourtesy and misstatement.” To make the position clear the following points were emphasised: “The council’s resolution as to contribution was passed in the belief that the amount was acceptable to the board; no specific sum has at any time been mentioned by the board as the borough’s contribution; the reason why the special contribution is only 24 per cent, is because the crossing happens to he oil a boundary road, and the other 21 per cent, is consequently provided by the county, hut this makes no difference to the hoard, as it, would still receive 5 per cent, from the borough and county and 5 per cent, from all" Local bodies in the highways district, including Hawera borough and county; the borough has agreed to pay its proportion of the 5 per cent, to" he provided by the local bodies in respect of ail crossings eliminated in the district; the District Highways Council, and not the borough, is the authority for the statement that the crossing is the most dangerous in the highwav district. “In view of the foregoing,” concluded the letter, “this council considers it is only reasonable that the board should reconsider the position, and is strongly of opinion that if it fails to do so, and loss of life results, the board must accept all responsibility.”