HEAVY TRAFFIC.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13347, 29 November 1906, Page 7

HEAVY TRAFFIC.

, CITY AND WAITEMATA COUNCILS. '. >-'v'rt';y■..." /■■■. : -' '■* : ' A LIVELY DISCUSSION. THK heavy traffic question came up for discussion at the meeting of the Waitemata, County Council yesterday. The chief engineer of roads, Wellington, rote stating that he had received a, letter from the Auckland City Council relating to the' carriage of water pipes, collars for water pipes, etc., on the Great North Road ' d other roads mentioned in the by-laws. a' He asked the Council to show cause as • * on as possible why the Council had con- ? '• !idered it necessary to pass such a. by-law. ?'*' He also asked that the facta, or any re- : marks in connection with the question that would be useful in enabling the Minister to H: jgal with the matter, should be forwarded. He suggested that the question should be fi gettted amicably. If an arrangement was l'"' not come to, an inquiry would be held to £ ■'■ consider whether or not it was necessary to !' V disallow the" by-law. ..,.'; - The letter from the town clerk of Auck- ''■■'"'< laudato the Department stated that the '? ".'■ roads Specified, with two exceptions on the i--: ' _th side of the harbour, were those used V in travelling from the city of Auckland to . t jj e waterworks at Nihotupu and Waitakerei : . and to the public cemetery at Waikumete. .-.. , The contract entered into by the City Council and the carting contractors threw all the liability for any damage on the contractors, but they and their carting sub-contractors bad several times complained to the City '•". " Council of being harassed in the carrying out of the contract by the demand of the County Council, which in September, 1906, claimed £300 for repairs to the roads, ami !- this amount had to be deposited before the. v .work could .proceed. The city engineer estimated the damage done to the roads by the carting contract at £58 6s Bd, against • the £500 claimed. The City Council feared that should repairs be urgently required '-'■"-/ to the pipe line by reason of any burst, leakage, or other cause, much valuable time might E be lost in having to first arrange with the County Council as to the "amount .to be paid for possible damage by carting over the roads. The Auckland City Coun- -• cil, as well as the, contractors, were rate- - -payers of the County Council, and the sub- .:; contractors paid a heavy license. The by--law seriously affected the statutory power ' of the City Council in carrying out such important works as the establishment of a , permanent water supply for the city and j suburbs. '" The city did not wish to evade '. its; responsibilities. The letter concluded ,by asking that the by-law be disallowed if sufficient reason was shown. /I j; The clerk (Mr. Cawkwell) said the letter ' : *-K'-; was a tissue of mistatements. It stated ■ that they imposed heavy fees, and the total .; •, fees were £6. • ■ - Mr. Dye: I think a plain statement of facts should be placed before them. That ;: . is » oue-sided statement. Mr. McVeagh (solicitor to the Council), ."'"• who was present at the time, said the ;/v Minister was not guided by any fixed rule , whatever in exercising the power conferred •-'''■■ . oh; him under the. Act. If the by-law was considered unreasonable, it was a very good ■-..■.•'ground;for having it decided in the Court. '&''.[ No Ceurt would hold a person bound by a . by-law-, which . was unreasonable. If the Court held that the by-law was a reasonable, one, then the Minister would not disallow it. But the Court had already im- ;;•'■■■■'■ posed a fine in one case. There was another ;; fact. v -i The Auckland City Council owned a V large area in the county boundaries, for purposes of waterworks, as a catchment area, out that «area did - not . contribute to the general rates. ■-; The Auckland City-- CounM i ; ; cil S claimed that ;it should be exempt from •'•■ ■': "a■proper"contribution- to the cost of the roads, and at * the same time it claimed statutory exemption from the payment of rates. :• That was a most unreasonable positiotfrJor the City Council to take up.,. . He . j.,., thought the proper course would be. for the Council to reply to the town s clerk's letter .-;.•- controverting the allegations, Which were »■ ;,, not in accordance with fact, and setting out ■<>.'. the true position. The Council, however, should allow any emergency work' to be done immediately by the City Council. (Hear, hear.) '■■■ _ -, . Mr. Cochran: I. do not think the Council would be unreasonable in such a case. The Chairman (Mr. J. O'Neill: lam surprised at the Mayor and councillors of •",.; Auckland trying to shuffle out of their liabilities in such a manner. " '. '"■ v, Mr. Dye moved.'"That the clerk reply to the Department setting forth the Coun- ■,'.■ cil's position, making special reference to the city's catchment area."' Mr. Cochran: It is a shuffling business, and the City Council ought to be ashamed of themselves. '".-' v ■ Mr. Kerr-Taylor: When .we have a by- ' '" law that brings them up to their bearings '• they, want to shuffle out of it. r , .'-The Clerk: They shirk their moral re- >■'..'; sponsibilities, and want to shuffle- out of ;[■., this by the back door. •" The motion of Mr. Dye's was agreed to.