MANGERE TARRED ROADS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 17889, 17 September 1921, Page 10

MANGERE TARRED ROADS.

Sir,—May! be permitted to state the following facts in ' connection with the Mangere tarred-road: scheme! In September, 1919, the ratepayers authorised the ■ManuXiu County Council to raise a loan of £30,000 for the purpose of degrading, reinstalling, ; and/, tarring the metalled roads throsighbut 7 the /district, amounting to 28& miles. Specifictatiohs had been' prepared by Mr. Lopdell, engineer for the oGonty, giving. amount of material and the cost for each partigoiar road: and these specifications were, explained to the ratepayers at various meetings preceding the poy. According to these Specifications, the firet; aection of tfae work «ras to commenca at the* railway bridge, Qnehtniga, and terminate at ,Wahasiey Road, Mangere., it distance of 151, chains. . Fop this portion of the worfe the engine* : allotted a mm of £2526, The work was com•.manced' last' summer, hat such draßcie alterations -had l>aen* made to the plana—without the knowledge or conseht of the ratepayers---thafc ( oh an r incompleted . posftic.i of 71 chains the cost' has already been, according to the engineers own %ares, £5570. To tins has to b,* added the bitumen dressing, whiii wfil probably bring the; total to £6500 for; 71 chains. I ask if it is any wonder that the ratepayers are indignant and complain thai they were fooled into voting "for the loan. ?rom the time the loan was raised to the time the work was- started, a period of only 18 months elapsed, Is it conceivable that during s this period circumsfeances go changed that an increased4expenditure of something liJia , £5000 was r«»c»ssary on a short section of I§l chains? Th<> position of the council is made worse by the fact that .Wo years ago at a numLor of meetings the scheme was urged isf ©a the ratepayers, who were, told in the most positivei; manner that the. engineer had thoroughly tested the depth of metel on the different roads and that the quantities of material allowed by Mm were ample for making good and permanent roads. Even if it were 1-jund necessary to spend a'" hugely increased amount on tie section under construction, it was not a fair thing. to take the money allocated to other roads. . The ratepayers should have been called together, the position put before them, and if they considered that the scheme should he enlarged other ways of fL/ancing it could have been found. The chairman of the council, in reply to the copulation of . ratepayers, stated the work could still be completed for the money set apart for the purpose, and in this he -was supported by the engineer. As a layman, I ask how this is possible? Mr. Lopdell has still 60 chains of his first .section to do, which will bring th<i total cost of the 131 chains to approximately £8000, against £2500 allowed by him for the Bection, leaving a deficiency uf £5600. How is he going tc overtake this deficiency without cutting down his quantities? Even if he can complete the r*st of the work, as he says be can, mil* for mile, according to his estimates, a further sum of over £5000 will still be reqvired to finish the scheme when the !oaa money is exhausted. Mr. Bell told us at the Mangere meeting that he thought 20 miles of the scheme could be completed with the money. To the deputation on Tuesday, he said that the whole distance of 28 miles could still be finished. Will Mr. Bell pardon me for asking which of these statement* represents his opinion? 1 J. MONTGOIJZKTE, Chairman Mangere Ratepayers' Association.