DISTRICT HIGHWAY COUNCIL.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19624, 30 October 1925, Page 13

DISTRICT HIGHWAY COUNCIL.

MONTHLY MEETING. A mooting of tlio District Highway Council No. 17 was held in the Public Works Office yesterday and was attended by Mr J. R. Clarks, district engineer (in the chair), and Messrs H. M. Driver, J. Bennetts, Walter Blackie, and D. R, Jack. Mr E. F. Evans, of the Public Works pepartmont, who had acted as chairman during Mr Marks’s absence in America, was accorded a vote of thanks for the manner ;n which he had carried out his duties. Mr Marks, on taking the chair, said that any knowledge ho had gained of highways abroad would be placed, at, the disposal of the council. The Public Works Engineer-in-chief advised that it was intended to introduce an additional clause in the motor lorry regulations providing for the use on roads o* any motor lorry which, with the maximum load it was licensed to carry, weighed not more than six tons.—Received. A letter was received from the Clutha Countv Council asking if the BalcluthaArthurton section of the Dunedm-Invercar-gill Main Highway could bo classified as a third-class road.—The Chaimian said that the load would thus bo limited to six tons. They would notice, however, that fche council asked that the winter months the load should be restricted to two tons.— On the motion of Mr Bennetts, seconded bv Mr Blackie, it was decided to inform the council that the District Council did not think it would be reasonable to reduce the load belcw six tons on this section of road at any time of the year. It was remarked that tne section was an important part of a highway, and that it would impose certain hardships if the load were restricted to two tons. , It was decided that the District Council should not offer any opinion on the loading which a road should be expected to carry until all the county councils had forwarded their ideas on the matter. —The Chairman said that replies had been received from two councils and that they were both “six tenners.” The Main Highway Board advised that it could subsidise the cost of maintaining detour roads to which traffic had to be diverted during the period under which the 1 main highway was under reconstruction. There were sometimes conditions under which the subsidy would be paid.—Received. The Board notified that the first examination of overseers and road foremen for certificates of competence under the Main Highways Board would be held, probably in the second week of December next. The Main Highways Board advised that it had been decided to ask the local authorities to have notice boards erected on main highways, showing the county boundaries. — Received. The Town Clerk, Dunedin, wrote advising that, subject to ratification by the council, the Works Committee was agreeable to contributing towards the maintenance of the road through Green Island, after it had been tar-sealed, an amount not to exceed the average sum which had been contributed under the existing agreement.— It was decided, on the motion of Mr Mackie, seconded by Mr Bennetts, that the Highways Board should be asked to contribute on a basis of £2 for £1 to the Green Island Borough Council for the reconstruction and tar-sealing of about two miles of the main highway through the borough. —lt was considered that the total cost 'would be about £2OOO. . A letter was received from the Mam Highways Board, stating that tho board proposed making a visit to the South Island, when the position regarding the Dunedin city boundary to the Portobello road would come up for discussion. The board also wrote that with regard to the application of the Portobello Road Board for assistance in the purchase of machinery that it regretted being unable to accede to the request in view of the fact that there were no highways running through the road district. —Received. It_ waa pointed out that there was a question which road to Portobello should no declared the main highway—the high road or the low road. Some discussion took place'on the local body which should pay the sum of £lO still required for work on the Manuka George bridges. It was Pointed out that the Tuapoka County Council had declined to pay the sum.—The Chairman said that the Highways Board had paid for the construction of the bridges on a basis of £3 for £l, and it had cost it £ISOO as compared with £SOO from the local bodies concerned. —Mr Duncan moved “That this council recommends that the Highways Board should advise the Tuapeka County Council that it considers the additional amount of £lO should bo found by the Tuapeka Council, and that if it is not the board should deduct it from the council’s subsidy.”—Mr Jack seconded the motion, which was carried, Mr Bennetts voting against it. Mr Bennetts moved that the request of the Lawrence Borough Council for a subsidy on the cost of repairs to Kearney’s Bridge bo granted. The motion was carried, the District Council to ascertain how much the Lawrence Council was entitled to.—The Main Highways Board wrote advising that as Kearney’s Bridge was within the boundaries of the borough the subsidy payable was limited to the expenditure on the adjoining highway in Tuapeka County. Mr Jack moved that the request of the Clutha County Council that the traffic bridge over the Clutha River should be declared part of the main highway be granted, and that a recommendation be forwarded to the board that it should ho so declared.—Mr Bennetts seconded the motion. —The Chairman explained that if tho hoard took over the bridge •it would pay half the cost of keeping up tho bridge and the Clutha Borough half. Would tho other outside bodies, ho asked, agree to continue to contribute towards tho cost ? At present Ihe upkeep was defrayed by the three local bodies in three parts.—lt was agreed that the bridge was really part of the main highway.—The motion was carried, and it was .decided to place full particulars of tho position regarding tho present payment of the upkeep of tho bridge before the Highways Board. Plans of the new bridge over the Waiwera stream were forwarded by the Clutha County Council, and a request was made for the payment of an additional £2OO (on a £ for £ basis) to the previous allocation of £8(X) on the £ foi £ basis). —The Chairman said tho plans would be looked over, and would be forwarded to the Highways Board, with tho request for tho additional £2OO.

ments, and although the Exhibition opened in a few wockr’ time, Mr A. R. Harris, manager for Broadcasters (Ltd.), had not -■greed to -he conditions jmt before him by the Exhibition Committee. “The committee intended to accept the offer made by Amalgamated Wireless, but the department, after having given its promise, refused them a license either owing to the undue influence or for some other unknown reason,' withdrew from the arrangement made, and stated that the broadcasting would have to be given to Broadcasters, Ltd.,” continued Mr Veitch. “The Exhibition authorities wore strongly opposed to this and some time was wasted in unavailing telegraphic communication between the Exhibition authorities and the department. “Ultimately the Exhibition authorities had to give up the previous idea, and is now ncgotiatin" with the Broadcasting Company. The conditions have now been in Mr Harris’s hands for 10 days, but he has not accepted them so far. Mr Bingham, Mr O'Neill, and myself have made ns many preliminary arrangements as possible, but wo can do nothing further until wo hear from Mr Harris. “The committee is terribly annoyed and disappointed in the fact that the Government will not allow Amalgamated Wireless to operate, and has no confidence in Broadcasters, Ltd.,” concluded Mr Veitch. “Broadcasters are going to slap up a set that might be all right and might not. If it is ready in time for the opening, I will bo surprised—if it is efficient I will bo amazed.”

For the present Magna Vox has no comment lo make, but it is to be noted that Mr Yeitcli’s statement was made on October