THE CITY STREETS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20832, 26 September 1929, Page 5

THE CITY STREETS.

WORKS COMMITTEE’S OPERATIONS. • CRITICISED BY COUNCILLORS. REPORT ON METHODS ' APPROVED. The methods of the Works-Committee in dealing with the city streets were strongly criticised at the meeting of the City Council last night when the committee submitted a report on a motion by Gr Mitchell that it should go into the question whether the. road work could be carried out more economically. Those who were prone to criticise, however, were in . a minority, and an amendment to the motion that the report should be adopted was defeated. The report stated: “The terms of the motion necessitated a general investigation into the whole of the operations of the street construction and maintenance branch of the Engineer’s Department, with a view to determining whether or not .works arc now being carried out economically, and if not, then in what directions expenditure might be curtailed as proposed in the motion. ' A comparative' statement of costs of various. classes of work on a yardage basis was accordingly obtained from the city-engineer, and these-are set out in full in the-engineer’s report. The committee is of the opinion that on the figures furnished by the city engineer, and after taking all other factors into consideration, the work of street reconstruction and maintenance is, at the present time, being ■ carried out at the lowest possible cost, and that further savings could only, be effected by impairing the stability and value of the work. In that connection it is necessary .to state that,- before any work is undertaken, the economical aspect is given primary consideration, and in the majority, of operations the • margin ■ between strictly essential work and the bare , minimum , is very. finely drawn. Thc neid for making the yearly allocations go as far as possible demands that that should be so. The practice is that streets are dealt with strictly according to the needs of every particular case, bearing in, mind the locality, class and , condition of , road, traffic requirements and the amount of money available. The committee is satisfied that the existing system of reconstruction and maintenance is the most economical under the above conditions, and enables the largest possible amount of work to be done with the funds available. - Improved types of surfaces can.be given in various ways if further funds can be made available, but it should not be overlooked that the cost of maintaining such surfaces will not be any less and will probably be greater than the cost’of maintenance under existing conditions. On the other hand the committee confidently asserts that hearing in mind the tr<*' mendous and ever-growing. calls on thte works allocation, due almost wholly to the demands of modern traffic, the streets throughout the city are on the whole, in reasonably good order,” Or Wilson, in moving the adoption- of the report, said that in passing the pre-' vious resolution and sending it bafek to the Works Committee the council had not been expressing its favour of what was meant. The press evidently thought so. The city engineer, in his report, made it clear that no curtailment could take place to keep the roads in‘the present state,-and if they; were to be improved with better surface increased expenditure must take place. The costs will compare'favourably with any other local authority, | The committee had the published costs of Christchurch. He had been taken to task for stating'at the last council meeting that on the whole the streets were in fair, order. He would go further, and state that never before had the streets been in as good condition as they were to-day. v He admitted that when the Otago Motor Club complained after the spell of wet weather a good many streets had dev eloped potholes. . There were yet several streets that required attention, This would, always occur op the council could dispense with , a number of its workmen. .. Exception, had been taken to using a sleeve of screenings. The department had refrained from using screenings to any extent, but where it had been used the ■ result § wppg excellent, and would have to be maintained until there was a more permanent surface. The editor of the Daily Times thought the report indicated that the committee was satisfied with the condition of the streets. The reverse was the Case. Last year an allocation had been compiled, showing that the needs of the city ran into £750,000. This had been reduced to the actual immediate requirements to £350,000. In consultation with the town clerk it had been reduced to £200,000 approved by the committee, and sent to the Finance Committee, a.ud it had never got any further, the reason being that loans were falling di|e in the near future and. the .Finance Committee hesitated in pending any large loan to the ratepayers ■ in the meantime. During the whole oi his experience he had not - seen' more care and thought exercised in studyin" the best methods of repairing- and com structing the roads economically with the money that had been allocated to the committee. The council was fortunate indeed in having a staff of engineers so painstaking and diligent as°it had-at present

Cr Mitchell said that perhaps the easiest way would be to allow the report to be adopted. He, however, had been struck by the remarkable speech , of the chairman, because of its inconsistency and in part its inaccuracy.—(A voice: Qh.) He entirely disagreed with therecommendation, and accordingly moved ' —“ That the council disapproves of the report, and recommends that the commit tee again consider the whole Question,” . What had been asked for in the ori .ginal motion had not been economy. in the sense of employing the cheapest possible methods, but an efficient method without undue expense. The report said, that this was actually being done. He submitted that two methods were being adopted in the maintenance of the streets —the cheapest possible and the most expensive. The-first consisted of spreading screenings in large quantities loose upon the surface and allowing the. traffic to .wear it in. That was when it was not thrown info the gutters. The other way was to tear up everything to a depth of nearly 'a foot and start de novo with a concrete base. Was there no middle way? Why was the Octagon (now open in front of them for inspection) able to stand the heavy traffic which daily passed over.it, while‘similar treatment w. not possible in the continuation of the same street up Stuart street? Why was Princes street. south from Manor street able to stand similar traffic-though constructed in like manner—an undisturbed base 1 of ordinary metal surfaced with a thin coat of tar macadam? Why had one block in King street stood up to heavy traffic for. 15 years—the original cost being ■ £646—when the adjoining block had to be reconstructed at a cost of £4000? Why had a block further north; replaced at a like heavy cost, at least nine inches of foundation being removed to make room for concrete, not stood up to the traffic, , as had the one where the foundation had not been disturbed?.- Why was the tramway portion of the Anderson's. Bay road in so much

better condition that that controlled by the Works Committee? Here applications of tar in oume form or another had resulted in a tolerably good surface, though the base was bad and the foundations were only water-bound macadam ? • These were questions which occurred to the layman who used his eyes and intelligence, and was not by textbook theories. Were councillors aware that the streets in, say, Wellington had been constructed at much lest cost than most of those in Dunedin, and were showing better results? The figures for the Wellington streets were:—Abel Smith street, Os 7.55 d; Bowen street, 10s sd: Bunny street, 13s; Cuba street, 12s 4d. Metal in Wellington cost 11s per yard and cartage, against Dunedin’s rate of about 7s 6cl. As would not doubt be told by the 'chairman, the bad results in King street were due to “ cheeseparing.” If so, he had better explain what this meant, in view of the facts he had set out.

Cr Scott seconded the amendment.. He thought they would be wise to send the matter back and see if any errors had been .made in the committee’s findings. There . was not general satisfaction in regard to .the condition of their city streets. He agreed that • too much surface on the roads had been interfered with, and that .there was .too much scratching of the surfaces. Cr Clark said he was quite confident that the council would approve of the amendment. He was sure that the Works Committee had not studied the wording of its. resolution or it would riot allow it to go forward, as" it smacked of a spirit not associated with the council or its committees. The. Works Committee told them the roads were satisfactory and that the methods were excellent. He would not say that any of their works had reached such a pinnacle of perfection that they could not be improved. Ct Clark quoted the last clause of the report brought down by the committee—“ The committee is satisfied that the existing system of reconstruction and maintenance is the most economical under the above conditions, and enables the largest possible amount of work to be done with, the funds available.”, Ci’ Wilson explained that\ they were riot dealing in the report with permanent reading. Cr Clark said that Cr Wilson, had now given the strongest reason ‘ for sending back the report, which was giving a totally false impression. No one would deny that the most ■ important work, outside the trading departments, was tha"t of the Works Committee, and it was suggested that more money should be given it.’ Ten years ago the Works Committee rcceivei?, Z 46.964,, and to this had to be added interest, etc., making a total of £64,091. The general rates received ’ that year came to £60,637. In other words the Works Committee had received £3454 more than - the total amount . the couucil received iii rates. In the last Year Book of the council it was shown that the. rates came to £126,753. The works allocation was £84,385, and the interest bill had increased to £53,176, making a total of £137,561, or some, £IO,OOO more than was actually received from their general rate. They also received .£6017 unemployment grant and £SOOO in .the petrol tax, making £148,578. On top of this there was expenditure from the loan of £18,136, the full total available for the Works Committee thus being £166,714. Now, seeing that the council was only receiving some £126,763 in rates, arid taking into consideration the amount to be given to .the Works Committee, how could it be said that the council was not treating it as generously as it possibly could. There were other departments dependent on the rates, and these, were being cut down to meet the demands of- tho Works Committee. There was the alternative, of course, of raising the rates. He resented the suggestion that the council was Starving the Works .Committee. He hoped the report would go back to make it more intelligible. Cr Marlow said the Works Committee had drawn up the report after full con-, sideration. • The committee had striven to give the council the best streets with the money available. Where they had a, good water-bound macadam surface they could treat it with tarred macadam and make it reasoriably good. That was the class' of road referred To in the report, but they, must remember that they would have to pay more for the cost of upkeep. He must admit that the streets were far below what they would like them to be. He would, however, oppose putting down expensive concrete roads over small distances in place of making ■ passable roads over. Ipriger distances. Of course, if they did not have confidence in their committee they knew what to do. Cr Wilkinson said he could not see any good hi. sending the. report baok. They could make the roads only according to the money available. He would \like to see more gravel used on the roads than quarry products. Ho did not see that any more economical 'methods could be introduced on their city roads than those obtaining at present. Cr Lawrence agreed that there would be no advantage in sending the motion back. There were three new members on Works Committee, and he did not think they should be blamed- for what the previous committees had. done. Ho upheld Cr Wilson in his contention that the city roads were in good order. Cr Wilson said if they passed the motion, the best thing they could do was to change the chairmanship and let Cr Mitchell have the position.— (“Hear, hear.") Cr Wilson said that' Cr Mit- : chell would not listen to even a heavenborn, engineer.—(Laughter.) No matter what figures were brought forward Cr Mitchell would not agree with them. Cr Mitchell said he had made it clear that he was speaking only as a layman. Cr Wilson said that the position was clear, and that if they were not satisfied with the methods of their city engineer they should get rid of him. He claimed that the engineer was doing all he could to deal-with the roads with the money available, Cr Mitchell had talked about certain of their streets, said Cr Wilson, who then proceeded to state what works had been carried out oh them. He claimed that the cost per yard of their roads in Dunedin would bear comparison, with that of auy other centre iu New Zealand. As regarded the comparative costs in Dunedin and Wellington, he would give Cr Mitchell a challenge. If it was found on a specification that similar work could be done there cheaper than in Dunedin he would apologise to him regarding anything he had said on the matter.

Cr Scott: You can apologise anyway. —(Laughter.), ' Cr Wilson added that Cr Scott had said that metal was put down one day and was gone the next. That was not a proper remark.

Cr Scott; I might have said “the same day,”

Cr Wilson said that the Works Committee was getting loss money to-day than 13 years, ago. Councillors: What? Cr Wilson: In comparison with the amount of rates collected we arc not getting as much.

Cr Clark: You have no more streets now than 15 years ago. Cr Wilson: Many of.the streets were not formed then. • He suggested that a comparison should be made to see how n )ueh the Reserves Coiiimittee ■ was receiving at the present tiine and la years ago.

The amendment was lost, Crs Mitchell, Clark, Tapley, and Scott voting in its-favour. ,

The report was then adopted,