MAIN HIGHWAYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3713, 12 May 1925, Page 14

MAIN HIGHWAYS.

NO. 17, DISTRICT COUNCIL.

A meeting of the No. 17 District Highways Council was held in ihe Publio Works Department’s offices on Thursday. There were present: Messrs D. R. Jack (Clutha County Council), H. M. Driver (Bruce County Council), R. G. Cotton (Tuapeka County Council), W. Blackie (Taieri County Council), and E. F. Evans (Government nominee). Mr Evans was elected chairman. At the conclusion of the meeting Mr Cotton handed in his resignation, and in so doing explained that there was no main highway in his riding. The Chairman expressed nis regret at Mr Cotton’s decision, and a motion of thanks for his past services was carried.

HIGHWAY BOARD’S GRANTS. The following authorities were received from the Public Works Department, Wellington, being the Main Highways Board’s subsidies for maintenance for different periodsDunedin-Invercargill highway (Taieri County), £311; same highway (Clutha County), £232 and £l5O 19s 4d for two periods; Mosgiel Junction-Middle-march highway (Taieri County), £465; subsidy towards cost of fencing unsafe bridges in the Manuka Gorge. £25; ClarksvilleClydo highway (Bruce County). £llß 12s; same highway (Tuapeka County), £lB6 lls and £94 7s 6a for two periods; Rae’s Junc-tion-Edievale highway (Tuapeka County), £7 7s for two months; and for commencing renovations to the Gatlins River bridge (Beaumont), £3OO. MAIN HIGHWAYS.

Mr Driver moved, and Mr Jack seconded —“That it be a recommendation to the Main Highways Council that the BalcluthnTuapeka road bo declared a main highwav.’’—The motion was carried. The Clutha County Council wrote recommending that tho following roads be declared man highway*:— Balclutha-Maclen-nan road, Gore to Tapanui road, via Walkoikoi, and Wa-ikakft to Kelso road. —Mr Jack moved, and Mr Cotton seconded “That the council forward the recommendations to the Main Highways Qoard with its approval.*’—The motion was carried.

LOVELL’S FLAT BRIDGE, In connection with the new Lovell’s Flat bridge, the plans showed that it would cost £IOOO to erect, instead of £BOO, at previously expected.— Mr Driver said that

his council was not aware of the extra cost, but aa the erection of the bridge was in its own interests ho thought tho counoil would find the extra money. The bridge was on tho Main Scuth road, and there was considerable heavy traffic. It was really not safe for such hoavy traffio. and tho erection of u new bridge was an urgent necessity.—On tho motion of Mr Driver, seconded by Mr Cotton, it was decided to urge the Main Highways’ Board to carry out the work as soon as possible. THE EXHIBITION AND ROADS. A letter was received from the Taieri County Council making application for * special grant of £2COO on the annual estimates to meet extraordinary traffic during the period of the Exhibition.—Mr Blackie contended that as the traffic would be very heavy during the Exhibition period the Taieri Council’s application was ft reasonable one.—The Chairman said that the only method of obtaining such a grant would bo to ask tho Main Highways’ Council to set up special legislation to meet case.*? of that kind, or to have the road declared a Govcrnmont road.—Mr Blackie remarked that they did not want the road declared a main road.—Mr Driver said that his council was of opinion that the Highways’ Board should make a special grant to local bodies which were affected in this mariner, so that the roads could be put in proper order before and during tho Exhibition. The local bodies had already subscribed to the funds of the Otago Court at the Exhibition, and the increased traffic on the roads would mean that the counties would have an increased expenditure on maintenance. —Mr Jack moved, and Mr Blackie seconded—“ That application be made to the Main Highways’ Board for a special grant to the No. 17 Highways’ Council in view of the very heavy traffic during the Exhibition period.’’—The motion waa carried

MANUKA GORGE BRIDGES. Several letters were received in connection with the Manuka Gorge bridges.—The District Council had assessed the Tuapeka Council at £167, but that body had replied thal it could not contribute more than £loo.—The Bruce County Council was agreeable to pay two-thirds of £SOO (£334) towards renewing the Manuka- Gorge bridges, provided the other local bodies contributed the remaining one-third.--The Lawrence Council wrote that its levy of £33 was too high, and considred that £lO was a more equitable amount. —The Roxburgh Borough Council wrote stating that it could not assist in the matter as it had expended £25 on those bridges last year and required all its funds for its own purposes.—A letter was also received from the Main Highways Board, enclosing the following resolution:—“That the local authorities be informed that, failing acceptance of the board’s offer to contribute £ISOO towards the estimated cost of £2OOO to improve the Manuka Gorge section of tho ClarksvilleClyde highway, the board would proceed to carry out the work and claim on them for one half the cost in terms of section 19 of the Main Highways Act.’’—The Chairman explained that he had advised the Board that the balance required amounted to £56, and if the local bodies would contribute that sum among themselves the work of repairing the bridges' could be eone on with.—After some discussion it was decided to leave the matter to Messrs Driver and Cotton, with a view to raising the. necessary £56, as if that could be dono the work could be proceeded with. CORRESPONDENCE. A letter was received from the Taieri County Council in connection with the portion of the Dunedin-Invercargill main road which ran through the county, and pointing out that owing to the greatly increased motor traffic the upkeep was considerably greater than had been the case in previous years. Consequently an unduly heavy burden had to be borne by the council.—ln reply to the Green Island Borough Council on tho same matter, the Main Highways Board wrote stating that at its meeting on April 18 it had declined to approve of the declaration of the road through Green Island as a main highway.—The matter was held over till the result of the deputation in Wellington was ascertained. In response to a resolution from the council the Main Highways Board wrote stating that it had prepared a series of questions and answers dealing with roadmaking for the benefit of road overseers.— The Chairman remarked that this meant that the board had practically given effect to tlie council’s suggestion.—The letter was received. GENERAL. It was decided to ask the Main Highways Board to forward a definition of the term “reconstruction’’ when dealing with roads. After some discussion it was decided to recommend to local authorities that they instruct their engineers to prepare the annual estimates for maintenance and construction early in April of each year.—The estimates were then considered and approved.