MAIN HIGHWAYS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3714, 19 May 1925, Page 18

MAIN HIGHWAYS.

No. 16 DISTRICT COUNCIL. 'The No. 16 District Highways Council met in the Public Works Office on Friday; present—Messrs G. lloss (Waihemo County Council), J. Preston (Waikouaiti County Council), W. S. Reid (Lake County Council), E. Morgan (Maniototo County Council), D. S. Middleton (Vincent County Council), and W. H. Evans (Government nominee). Mr Evans was elected chairman. In connection with the District Council’s resolution that the Main Hrjafcways Board’s subsidy towards main highways should be based upon the portion of traffic foreign to the group rather than on a flat rate, and that the Main Highways Act should be amended accordingly, a letter was received from the Main Highways Board stating that it was unable to recommend the Government to amend the Act to pay subsidies on maintenance according to foreign traffic. The board proposed to recommend the Government to amend the Act to give it discretionary powers that would enable it at the commencement of each financial year to declare the rate of subsidy, varying from one-third to onehalf, to be paid during that year for maintenance.—The letter was received. A letter was read from the Waihemo County Council advising that a resolution had been passed at a meeting of the council in connection with tho tax on motor lorries feeding the railways and those competing against the railways urging that motor lorries oarrying produce to the railhead should be exempt from the full tax, and tnat those competing against the railways should pay tho full fee. —The letter was received. An application from the Waihemo County Council that the Palmer6ton-Middlemarch road frqm the junction of the Palmerston - Pigroot road, near Dunback, to the boundary of Taieri County should be made a main highway was forwarded to the Main Highways Board. The Maniototo County Council wrote recommending that a deviation from the main road, about nine miles long, in the vicinity of St. Bathans. should be declared a main highway.—Received. The Mam Highways Board wrote with reference to the application for the declaration of the Cromwell-Pembroke road as a main highway. * The board did not approve of a highway on the right bank of Clutha River as well as on the left bank: but was prepared to consider a modified proposal.—After some discussion it was proposed by Mr Middleton and seconded by Mr Preston that the matter be referred to the Vincent County Council- for discussion.—The motion was carried. A letter was received from the Main Highways Board stating that the board did not approve of the declaration of the Butchers’ Gully-Clyde road a main highway.—Mr Middleton proposed that the matter should bo referred back to the Vincent County Council for further discussion.—Mr Mot pan seconded the motion, which was carried. Tho Waikouaiti County Council wrote accepting the conditions under which the Main Highways Board had offered to declare the road front the Dunedin city boundary to Waitati a main highway--namely, that the Waikouaiti Couaty Council should oxpend on the portion beyond Waitati the amount previously spent on tho section the board was taking over.— Received. The Main Highways Board wrote granting a subsidy of £ for £ towards construction work by tho Lake County Council on the Queenstown-Roaring Meg section of highway, in place of the former maintenance subsidy of £1 for £2.—Approved. Authorities wore received from the Public Works Department for construction and maintenance in tho various highways districts as follows:—Duned in-Christchurch highway for Juno to Decemlier. 1924, £197; steam roller, £723; stone crusher, £500; punedin-Ohristchurrh highway (Waihemo Uounty), June, 1924, to March, 1925, £JS 4s; Palm erst on-Queenstown, via Peeks high way (Whihomo County), June, 1924, to March, town, via Becks highway (Maniototo County), July, 1924, to February, 1925,

£ll2 14s 6d; Palmerston-Queonstown, via Becks, highway (Vincent County), July, 1924, to February, 1925. £77 ss : Palmerston Queenstown, via Becks, highway (Lake County), June, 1921, to January, 1925, £11.5; Oromwell-Hawea Flat highway, July, 1924, to February, 1925, £BS 16s; and Clarkesville-Clyde highway (Vincent County), July, 1924, to February, 1925, £63 GROUP 16. A conference of delegates from the counties comprising Group 16 of the District highways Council (viz., Lake, Vincent* Maniototo, Waihemo, and Waikouaiti) waa held on Wednesday at the County Chambers, Clyde. There were presenti Crs J. R. Webb, D. 8. Middleton, James Ritchie (Vincent), Crs W. a. Reid, L. Leo, W A. Scaife (Lake), Crs E. Morgan, P. Aitken (Maniototo), Cr G. Ross (Waihemo), Cr J. Preston (Waikouaiti), Mr L. Pearson (acting clerk, Vincent), Mr O. Scott (county clerk, Lake), and Mr F. A. Lloyd (county clerk. Maniototo). Mr James Ritchie (Vincent) was unanimously elected chairman of the conference. The Chairman, in extending a welcome to the delegates, stated that this was a memorable day, it being the first conference of local bodies held in the district. He hoped it would become an annual event. He felt it would do a great deal to bring the counties together, and would be of inestimable benefit and help to clear many difficulties which each county experienced. The principal items to be discussed were heavy traffic regulations, by-laws, and travelling expenses. So far as heavy traffic was concerned, Vincent. Lake, and Maniototo were in a more difficult position than Waihemo and Waikouaiti, as the roads in the former counties were actually feeders to the railways, whilst in the latter counties the main roads ran parallel with the lines. There was another aspect which required consideration, and that was that the majority of lorry owners were situate in the boroughs, who would collect the fees, but the county roads had to bear the wear and tear from traffic. This would, however, bo a matter of adjustment at the end of the year, when the fees had to be apportioned between the local bodies in the groups. He was of the opinion that the Main Highways Act was an honest attempt to deal with the position, though maybe it was imperfect as yet. Mr Morgan expressed the view that boroughs should bo excluded. Mr Preston pointed out that in his county there were no lorry owners, all these residing in boroughs outside the county. It was moved by Mr Preston, seconded by Mr Reid: “That this conference recommends that Vincent Countv be appointed a liftnsing body under the heavy traffic bylaws for Highways District No. 16.”—The motion was carried unanimously. It was moved by Mr Lee. seconded by Mr Preston, and carried: “That Mr Martin be asked for a legal opinion whether a farmer’s lorry, used solelv for tho purpose of carting his own produce, came under the heavy traffic regulations.” Mr Freston drew attention to the offer of the Highways Board to supply plant to local bodies for roadmaking. His council had applied for plant, but had been informed it would have to pav interest and sinking fund m five years. His council considered this impossible. He would move: ‘‘That this conference of counties send a remit to the counties’ conference asking that the term of repayment on plant purchased from the Main Highways Board be for a longer period thaq five years.”—This was seconded by Mr Aitken, and carried. Mr Morgan reported that his council took exception to the decision of the Highways Board not to pay the travelling expenses of the councils’ representatives on the District Highways Council, and had passed resolutions protesting. He asked the conference to support this. It was moved bv Mr Morgan, seconded by Mr Scaife: “That this conference of counties in Group 16 expresses its disapproval of the decision of the Main Highways Board not to allow travelling expenses to be paid to county representatives on District Highway Councils, as such imposes inequitable expense upon the counties affected, and that it is only just that each ‘District Highways Council should bear its own expenses, and makes direct representations to the Minister of Publio Works requesting that district councils be allowed travelling expenses. Further, that each county be circularised requesting support to this resolution.” —The motion was carried. It was decided that the conference approves of the proposal to provide joint bylaws for the five counties (T>ake. Vincent, Maniototo, Waihemo and Waikouaiti) m Group 16, and that the draft of such bylaw’s bo submitted to each county -with a request to appoint delegates to a committee to deal with the matter, the cost to be borne proportionately between the five counties.