“No Money Sense”

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 417, 27 July 1928, Page 7

“No Money Sense”

CITY ROAD MAINTENANCE

Cr. Allum Attacks Figures

”| HAVE the greatest respect for the integrity of our 1 engineer, and for his ability, but I am sorry to say I have not the same respect for his money sense,” was the pith of a strong criticism of the road maintenance position expressed by Cr. J. A. C. Alluni at last evening’s meeting of the City Council.

Voluminous reports were presented to the council in connection with the comment that took place on the increased amounts necessary for street maintenance In the city in spite of £710,000 haring been spent on permanent surfacing.

The works committee pointed out that the city engineer, Mr. W. E. Bush, had never held the view that the laying of permanent surfaces would reduce the annual grants necessary for street maintenance. “Such a view would he ridiculous,” commented the committee. In 1924, the committee pointed out the city had 180 miles of streets, and practically double that distance of footpaths to maintain, and £55,427 was spent on street maintenance. The streets improvement scheme covered only 66 miles, leaving 103 miles unaffected by the loan. About £46,000 is required for interest and sinking fund, and £30,000 for street scavenging and other recurring purposes. The net result was that there would he about £4,000 left for street maintenance, which was ridiculous. The committee was of the opinion that even if the ratepayers had not been relieved in the manner some of them expected, they were in a fortunate position, and the council and officers had rightly read the “writing on the wall” in earlier years. MORE MONEY WANTED

The committee further stated that it was concerned about the extraordinary wear and tear on some of the streets, and further maintenance or capital charges would have to he incurred on them.

Finally the committee pointed out that though the figures this year—which are larger than they have ever been—were cut to meet the situation, this would not be possible in future years, and the grant must he increased to meet the extra demands, and to prevent the sum spent on the paved roads being wasted. The money available was quite inadequate for the work required. “Many of the macadam roads, especially in districts recently added to the city, are in desperate

condition, and if not renewed or liberally maintained will shortly be impassable,” commented the committee. Mr. Bush submitted a long report in which he detailed the maintenance costs, and pointed out that the 54 miles of road in 1907 had increased to 275 this year, vehicles had enormously increased in number, much higher standards of maintenance were called for, and the prices of material and labour had more than doubled. Moving that the report be referred to the Finance Committee, Cr J. A. C. Alum asked for a return of certain figures relating to street works for his own information and that of the council. Cr., Allum said a comparative table showing the cost of street maintenance in various cities, attached to the engineer’s report, was ludicrous. It would hardly deceive a child. Credit appeared to be taken because the cost here compared favourably with other cities. That was no test at all. Melbourne had two-thirds of our streets and four times the population. Birmingham had ten times the population and more than twice the roads. Per capita Melbourne’s roads were costing 3s 4d a mile, and Birmingham’s, 4s. Auckland had to face 12s 6d per capita, and on top of that 9s per capita anually for loan charges. “I have no recollection of the city engineer protesting when the citizens were told during the campaign for the £710,000 loan, that the maintenance cost would thereby be substantially reduced,” remarked Cr. Allum. “Right through the years the engineer has asked for inordinately high sums for streets. Year after year he has got through with what we could give him, and without serious results.” He thought the position required very serious consideration by the Finance Committee and moved that the whole report be referred to the committee for a report.

“The cost per capita has reached a very serious position,” said Cr. S. I. Crookes, seconding the motion. He urged very careful consideration by thq Finance Committee. Cr. E. J. Phelan did not favour referring the report to a committee which, he said, would only say that things were all right. He advocated a report by an independent engineer and the introduction of improved methods of street cleaning and maintenance. The report was referred to the Finance Committee.