BAY VIADUCT

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19661, 1 December 1933, Page 7

BAY VIADUCT

SECTIONAL DOMES VAST IMPROVEMENT The general opinion of members who were present at the annual meeting of the South Canterbury Automobile Association last night was that the sectional domes at the Bay Viaduct were a vast improvement on the central dome. Discussion on the subject followed a statement by the president (Mr J. M. Jenkins) who said that the Borough Council had decided to give sectional domes a trial at the Bay Viaduct for a period of two months. The period had now expired, and he desired P.n expression of opinion from members as to whether the domes were an improvement on the old system, and also as to whether any further improvement could be effected. When the Association had first made the suggestion of sectional domes as against the central dome, there had been a decided difference of opinion between the Association and the Council. As the negotiations proceeded the executive were invited by the Council to attend a demonstration at the Bay Viaduct, and following that demonstration, the Council decided to give sectional domes a trial. Mr Jenkins went on to say that he had been accused of usurping authority, in that he had attended at the Bay Viaduct with the Borough traffic inspector, and had placed the domes in position. The accusation had been levelled against him as a result of a misunderstanding. He had been present as an act of courtesy, and not as the official representative of the Association. When he had gone there with the traffic inspector and the chairman of the Works Committee, lie had been afforded the opportunity to put forward his personal view’s, and he desired publicly to acknowledge the consideration given to his views. The intersection was a very difficult one on which to place domes, and one naturally was inclined to say that the layout was a stupid one. But one had had to consider the matter from more than one aspect, and more than one intersection, and he thought members would agree that the matter had not been a very easy one. Domes Perfect. Mr P. S. Shrimpton: I pass them four times a day, and they are perfect. Mr F. Chittock said that the new domes were a vast Improvement on the old domes, and he hoped they would remain. Mr N. M. Orbell said that the new domes were 100 per cent. Improvement. Mr J. Palliser said the old domes were a nightmare, but the new domes were more than 100 per cent. Improvement. He would like, however, to see the dome on Wai-iti road side shifted a little further up the hill. Mr J. H. Don agreed that the new j domes were a big Improvement, and j he also agreed that the dome referred j to by Mr Palliser might be shifted to j advantage. The chairman said there was only j one point, and that was if the Wai-ili i road dome W’as shifted uphill, they j might be inviting cutting when turning into Hewling Street. Voting Equal. Mr Palliser moved that the Association w’rite to the Timaru Borough | Council expressing appreciation of the | present system of domes, but suggest- j ing that the Wai-iti road dome be j shifted a few feet up the hill. The motion was seconded by Mr J. H. Don. An amendment was moved by Mr S. G. McClelland and seconded by Mr .1. T. Brady that the Council be recommended to leave the domes in their present position. Voting on the amendment and the motion was equal, the chairman giving his casting vote in favour of the amendment.