PREPARATION COSTS

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 130, 1 March 1928, Page 15

PREPARATION COSTS

MAKARA COUNTY WANTS ASSISTANCE PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT ALLEGED MOTOR REPRESENTATIVE OPPOSED An interesting discussion arose at yesterday’s meeting of the City and .Suburban Highways Board, when the Makara County Council appealed for consideration in respect of the preparation costs of half a mile of roadway in the Ngahauranga Gorge. While the majority of members of the board were in sympathy with the request, the motor representatives were against recognition of the claim in view of previous happenings. A report is to be made by the engineer as to the proportion of preparation costs due to widening.

Those present were the Mayor (Mr. G. A. Troup), in the chair, Messrs. H. D. Bennett, W. 11. Bennett, G. Mitchell (Wellington City Council), W. T. Strand (Mayor, Lower Hutt), J. McKenzie (Mayor, Petone), P. Robertson (Mayor, Upper Hutt), H. M. Jones (Mayor, Eastbourne), A. Moore (Johnsonville), A. J. Curtis (heavy traffic representative), H. J. Stott and F. W. Manton (motorists’ representatives), JL. Windley (Makara County). Liability Not Repudiated. A letter was received from the Makara County Council stating that it had before it, from the city treasurer s office, an account for .£416 Bs., being the Makara County proportionate share ci the cost of reconstruction ot the, first half-mile of the Ngahauranga Gorge Road commencing at the Hutt ttoau. While not in any way repudiating its liability and was prepared to adhere to its agreement with the city engineer, it was of opinion that it bad been singled out for different treatment than that meted to other local authorities that were contributaries to the Wellington and Suburban Highways Board. The reconstruction was carried out by an agreement with the city engineer, who was desirous of retaining the services of men who would otherwise have been dismissed pending the reopening of the paving season, and the council found it difficult to understand why the cost of such work should be borne by the Suburban Highways Board in the areas of other local bodies, and why the cost of similar work within the Makara County area should be borne by the County Council. The letter also mentioned that the county of Makara was already contributing a sum of .£12,000 towards the cost of reconstruction of the main highway between Johnsonville and Tawa lat, where the preparatory work should be very small as compared with that in other localities where paving work had been undertaken. “The saving here to the Suburban Highways Board must be considerable,” continued the letter, as evidenced by the preparatory cost of 8d per square yard over the section of road the subject of this letter, and where reconstruction work had been eatisfactorily carried out/’ The council asked that its letter be the. basis of cllsc “ s ' Bion at the next meeting of the board. Mr. Windley urged that the position had changed since the agreement was made, and contended that the board should meet the liability, seeing that it hart met similar costs in other localities. The chairman agreed that . Makara County should have some consideration from the board. . , That there was some merit in tne case presented by Mr. Windley was admitted by Mr. H- D. Bennett, bu v he ur’ed that the matter should be considered very carefully, as the true pnnciples guiding the operations of the boaid had been departed from in the last two years, and they must be careful regarding the future. The board was established “for the purpose of paving and nothing else. The speaker outlined how the preparation work was entered upon, and how costs in excess of Is. per yard as agreed were debited to various local authorities, who were unable to pay. and those amounts camo to £ll,OOO. When it was found that some of the authorities could not pay back the money the board accepted the inevitable. During that time only certain local bodies were affected, but Makara County was not one of those who rushed ahead of everyone else. Mr. Windley’s claim now was that because he had been patient and allowed other bodies to rush in and help themselves he was now being called upon to pay the penalty. He asked for the same sympathy that was extended by the board to others, and he (the speaker) said at once that (he claim was irresistible, and that the board must make concession of part, if tot the whole. Although what had been done un the past were offences against the principles of the board, in the circumstances be did not think they would be hanged if they committed one more. Motorists’ View. Mr. Manton sail this appeared to be the clcan-up of the preparation costs, and although the claim might be considered irresistible, it was only to a certain extent. The board had allowed its sympathies to run away with it, and he admitted that he was sorry for Makara County, but for all that, he could not agree to the suggestion. “We are not trying to get awav with anything,” said Mr. Windley. “We are prepared to pay that account, but as a matter of principle we have no right The Mayor reminded the board that they were on adifferent footing, as they were now spending Government money. Mr. G. Mitchell: Are there any other claims likely to arise, or is this the end Of them ? Mr. H. D. Bennett: Yes. . . The Mavor: Makara is making a claim for the last time. Mr. Curtis said the money came from the payers of duties, and be objected to any authority getting out of payment of amounts because of mistakes made in the past. It was decided to defer the matter until the next meeting to enable the engineer to prepare a statement as to proportion borne by Makara County relating to widening. Mr. Manton said he would like to ask Mr. Strand if there was any chance of getting some of the £ll, OOO from Lower Hutt. Mr. Strand: I should like notice of that question. Mr. Manton said be would give notice, and Mr. Strand replied that he would consider it at the next meeting.