The Hutt News THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1930. THE RAMP AT PETONE.

Hutt News, Volume 3, Issue 9, 24 July 1930, Page 7

The Hutt News THURSDAY, JULY 24, 1930. THE RAMP AT PETONE.

The proposed erection of a ramp ■over the railway Jine at Petone is .a matter which is at the present time engaging much and serious consideration, amongst the , residents of the Hutt Valley and others who may possibly be called upon to find their proportion of the cost' Although it is usually alluded to as the "Petone Ramp" .as a fact it is . not a matter in which, save for its actual site, the Petone people are any more concerned than arc the residents of the Lower Hutt, and in a lesser degree numerically, all those living in the more northerly parts of the Valley. So* far as the Lower Hutt is concerned, practically every resident is as much interested as are those living within the boundaries of Petone. We are enjoying the benefits of perhaps the best motor-bins service in the Dominion, which is taken advantage of in almost equal proportions by-residents of both boroughs. It is a regrettable fact that sinee N the advent of the bus service the railway; save for the "rash hours" is of little import-

ance to the residents of either dis-

triet. The emasculated, train serk vice has rendered it necessary for those who may desire to visit Wellington to go in by bus. Thus all ■who. save in the hours referred to have occasion to go to the City must go by road, and consequently are objiged to cross thq,, railway lines at what is admittedly a dangerous crossing. To say) that this spot is not dangerous is to deny an absolute and most apparent fact. And when the huge volume of motor traffic that daily traverses this road is considered, the wonder is not that there are ac--eidents, but that there are not many more. We doubt if any of our readers can, after, consideration, point to any road in New Zealand over which a larger numfcrer of • motor vehicle»:Vpass daily, ■considering the number of passengers using the bus service, there is little or no doubt that the number of human lives daily placed in jeopardy at this crossing is immensurabiy greater than at any other crossing on. the railway system of either island. It is fatare to assert that there is no danger; there must always be a <*ertam amount of danger at any erossing r and in this case that danger is multiplied by the very large volume of traffic. And from the tone of the remarks made at the k recent meeting of the Lower Hutt v Borough Council, the necessity of /-either a ramp or other means of averting the threatened danger appears to have been generally recognised, with however, the frequently used procrastinating projyisp^^at at present the time is, not opportune. We confess thatt we cannot see eye to eye with the •councillors in this view of the situation for obviously if the ramp is needed at all it is needed as soon as it can be. built—if possible before the huge smash that so many have prophesied takes place, lesson of the needless sacrifice of human lives at Sockbum recently shoulcl carry its own lesson. The policy of not actively opposing the proposed enabling-legislation,

does not appear to compare favourably with the action of the sistor borough when there was urgoiit need, of a new bridge over the river within the Hutt borough. Very naturally that body did not desire to have to meet any increased expenditure on an urgent work affecting the road communication in the adjoining borough, but recognising that the work was essential--to public safety, it1 accepted cheerfully the allotted proportion of the cost, and said nothing about the "time not being opportune.*' If we are correctly informed the late Sir Joseph Ward definitely promised, when interviewed by a deputation from (we think) the Highways Board, that the Government would find twothirds of the cost, then estimated at £60,000, of the ramp, the local bodies concerned to provide the balance of £20,000 between them in equitable proportions. This offer it must be admitted was a very liberal one, and to our think-' ing; is conclusive evidence that the Government, no doubt acting under expert advice, considers the danger of the present state of matters to be acute. Admittedly, the present is not 'the happiest time to look forward to any in-. crease in rates or any other putgoings, but what is the expenditure of the small sum required per 'capita- compared- to the-'loss of! even one life (particularly if that one happens to be one's own). Of course it is a moot point whether some means should not be adopted, to extract from the motorists using the road, some adequate contribution towards the cost (which appears to us as lay folk to be very high) of the work necessary for the safeguarding of their lives and property; but whether any means can be adopted to this most fair and reasonable object, is still a matter for future consideration. Briefly the position appears to be 'i If t 'were done, t 'were well done quickly (Shakespeare). If the ramp is needed it should be erected, and without delay. If it can be shown that it is an-unnecessary luxury, then by all means let the local Council give the proposal straight-out opposition. If there is serious menace to human life under present conditions, then the present cannot be said to be "inopportune", while if such menace does not exist, then no time would be opportune to expend > the ratepayers' money on , unnecessary luxuries, and the project .should be strongly opposed.