ROAD CLASSIFICATION.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVI, Issue 4863, 10 August 1925, Page 2

ROAD CLASSIFICATION.

REPORT BY COUNTY CHAIRMAN. POSITION IN OHINEMURI. At Thursday’s meeting of the Ohinemuri County Council the chair- - man (Cr. W. F. Johnstoue) submitted a report in which he recommended, in conjunction with . the Main Highways Board, that the Pokeno-Waihi Road should be graded as a secondclass road, which meant that it/**' would carry heavy traffic up to etgfft tons; Hamiltpn-Pacroa Road, thirdclass, to carry traffic up to four tons, and a similar classification for the Paeroa-Kopu Road ; ■ all other roads to bei fourth-class, to carry traffic up to 212 tons. These classifications would operate from October to March, both months inclusive. From April to September the Pokeno-Waihi Road (that portion which passes through the Ohinemuri County) would be third-class, and all other roads fourth-class. In conjunction with the report a letter was read from the chairman of the No. 2 District Highways Council advising that provision was made in clause 7 of the regulations under the Public Works Amendment Act, 1924, for the classification of roads. The council was asked to advise tne names of any highways it wished to have permanently classified, and the class in which it was desired to classify them. Information was also sought as to .whether it was desired to pro; .„. Dibit the use of any motor-lorry traffic under any condition on any highway in the district. The main highways in the district were given as . three, namely, Pokeno-Waihi, Hamil-ton-Paeroa, and Paeroa-Kopu.

Cr. H. M. Corbett said he did not agree that the - Pokeno-Waihi road should be graded second-class. He thought traffic up to eight tons was too much, and that a six-ton limit would be ample. Cr. Morgan .agreed. The chairman explained that the grading did not provide for- a six-ton classification. He agreed that eight tons was too high.

Cr. Robinson gave it as his opinion that all heavy traffic should be prohibited on the county roads during the winter months. The matter was bf serious importance to the council. Cr. F. C. Hubbard said that so far as the county’s portion of the PokenoWaihi road was concerned he thought four tons was too low. He pointed out that an eight-ton limit was only a nominal figure, and he did npt think such tonnage would be reached. He agreed that heavy traffic should be restricted during the winter months. Cr. Corbett said it was not a . question of traffic so much as it Yus of what the road could stand. Wita the railway from Paeroa to Waihi he failed to see why the council should be expected to maintain that portion of the road for the purpose! of carrying extraordinary heavy traffic: The council existed for the purpose of protecting its roads, and to keep the maintenance of them down to a minimum, and not to cater for a. carrying firm in Paeroa. He contended that in the past the council had not possessed the moral courage to enlbrce its heavy traffic by-laws. The speaker contended that the traffic should be limited to not more than four tons. Cr. S. H. Morgan said that if carriers considered that the council had classified its reads unfairly they had the right to lodge an objection with the Main Highways Board, and if .the objection was upheld the road.,would be reclassed. He did not think theie was any need to specify any particular carrying firm, but the council should take a broadminded view of the matter and act in the best interests of the ratepayers and the district. Cr Robinson said that there appeared to be no prospect of reaching a unanimous decision, and moved that the District Council be asked to accept the responsibility bf classifying the road in question. Cr. H. M. Corbett agreed with that as the better course to adopt. Cr. A. D. McGuire took strong exception to the proposal, and maintained that the council should be the best judge of what its roads would carry. He failed to see the use of quibbling over the matter or going outside for an opinion. He contended that the maintenance costs on the PaeroaWaihi road were not out of proportion to the revenue received. Although provision had been suggested for an eight-ton load to pass over the road, it was ridiculous to think that a motor-lorry would carry such a load.

Cr. H. M. Corbett disagreed with the previous speaker's remarks, and pointed out that the maintenance on Mie road was a big drain on the finances, and the amount spent was out of all proportion to the money spent on the subsidiary roads. In seconding the resolution Cr. H. M. Corbett said that the road in question had caused a considerable diversity of opinion in the council on previous occasions, and he favoured the District Council accepting the responsibility. ..He also considered that an unbiased opinion was desirable. Cr. Hubbard contended that the council should be in a position to deal with the matter, and he failed to isee what exception could be taken'to the classification suggested. A fast-travel-ling motor-car damaged the roads considerably more than did a heavy motor lorry travelling at a moderate pace. \

in reply to the chairman the engineer said that the present-day motor lorries were not carrying more than 6% tons. He thought that provision should be made for six-ton traffic, as there was too great a difference between the four and eight ton classifications. Cr. R. R. Morrison favoured the Highways Council deciding the matter, which would overcome the local feeling that prevailed. On the motion being put it wap carried, Crs. McGuire and Hubbard voting against it. It was resolved to adopt the classification of. the other roads as recommended by the chairman.