ROADING CONDITIONS.

Putaruru Press, Volume VIII, Issue 360, 16 October 1930, Page 5

ROADING CONDITIONS.

UPSET LOAN PROPOSALS. Modern Motor Traffic. Fivefold Increase. A deputation from Maungatautari riding, consisting of Messrs. S. H. Judd (ex-councillor) and Ariell and Deane, waited on the Matamata County Council on Friday, with reference to the bituminising of Maungatautari road. Mr. S. H. Judd stated that the deputation waited on the council with reference to the surfacing of the Maungatautari main road and to voice an emphatic protest against any deviation from the original scheme. In 1924 when the loan was raised the road in question was included and this was definitely confirmed at a full meeting of ratepayers held in the riding recently. Mr. Deane recalled that when the loan was proposed it was stated that a halfpenny in the pound would pay for same, and if it was not passed the half-penny would have to go on as general rate, in any case, for maintenance. After supporting the loan on an assurance that they would get a permanent surface it was unthinkable that there should be any alteration.

Mr. Ariell stated that it would not be right now that the loan had been raised, as a big proportion of the burden had been placed on them, to forego their share even on lines of economy. Personally, he did not think economy did justify any such action. At the time he had questioned the loan as being an economical one, but had been persuaded by the arguments advanced.

The chairman stated that conditions had altered from the time the loan was raised; motor traffic had increased fivefold. It was not the intention of the council to bituminise all roads. Maungatautari was entitled to about £12,400, and to date £BOOO had been spent. By the time Goosman’s present contract of £SOOO was finished £13,000 would have been spent. Maungatautari road was sandwiched between two ridings. Karapiro was entitled to the same amount, but had only £II,OOO. Tokoroa road was costing more and the most economical road to-day for the county to tackle was the Cambridge-Karapiro road. His own riding was entitled to £22,000 and had only had £9OOO. At this stage Mr. Judd interrupted to state that he had never stated that Maungatautari had not had its fair share. Mr. Ariell stated he made the remark, but meant that the money allocated should be spent. Mr. Judd then read the voting paper, which he held stated the road in question would be bituminised. The chairman disagreed, holding the statement was general and included construction. The paper stated that portions only might be done. Mr. Judd did not agree with this view, and pointed out that omissions from the bituminising programme were specifically stated. The chairman pointed out that practically every road in their riding had a Government subsidy previously, and these were now relisted, and further grants could not be obtained. Mr. Judd replied that £IOOO had since been secured. Mr. Ariell stated a map had been shown at the meeting on which the road was shown with a bituminous surface.

Mr. Deane said that work done to date had been done on that carrying the least traffic. The chairman remarked that the portion done had been costing an awful sum for maintenance. The metal was wearing out. Mr. Judd held that until the loan was raised there was no metal with the exception of that put on by himself and others from the Cambridge end of the bridge. A circular sent out by the chairman, at the time of the loan, stated that the county main roads were to be put down with a bituminous surface. He held that they were evading their responsibilities if the road was not surfaced. Cr. Cox stated that did not apply to all county roads as 14 miles in his riding had been omitted. Mr. Judd agreed, but stated such were provided for in the list of omissions. If he recalled correctly the Putaruru-Arapuni road was not included. Cr. Allen held that there was, in his opinion, no desire to evade the point that the road was to be bituminised, but the question was that the money allocated had been spent. Mr. Judd held that no particular sums had been specified for any particular road. If the estimates had been exceeded then there was still the

ten per cent extra which could be I raised. The engineer stated that when the estimates were made up Public Works grants were about £6ooo' per year, and he had averaged on £SOOO per year. Since then these grants had dropped to £4OOO. On top of this the Public Works had cut out subsidies on surfacing. Mr. Ariell somewhat warmly stated the council could not honourably get out of its promise. The chairman, heatedly, explained that the speaker’s statement meant that if £12,000 was estimated, and the cost years later was found to be £SOOO, that amount would have to be spent. The speaker must realise that conditions had altered in a manner which no one could forsee, since the loan was raised. It was not a local trouble, but one which affected the whole of New Zealand. All local bodies were in similar trouble. The engineer then gave certain illustrations in regard to various difficulties, a.nd stated that a county near Palmerston, after raising a loan for surfacing, had cancelled the whole loan. He agreed with Mr. Judd that' it was possible that from an economical point of view to surface the first eight miles and not the balance of four miles.

Mr. Judd urged that he did not advocate that. He wanted the whole twelve miles done.

Mr. Ariell stated that the farmers concerned were in a better position to-day than when the loan was raised. They were on their feet.

Cr. Allen stated that many farmers believed in derating, and the more they concentrated on that, and economised, the better off they would be. He held that the outlook for the farmer was never blacker. He doubted if butterfat would exceed Is per lb over the whole season, while the £1 sterling was only worth two-thirds of what it was in 1914.

Mr. Judd agreed with derating, but held the loan should be spent now, as it would be difficult to obtain grants when the user paid for the roads. The deputation then thanked the council for the patient hearing given and withdrew.

The position is that the matter remains in abeyance for the time being, and that the road in question will receive further consideration at a later date, as the roading programme becomes more clear.