HOROWHENUA COUNTY COUNCIL.

Shannon News, 14 September 1926, Page 3

HOROWHENUA COUNTY COUNCIL.

■+ ■ SEPTEMBER MEETING. The Horowhenua County Council met on Saturday, all the members being present and the chairman (Mr Monk) presiding. DANGER TO TRAFFIC. Mr F. Webb, of Shannon, drew the Council's attention to the fact that part of the fence along' the main road north of the bridge had fallen down, and constituted a danger to both traffic and stock, as a section of the fence was composed of barbed wire.—Referred to Engineer and Cr. Barber to investigate.

NO POWER TO REMIT RATES. Two ratepayers at Makerua wrote stating that they had been heavy sufferers through the recent flood on their property. Added to heavy losses of stock the pastures on the flat, comprising 100 of the 12-2 acres constituting the property, had been destroyed, and it would be impossible to do much for the first six months. They appealed to the Council to rebate the rates which would fall due in the coming year, thereby assisting them in a time of real catastrophe. Given this help they would be able to round the comer, without it they might be forced to relinquish the property. The rates had always been paid for the past seven years and it was only dire need that'forced them to ask for this remission.

l'he chairman said it was quite clear the Council had no power to remit rates. He thought the first man to whom application should be made for assistance was the lender of the money. Even if the land was flooded, the Council had to maintain the roads and other services. In any case the Council had no power to remit rates for the reason given. No action was taken. RIVER BOARD COMMISSION. The . chairman reported that the Council's'representatives went to the conference at Palmerston, but decided not to join with the other local bodies in employing counsel and an engineer to combat the River Board's case', as. they felt that those local bodies, would derive some - benefit, while Horowhenua as. a County would receive no benefit. It was therefore decided to instruct the County Solicitor to appear on behalf of the County, and he would call evidence and cross-examine witnesses.

Cr. Galley considered the Commis-' ; sion had extraordinary powers if it ' could impose a share of the cost on a local body contrary to the wish of the people. » The chairman said the Commission , had that power and further if it made the council liable for the £BOOO sought to.' be imposed on it, such payment was mandawry and would have to be paid without reference to , the ratepayers. The Committee's action was approved, tlie Council agreeing that ' the County was in a different position to other local bodies. A BOUNDARY ROAD. Levin, .Borough Council reported tliat it was commencing work on the formation of an asphailt footpath along the southern side of Mako Miako 'ißoad West, leading to tlie 'racecourse property, while it was further proposed 'during the coming; season to re-form and bitumenise the roadway to a width of 16 feet. That portion, of Mako Mako Road, is a boundary road, and through an oversight, no share of the maintenance had ever been charged to the County Council. It was now proposed to charge the County with one-half of the cost, of this work, the proportion amounting to £l5O (estimated). The distance was seven chains. The chairman said the Mayor of Levin had" spoken to him about the matter 'and the .speaker explained that the Council would have to consider anv extraordinary expenditure such as footpath or bitumenizing before agreeing to it. He suggested that .tlie Works Committee view the road and report thereon. Or. Catley: W e> can't, do anything this year. ' ' , The chairman said the Borough did' not expect that. N In answer to Cr. Kilsby;, the clerk said the racecourse was in the Gouny'riie matter was referred to trTS Works Committee. GENERAL. Mrs J Keiinard, Tokoinaru, asked the Council if it would take steps to have Mr Hume's tramway removed from the roadway in front of tlie writer's gate, as the approach was rendered very muddy, it being almost impossible to gain access to the gate.—Referred to Cr. Whyte and the Engineer to interview Mr Hume Shannon Borough Council asked that the bridge across the Otarau stream (as a continuance of Nathan Terrace) be made passable for traffic as it had been out of repair for some time—Resolved to inform, tlie writers --What tlie necessary timber has been ordered, and when this comes to hand the work will be proceeded with. , . ' Mr W. James, of. Shannon, informed the Council that several big slips on the Kingston Road Hill had occurred during the heavy rains o julv blocking the' water-tables and forcing the water down the road for a considerable distance. It was asked that these slips be removed as soon as-.possible—Referred to the Engineer, with P»w«' ERECTION OF BOWSERS. The Works Committee recommend(a) That persons desirous of ln.stalling a kerbside 'bowser- within the County must first submit an application and plan showing the position of the same. ' (b) That subject 1o the site and plan being to the satisfaction of the Fiiffineer, permission he granted foath" installation of a bowser duringti,c pleasure of the Council and revocable at any time. oriTllir n (c) That a rent of £2 per annum t£?' the- Council be supplied with a bond with two sureties approved by the Council or a cover from a guarantee Society indemnifying the Council from all damages

it may become liable to by reason of the erection and maintenance of any bowser. The recommendations were agreed' to.

Messrs W. H. Gunning and Co., Ltd., desired permission to instal a petrol pump at their Tokomaru store, ; situated on the Main County Road. A similar request came from Mr G. Johnston, Waikanae. It was decided that permission be granted, subject to the Engineer being satisfied that.such installations will be in accordance with the reI quirements of the Council. THE KARA BRIDGE. J In regard to the Kara Bridge the 1 Makerua Drainage Board stated that ) it was desirous of -coming to a definite understanding with the County Council in reference to the amount the former should' pay towards tlhe construction of the bridge. | The Board stated that the position appeared to be .as follows: The road was now declared a main highway and being reconstructed. In connection with this work the bridge had to be rebuilt to. conform with the requirements of the Main Highway. In the ordinary course of events tlhe County Council would construct the bridge about 2 feet 4 inches below the top of the Board's flood protection 'banks. For the benefit of all parties it was desirable to build the bridge as high or •i little higher than the Makerua Boaird's flood protection bank.. Raising the .bridge would make it more costly to construct. The Board was prepared to pay this amount, and also the additional cost of constructing mo approaches. In connection witih this work the/ writers desired to point out that the flood protection bank scheme would greatly improve the Main Highway by keeping the water' off the road, and for this reason the Board thought 5 that if the Council paid for the whole work the benefit would far outweigh the extra cost of building the bridge and approaches. The chairman stated that some of the members of the Council present at the recent Commission to enquire into the Manawatu-Oiroua River Board were asked to meet members of the Makerua Drainage Board in •connection with this bridge. The I latter had, .apparently, seemed' to forget about a record or agreement having been entered into in connection with the bridge. The speaker had very definite recollection ofsome agreement haying been reached whereby the Council contributed £250, the Government a similar amount, and the balance by the Board, who would erect a bridge over the stream. The' position now was a somewhat different one since the advent of the Main Highways Board because the work' would be subject to a £1 for £1 subsidy. That was—the Highways Board would find half the money. The bridge that the •Makerua Drainage .Hoard proposed to erect was not of the standard or , the size the Council intended to buald in order to comply \yith the requirements of the Main Highways Board. Apparently, at -the time of the. original agreement, each of the parties —Government, County Council and Drainage Board were to find onethird of the cost. Seeing that, at the present moment, the County Council was cited as a contributor to an idea included in that covered by the Makerua Drainage Board, it niio-ht be found that the Council was twice contributing towards the work, either directly/or indirectly, at .the. Tokomaru end of the County. There was another aspect of the matter, as this work was urgently needed. ■ The banks should be built up as ) to render the land flood-proof. Just , at that particular point the Council had encroached upon Government, land and until some arrangement was 'made with the Railway Department, the Council would not be ma position to continue with the work. The speaker agreed with the Makerua Drainage Board that this matter was urgently needed and should pe expedS, -because" the whole of the , work already done was-nullified by that particular portion remaining undone. The question was one of what proportion the Board should be , called upon to pay-it should be asked to keep to the ™gmal arrangement, £250 from the Government £250 from the County and the remainder from the ißibard. He S Sat the Board should be noti fled that the Council was expediting the work of erecting the bridge, and Sat when the bridge was complete the question of payment should be on the terms previously outimea. This was agreed to.