HEAVY TRAFFIC BY-LAWS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 231, 4 February 1911, Page 2

HEAVY TRAFFIC BY-LAWS

CLIFTON COUNTY IN TROUBLE. RATEPAYERS PROTEST. Respecting the by-laws recently confirmed by the Clifton County Council, the following correspondence (which explains itself) was read at the meeting of the Council yesterday:— The Hon. R. McKenzie, Minister of Public Works, wrote stating with regard to Mr. PepperclFs petition respecting the width of tyres on vehicles used in the district and to the prohibition of heavy traffic during the winter months, that the representations made would have due consideration. Mr. W. S. Short, Assistant Under-Sec-retary, Pablic Works Department, Wellington, wrote stating that the Department was in receipt of the petition and asking under what statutory authority these by-laws were made, and why a copy of same was not sent to the Minister of Public Works in accordance with ection 139 of the Public Works Act, 1908.

THE PETITION. "We, the undersigned settlers in the County of Clifton, hereby beg to protest against certain clauses in the Wheel Traffic By-laws recently passed by the Clifton County Council, and which have been submitted to you for approval in accordance with section 143 of the Public Works Act, 1008. The clausos we object to are: Clause B 01 section ;'l (width of tyres).—This we consider unjust and absolutely unworkable in common practice. Clause C ol section 3.—lf this clause is allowed to pass it means that carriers will be prohibited from using the county roads for four months in each year." THE CHAIRMAN'S REPLY. "I am in receipt of your letter of the 10th inst. in reference to the above enclosing a copy to yourself from R. H. Pepperell and others objecting to those clauses which provide for the width ol tyres on vehicles used in general traffic, and the prohibition of heavy traffic during the four winter months of the year. Before the special order making the by-laws was confirmed, Messrs. R. H. Pepperell and E. G. Bleakley, carriers, waited upon the Council, and asked that clause B of section. 1, By-law No. 1, be amended by reducing the width of tyres of vehicles on springs drawn by five or six horses to three inches instead of four inches as provided in the by-law. They did not then ask for the excision of the clause; on the contrary, they expressed approval of its provisions in regard to the other classes of vehicles that come under its provisions. They also urged that the stoppage of heavy traffic as proposed would affect their business, and would not benefit either the roads or the ratepayers. After full consideration, the Council unanimously decided it would not grant the concession asked for, as to do so would in their opinion nullify their principal object in making the by-laws. The Council also held that the provision in the clause in regard to tyres on a vehicle requiring five or six horses to draw it cannot, when the damage to both metalled and unmetalled Toads by heavy Joads on narrow Ityres passing lover them is considered, be termed uureasonaoie. They are confident that when this clause is in operation a saving in maintenance will be effected, an item which in this county on account of the broken character of the country and the scarcity of metal, is difficult and costly. The stopping of heavy traffic is done in the ratepayers' interest. Councillors have, on behalf of the districts they represent, made continuous complaints of the damage caused by heavy loads passing over their roads during the winter months. I therefore submit: (1) That while the other clauses in our by-laws contain much that is required for the guidance and safety of the travelling public, they are of minor importance compared to those relating to the width of tyres and the control of heavy traffic. (2) That the clauses mentioned in the petition are not unjust or unworkable, and will not stop carriers from working when brought into operation. (3) That the by-laws are the results of practical knowledge of the requirements of the county and are generally approved. Councillors have had many expressions of opini«n to this effect. Also that the dissatisfaction is very limited is indicated when, after an energetic canvass, out of 550 ratepayers in the county, only twenty-live could be found to sign the petition, and of these there is reason to believe many were not well informed upon the question they were dealin" with. In referencce to the second part of Mr. Short's letter, I enclose a copy of the special order making the by-laws which I trust will give the desired information. Regarding not having been forwarded to you in terms of section 13!) (4) of "The Public Works Act, 1908," I can only state that the obligation imposed by the section was not overlooked, only that an error was made in addressing the letter containing the by-laws to the Minister for Internal Affairs instead of the Minister of Public Works."