NEW POLICY

Waikato Times, Volume 125, Issue 20993, 21 December 1939, Page 8

NEW POLICY

COST DISTRIBUTION DEPARTMENT PAY’S ONE-SIXTH ENGINEER’S RECOMMENDATIONS “It appears from Mr G. H. Mackley’s report on the new railway scheme that a new policy is now in force whereby the department pays one-sixth of the cost and the local authority five-sixths,” said the borough engineer, Mr R. Worley at the Hamilton Borough Council meeting last night, in referring to the distribution of the costs of the new railway scheme. “I can see no justification for such an unfair distribution of the costs, but in this case the department does not even propose to bear any of the cost other than crediting us with the saving resulting from the abolition of a crossing keeper. The lowering is without doubt of equal benefit to both the department and to the council, and the net cost after deducting credits and Employment Promotion Fund subsidies might well be divided on an equal basis. When recently a new outlet was constructed from the recently reclaimed area at Thorndon by means of an overhead bridge to the Hutt Road, the cost was divided as follows: City Council and Harbour Board, £11,000; Public Works Fund, £1000; Railway Department. £12,000. Employment Promotion Fund £IO,OOO. A somewhat similar arrangement might well be put forward in regard to the proposals now before the council. “In Palmerston North the line is being deviated outside the city very largely on account of the way in which the presence of the railway hinders development and creates dangerous crossings, and no levy is being made on the council. Price of Railway Bridge “Then in regard to the railway bridge being taken over by the council for road purposes, the proposal of the department virtually means us paying £40,000 for it. A figure in the vicinity of £25,000 would appear to be more appropriate. “When the question of abolishing Hamilton station was discussed with the representatives of the department some years ago the council representatives made it quite clear that they thought there would be no great objection from the people of Hamilton provided that (1) as a result of such alteration the line would be lowered and (2) that a new direct road be constructed from Bryce Street to the new railhead and (3) that platforms be left in the vicinity of Hinemoa Street for entraining and detraining school children and Winter Show patrons. The department suggests that we pay the whole cost of providing these facilities whereas, as the department will experience a saving in operating expenses of about £SOOO per annum as a result of the centralisation, it might well be argued that the whole of the cost should be debited to it. “The shifting of Claudelands station and building a new one is necessary on account of the lowering, and its cost should come under the same basis as the rest of the lowering instead of the council being asked to bear the whole cost. Commerce Street Crossing “The Commerce Street crossing is proposed to be eliminated by constructing a subway under the station yard connecting Hall Street and Massey Street,” continued Mr Worley. “The department proposes that it should bear one-sixth of the cost and the council five-sixths. More trains and shunts pass over this crossing than any other crossing in the country. When the department enlarges the station yard to its plan, it will be necessary for a great many more shunts to pass over the crossing so that in effect it will be virtually closed. Under these circumstances the council would be well justified in asking for a very much altered allocation of the cost. “Forest Lake Road subway is also scheduled for the council to pay fivesixths. It should be noted that this crossing lies entirely' outside the borough boundary and the cost seems to be a matter between the department and the county council or highways board. “The three new connecting roads and the overhead bridges connecting Alexandra Street to Barton Street. Anglesea Street to Selkirk Street, and Tristram Street to Hinemoa Street are scheduled for the council to pay the whole cost. The total cost of the three roads is £29,000, made up as follows: Compensation £9OOO, cost of bridges £16,000, cost of roading £4OOO. Valuable Frontages “Excluding the frontages within 70 feet of Ward Street and Bryce Street on these new roads, there will be at least 700 feet of new frontage created to railway property. These frontages will become very valuable and it would appear as if the department would be justified either in bearing a considerable part of the cost or in crediting the council with a share of the increased value resulting from the carrying out of the work. “The final observation concerns the conversion of the railway bridge to road traffic and the necessary approach roads. The cost of this work is rightly debited against the council, but as a result of carrying it out a large area of railway land at present lying idle, or used for residential purposes only, will have valuable street frontage. The increase in value to this property will be very considerable indeed and some substantial credit might well accrue to the council as a result. The land referred to is the block adjacent to King's Chambers, having a frontage of 25 feet to Victoria Street and 140 feet to the new street, and also the block further back measuring 14C feet to the new street with a depth ol 150 feet. “The department has pointed out that it is in a position to go ahead with the proposal to build a central railhead at King Street and eliminate the railway facilities at Hamilton, irrespective of whether the line is lowered or not,” he added. “Whether it could do this without securing the good will of the people of Hamilton is a matter it would have to be fully satisfied about. As pointed out earlier, this goodwill would probably only be secured by the department providing for more direct access to the new railhead and for the elimination of the level crossings. Defer Lowering of Line assuming the department did carry out such a proposal to me that it would not be

long before it found that the most profitable way in which it could deal with the large area of land at present occupied by the Hamilton Station and yards would be to extend the three roads referred to earlier through it, even in spite of the creation of three more level crossings. As owners of the property it would of course have to bear the whole cost of the roading work. “With the Hamilton station out of the way the hold up on Victoria Street and the other crossings will be reduced to less than half, as all the traffic will be through traffic. If all three crossings in the business area are manned by keepers the danger should be small. “If the council considers that £174,000 is too big a price to pay for the elimination of five level crossings and the extension of our roading system, it might be wise, unless the department is prepared to extensively alter the allocation, to let developments take the alternative course suggested by the department as being more in its interests, and defer the lowering part of the scheme for some years,” concluded Mr Worley. “On the figures supplied by the department subsequent lowering costs would not exceed £190,000, including all of the works now proposed, from which credits would reduce the figure to £150,000. By this time everyone concerned would have a much clearer idea of the problems involved and the issue at stake.”