page 13

The Level Crossing Problem
The following article deals in a practical manner with the level crossing problem. It contains information, not previously available, upon the existing financial responsibilities of the various parties concerned, and shows to how great an extent the New Zealand Railways have carried the burden of level crossing protection.

A great deal has been written in recent months about the level crossing problem as it exits in New Zealand. This has been due to the unfortunate series of accidents that have occurred through road-users failing to obey the law, rather than to any special attractiveness about the subject in its legal, moral, technical and psychological aspects.

The main points considered are:—

• (1) Is the Railway doing a reasonable amount of work in the direction of protection at crossings throughout the Dominion?

• (2) Where, and by what means are crossing protected?

• (3) Is the law relating to crossing reasonable? Is it observed?M

• (4) What further can be done to minimise the risk of accident at crossings? Who should do it?

Taking the above questions in order, it may be possible to bring the problem within reasonable compass and state the position in brief and concise terms.

• (1) What the Railway Department is doing towards level crossing protection.

The Department employs a total of 80 crossing-keepers (52 on full time and 28 on part-time) at 37 crossings where the traffic is particularly dense. The wages bill for this work totals £13,122 15s. 3d. per annum, towards which Local Bodies contribute £1,107 8s. 6d.

Up to the present the total amount spent by the Railway Department on the elimination of crossings, either by providing overhead bridges or subways, has been £150,000. Crossings have been dealt with in this way only when the traffic was particularly dense or where the need was especially urgent.

The next method of dealing with the protection of important or dangerous crossings has been by the provision of special crossing signals; these have been of three types and were supplied at the number of crossings indicated, as follows:—

• (a) Warning bells—at 54 crossings.

• (b) Wig-wag signals—at 32 crossings.

• (c) Flashing light signals—at 4 crossings.

Total cost, £19,080.

This still leaves 2,561 crossings in the Dominion (1,093 in the North Island) at which no special audible or visual signals have been provided. But all of these have the protection of the standard “Stop” notice, 6,000 of these having been provided, as well as 1,400 “crossed arm” notices, at a cost of £26,000. It would thus be seen that the Railway Department has spent on protection of level crossings and their elimination the sum of £195,080. The Main Highways Board has spent £13,000; the Local Bodies have spent £24,000, while the amount provided by road using vehicles and associations of motor interest is infinitesimal.

The annual cost to the Railway Department of the up-keep of automatic warning devices at level crossings amounts to £3,880. If this be added to the Department's annual cost for the wages of crossing-keepers (£12,015) it will be seen that the annual cost to the Railways for the protection afforded to the road using public at level crossings is approximately £16,000.

The record of accidents at level crossings shows the following results since 1909.—

page 14

Accidents to Road Users at Level Crossings.

Accidents to Train Passengers at Level Crossings.

• (2) The Level Crossing Law in New Zealand.

The law recognises, that, in order to preserve the safety of His Majesty's lieges, definite instructions must be given regarding the negotiation of level crossings by the public. The present of level crossings by the public. The present law requires that vehicles must stop before attempting to negotiate level crossings, and it is noteworthy that in no case where this law has been observed has any accident occurred to a motor vehicle in New Zealand.

The Government Railways Amendment Act, 1928, contains an amendment to the above provision which reads as follows:—

Section 9:

• (1) Every person driving a motor-vehicle on any road or street shall, when approaching a railway-crossing, reduce speed when within one hundred yards of the crossing to a rate not exceeding fifteen miles an hour, and shall not increase speed until after he has crossed the railway-line. It shall be his duty to keep a vigilant lookout for approaching trains, and he shall not attempt to cross unless the line is clear.

• (2) If at any such crossing there is a “compulsory stop” sign, erected pursuant to regulations page 15 under the Motor-vehicles Act, 1924, or by the railway authorities, it shall be the duty of the person driving any motor-vehicle as aforesaid to stop at such sign for such time as may be necessary to make adequate observations to ascertain whether or not the line is clear.

• (3) Every person who fails to comply with the requirements of this section or who crosses or attempts to cross any railway line while the same is not commits an offence and is liable to a fine of ten pounds.

This amendment comes into operation on the 1st June, 1929, and before that date the Railway Department, in collaboration with the Main Highways Board, will have the various level crossings classified according to their relative importance in order that those which will carry the compulsory stop signs may be defined. The neglect to comply with the law as it previously stood was particularly due to a belief on the part of road users that its universal application would be absurd considering the large number of crossings at which trains are to be met with perhaps only once or twice a day. The distinction between compulsory “stop” road crossings and others will now be based on a reasonable assessment of the desirability of enforcing a stop in order to adequately protect the persons and property of both road users and rail users, and the law will be rigorously enforced.

• (3) Further Action in the Direction of Road Crossing Protection.

For the current year the Department has a programme which will entail an expenditure of £8,223 in eliminating two crossings and providing 11 special crossing signals. In view of the Department's financial situation, it may be reasonably contended that it is doing a fair thing for the public of New Zealand in the amount it is expending, and intends to expend, on level crossing protection. Upon this point it is to be noted that the financial position imposes a very definite limit to the load of expenditure which the Railways can bear for work of this kind. If more is required to be done it seems that action should be taken by the road using authorities for their own protection at level crossings, and in this direction there is room for very much greater interest and activity.

The Railway Department has shouldered the heavy burden cheerfully in the past, and has constantly indicated that where local bodies have been prepared to bear a fair share of the cost of eliminating crossings it would join with them in securing elimination.

The foregoing statement, and particularly the impressive figures of the Department's expenditure and annual liability upon level crossing protection, should do much to put the whole question in its proper perspective.