HC Deb 12 July 1920 vol 131 c1992W

asked the Minister of Health whether orders have been issued to housing authorities that the cost of making roads beyond 16 feet in width shall not rank for subsidy; and, if so, whether councils that have incurred the cost of making the additional width of roadway required by the bye-laws have any powers to compel other owners in the district who open up roadways to adhere to the bye-laws?


No such instruction has been given. The Ministry of Health allow the cost of roads of widths varying according to the purpose and character of the particular roads to rank for Exchequer subsidy. For the ordinary minor roads on a housing scheme I am advised that a carriageway of 16 feet is ample, but a greater width would be required for more important roads. As regards the latter part of the question, I may refer to Section 24 (2) of the Housing, Town Planning, etc., Act, 1919, under which, if departures are made from bye-laws in a housing scheme by a local authority with the approval of the Ministry of Health, similar concessions must be made in like circumstances to private owners. Where a local authority decide to make roads on their housing scheme in accordance with the bye-laws and to bear the extra expense, Section 24 of the Housing Act, 1919, will not apply, and it will be necessary for private owners to comply with the bye-laws.