Kaiapoi householders to be questioned on buses

Press, 15 August 1984, Page 25

Kaiapoi householders to be questioned on buses

Householders’ comments on the Kaiapoi bus service will be sought by the Kaiapoi Borough Council. A questionnaire on the ise of the bus service will oe sent to each house along with information on the effects of the introduction of the proposed urban, transport area in the Christchurch region. -fee area, as proposed by the Canterbury United Council, would extend from Burnham to Rangiora. Public transport within the area would come under the control of an urban transport council. The United Council sent the Borough Council the results of a survey on the use of Christchurch Transport Board buses in North Canterbury.

The Town Clerk, Mr R. N. McCabe, told a meeting of the Borough Council on Monday that the questionnaire would determine if there was a greater demand for the buses than the survey had shown. The information on the effects of the urban transport area said that the United Council had estimated that on present service levels, the bus service north of the Waimakariri River would cost $500,000 to run. Kaiapoi ratepayers would have to pay $30,600 toward the running of the buses under the United Council’s present subsidy policy.

An extra rate of 0.1859 c a dollar of land value would have to be struck to meet the bill, it said. That would add $83.65 to the rate de-

mand on a property with a land value of $15,000. If the level of service from the buses was reduced, the cost to ratepayers would also be reduced. If Kaiapoi was excluded from the area, bus fares would increase because the

urban transport council would not help pay for the service in Kaiapoi. It also said that the Borough Council did not want Kaiapoi to be included in the urban transport area. Cr Margaret Cleland said that the newsletter should not tell people what the council’s views on the issue were. The information should remain objective to allow householders to make up their own minds. She accused the council of having “done everything back to front.” Householders should have been sent the questionnaire before the council had decided against inclusion in the urban transport area. If the newsletter included the council’s views, the questionnaire might as well not be sent out, she said. Her motion to exclude the council’s decision from the newsletter was narrowly defeated.

Cr Cleland also wanted the questionnaire to ask if the person answering the questions was a resident or a ratepayer. A ratepayer would be affected more by the introduction of the urban transport area than a resident.

The Mayor of Kaiapoi, Mr H. W. Cumberland, said it would be “immoral” to include the question. He said no distinction should be made between residents and ratepayers.

Cr Cleland’s motion was lost.

The council decided to support the Rangiora District Council in its attempt to set up a North Canterbury urban transport advisory committee. The committee would advise the urban transport council on the ■transport needs in north canterbury. Councillors agreed that the people of North Canter'bury knew better than the United Council what was needed in the area on transport matters. Car-wreckers

Good will “on both sides” would help resolve a breach of planning laws by a carwrecking business, Cr Cleland told the council.

She was commenting on a report on the yard by Mr

McCabe. The report said that the business on Williams Street also had illegal access to Stone Street. Wrecked cars were being stored on an area of land not permitted under the District Scheme. It was possible the landowners did not realise they needed to seek council permission to store the cars on the land and to have access to Stone Street, said Cr Cleland.

There was no reason why the owners could not go through the normal planning procedures for a conditional use for the land and to apply for access to Stone Street.

Mr McCabe said that the stacking of wrecked cars was allowed on some of the land as an existing use right. Not all of the land being used was covered by that privilege. Cr Cleland said that other properties also had illegal access to Stone Street The owners would also be approached and asked to make an application to the council for legal access. Mr McCabe said a strip of reserve land separated the properties from the street. The reserve had been created because property owners had not been willing to contribute toward the cost of creating Stone Street. Carton milk

The council agreed to back a stand by the Canterbury Milk Vendors’ Association against the introduction of white milk in cartons. It will write to the Milk Board to say it opposed moves to sell milk in cartons.

Mr Cumberland said the council would be affected by the increased amount of litter cartoned milk would create. The non-biodegrade-able cartons would have to be collected and disposed of. Cr McAllister said that the milk vendors performed a "great service” to the community and deserved the support of the council. Cr Cleland said that New .Zealand did not have the population to make the selling of milk in both bottles and cartons viable. Cartoned milk would be sold at supermarkets. Elderly people and young mothers might pot have transport to carry large amounts of milk home from the supermarket, she said. “We should also do everything we can to avoid extra litter,” said Cr Cleland.