CONTROVERSY ENDED.

Northern Advocate, 20 July 1915, Page 2

CONTROVERSY ENDED.

OTAIKA-MAUNGATAPERE EOAD

COUNTY ENGINEER , UPHELD.

The long controversy and drawnout negotiations respecting the OtaikaMaungatapere road were brought to a head yesterday afternoon at the meeting of ratepayers called by the Why ngarei County Council at Maungatapere. The County. Chairman, Mr J. R. Mclnnes, presided, and there were present with him the Maunu riding members, Crs. R. Y. Kernohan and A. E. Phillips, the acting-County clerk (Mr H. W. Briggs) and the County engineer (Mr W. M. Fraser). The chairman explained that in 1912 a petition was received by the Whangarei County Council from a number of Maunu ratepayers, praying that a- road be put through from Otaika direct to the Maungatapere dairy factory. The County Council instructed the county engineer to lay off the road and they paid Mr Foote compensation. There was a right co take 5 per cent, of land through Mr A. A. Wilson's property which was native land. The engineer ran off a grade of one in 32. In the meantime, however, the law was amended, and the County Council- lost the right to take 5 per cent, from the top portion of Mr Wilson '.s. property, although the right still applied to the bottom portion. Mr Wilson was fighting the proposition, claiming that it damaged his land/ He did not 'blame Mr Wilson for that. In the altered circumstances the Council had resolved :o place the decision in the hands of the ratepayers as to which route should be adopted. The county engineer explained the position of the road arid; a road proposed by Mr Wilson, both being shown on plans. He staged that Mr Wilson's route included steep places. Referring to the amendment of, the law, the, engineer said it had been put through quietly, inasmuch as it was usual to forward a draft of amendments to

local bodies, and 'in the present caso the County Council knew nothing about it. The amendment applied all over the Dominion. The Public Works Department would not spend a copper on Mr Wilson's road but would devote money to the road as! propose! by the County Gouncil. The acting-county clerk read the correspondence received-by the" County Council on the matter from the Department of Lands and Survey. He also read legal opinion obtained by the Council. . (The correspondence lias already been reported in connection with the

meetings of the County Council.) The chairman observed that it would be seen that the County Council hau done their best to fulfil'the desire of the petitioners. He had no hesitation in saying that the road would be on'i of the most important tn the county. Cr. Phillips explained the attitude he had adopted as councillor and fiding member throughout the question. Cr. Kernohan explained; that he had no brief for either side. He considered that the crux of question was the , financial position of the riding. The bill had to be footed by the riding if the road were sanctioned. Two-thirns of .the riding's revenue would go in compensation. He felt that the main road required repairs and that the riding had as many side roads as it could carry financially. The proposed road might be left over-for a thais. As an alternative, those who would benefit by the road could place themselves under a special rate. There wore many in the Maunti riding who would not benefit by the road, for which the compensation would tw £1491. The county engineer ■ denied that £1491 compensation would have to be paid. Mr Wilson was asking £1401 compensation for land, the total value of which the engineer declared vvoalil be about £ 1000. On the contrary the compensation would cost about

£290, as only grazing rights wouM be affected, the increased value which would accrue to the land from the roadway off-setting injurious Cattle subways could be built to protect grazing rights, s Cr. Kernohan thought that the figures he quoted were correct. They were on the Council records. In answer to a question, the Chairman said that the engineer quoted his figures from his own calculations. Cr. Phillips said the figures were taken from Government -valuations. Mr Wilson's were taken from private sources. If the road were not pushed through the money already expended would be lost. Mr A. A. Wilson said he was opposed to thg road, although in some respects he was sorry to oppose it. 113 claimed that to put the road through as th 3 County Council proposed would be a hardship., Ho had spent, over £{1.000 hard cash on rhe property. Th e engineer's, road would cut off the water from the .Otsika stream for 110 chains. It WQUId also make an area of 3C acres which γ-vsuld not be of use to anyone. Every councillor who "had gone over the road with him, including the county chairman, had said that they would fight the proposal if they were similarly placed. He submitted that all !ne legal grades could be obtained along the alternative road proposed by hiV.i. The property had given him more tvTable than his whole business. To own a bit of property was becoming a cmse. The County Council road would cruise a mutilation of his property. With regard to cattle subways they 'vero no use. He considered ie was time legislation was passed walcb would protect property owners from havir.u. their land mutilated. His property concerned In the present qur-K-

tio'i would be useless for the for which he had intended it. Mr Fc-terson:. You didn't have chat opi.iion when a road was put- thr.i'.gh my property! (Laughter.) Mr Wilson: You never asked my advice.

The chairman Here admitted tnat he had said that he would do the same thing as Mr Wilson, but at the same time he was satisfied that the engineer had chosen the best route from a road point of view. That was his duty. Mr Leng said he vis-ited the proposed route as a deputation from the Maungatapere Dairy Company. He came to the conclusion that Mr Wilson was taking up a selfish position, for he did not care where the road went so long as it did not touch vis property. Th e proposed route .wouii become the main road for cattle to he trucked on the main trunk line ant': also for cattle intended to be shippel. There would b e freezing; works before long and cattle yards too. He contended .that the road should be legil'sed immediately. The longer the matter was delayed the more would be the cost. It was not necessary to spend money on the road immediately. Mr Dwyer said that others you'd be deprived of water from the Otaika stream by th e proposed road as we!l as Mr Wilson, but lie, as one so affected, would only be too pleased to see a road put through along tbe couDty. engineer's route: ' It would be a great benefit to settlers at large.

Cγ. ■Kernohan said the Maunu ratepayers had to bear in mind the financial position of the riding. Available for the current year's expenditure vf?s a-sum of about £1888. ' Compensation to various property owners involved £1491, and if the road wero proceeded with there woujd be only a limited amount of money available for the current year's expenditure. The County Council was quite willing, if the ratepayers sanctioned: it to go on with the road under the Public Works Act, whereby it would be decided whe* ther or not the total amount of compensation, claimed would have to "be paid. Mr Feaver pointed Mauna did not ship cattle. Mangakahia sent all the cattle, and that district would not pay anything towards the road. Mr Leng proposed, and- Mr C. Stevens seconded, that the road be legalised as surveyed by the county engineer through Mr A. A. Wilson's property. There was no amendment, and the motion, on being put, was (jarried by a narrow majority. '