ROAD TO KIOREROA

Northern Advocate, 21 July 1933, Page 6

ROAD TO KIOREROA

■ ■; Xtim —■ — ■■'Q . * t HARBOUR BOARD’S VIEWS 'r— - - » CO-OPERATION OF COUNTY. i ' _______ ; . ; . v ’ ' ! REMOVING AMBIGUITIES. Replies from the local bodies concerned in connection with the proposed road to connect Wharigarei with the new wharf .'at Kiororoa, were received by the Wiangarei Harbour Board today. The committee appointed in this matter reported that it had direced thai a letter be forwarded to the Borough Council asking if the council would ’undertake to construct its portion of the road. The committee had also waited on the council in support oi the proposal. The committee further reported having' brought the matter before dhe County Council by way of a letter. | t The Borough Council advised having passed-a resolution to the effect that faVourible consideration be given to the proposals. Of the Harbour Board, and that a committee of the whole council-; would confer with the Harbour Board -to determine the basis of arrangements, ' :*■ The ?Whangarei County Council re-

r plied ti|at before consideration could be v given it desired to be informed of the location of the proposed road, together • with some proof, so far as it concerned .the county that the work was now a ■ public necessity. Mr J l , A. Finlayson expressed opinion that the board should have followed the letter to the County Council with a deputation. Apparently the council was under a little bit of a misunderstanding; } “Construction is mentioned in their he continued. “We are not asking' the council to contribute towards the construction of the road, but / consider that the onus of building the road should 1 be on the County Council. :V. J : ' ‘<t : ’lf the 'road can be provided without cost tt3f the county surely that should be all to the good. The county has been collecting rates in the locality for 20 ■; or 30 years. They should accept onus for maintenance of the road and we "' hope tp obtain their moral support in the connection put through. “I \frould: like, to congratulate Or J. & A, S. Mae Kay upon the open-minded attitude be adopted/’ Mr Finlayson coni’ tinued.j, ‘ 1 Some years ago the Harbour Board was instructed by the people of. r. Vf.hang?rei. to -build a wharf at Eiore- | roa.., We have charge of the water and the. oth,er two. local bodies operating in Whahgarei have charge of the land. ' The district will-’never, get full value from the wharf until the road is put in.” ; The chairman then moved that a deputation wait on the County Council at . its nexs meetfags. •*; ~f , ■’ This was seconded by Mr P. Gardner, ;• who sa|d> i&at the availability of nh- | employed labour should be stressed. Local bodies were not being asked to

raise loans.;' To have the wharf without a road would be like.having a railway ;l station without a goods shed. “Some, members of the County Council, as Reported, seemed to misunderstand the .position altogether," said Mi HoliheS.;;, The council was -not being

| asked to piake a road, but the Harbour Board wafc not a road-making authority, and waited’ the approval of the council •; to a; road beihg put in. The • County Council appeared to have gone back upon the decision reached by its representatives on - a committee which the proposed route. I?' The council delegates had then accepted the idea; of a road acrriss the (flat near the railway in preference to that previously planned, which would | have followed the foot of the hill. This second' rqqte waij a countyjroad, and the council could be compelled to put it through.?: ? Mr L, A. Johnson: “We are in the •. same pqsition as a man who subdivides. We simply want the county to accept dedication, and future maintenance.* * Some ambiguity about the matter was from the report of the council meeting.?: The chairman’s proposal that a deputation wait on the council was accepted.