Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 11 September 1931, Page 4

Thk County Council had a further discussion tli is weak regarding the Petersen road route. A short time ago the Council had an offer to construct a serviceable road on Mr Mclntosh’s frontage. This was accepted as the recess was to be provided without cost to Government'or the Council. When the route had been determined however, ft. flood occurred submerging the proposed route and as also the approaches. as well as the line for tlie dedicated road. This visitation caused a suspension of operations while repreimitations were made about adequate i iver protection. As this has not been possible, the agitation for the completion of the road has been renewed. When considered by the Council there was again a division of opinion among the members. There was a proposal lo leave the matter to the Public Works Department to have the road constructed where thought desirable. This was lost in favour of a motion to recommend the back route so as to avoid cutting up valuable farm land with a road, a n d asking for favourable consideration so that access might be provided as soon as possible. The motion as agreed to .suggests the safest route and avoids spoiling good farm land. On the other hand, the cost of the hack route is considerably in excess of the dedicated route, and this is a factor which has to be reconciled. Mr Mclntosh is so desirous of saving his farm land that he has offered to refund the cost of the money spent in clearing the road route through his land, and that would he some contribution towards the extra cost. It is to be hoped the present overtures will result in finality being reached and stable access provided. The position is now largely in the hands of the Public Works Department, the officers of which are fully conversant with the position. There should therefore soon become'indication"as to what Is to transpire to settle the very vexed question.