Kokako Road to be stopped, council expects objections

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 12, Issue 576, 7 March 1995, Page 4

Kokako Road to be stopped, council expects objections

Kokako Road is to be closed and an altemative route for trampers provided along the eastem boundary of the Ruatiti Wilderness property, the Ruapehu District Council decided at their last meeting. However, the council expects objections to the road closure and also decided it would eonsider any objections by way of a special hearings committee, whose decision would be accepted by the council. The committee is to be: deputy mayor Graeme

Cosford and councillors Joe Murphy and BillMorrissey. Council chief executive Cliff Houston outlined the procedural requirements of "Section 342 of the Local Govemment Act 1974" as they related to the issue: To close the road the council has to obtain the consent of the Minister of Lands. It then has to follow the procedure set out in the Tenth Schedule to the Local Govemment Act which includes the stipulations that the council must prepare a plan of the road and make it available to the public; explain why the road is to be stopped; give public notice of the intention to stop the road calling for objections; notify neighbours. If objections are recei ved and the council decides not • to allow the objections, the council can then send the objections together with the plan to the Planning Tribunal. There was some discussion by the council on whether it should eonsider the matter and whether it could hand the decision directly to the Planning Tribunal, given that councillors beleived that there would be objections to whatever they decided. Mr Houston said the council had a duty to eonsider the matter and make a decision, regardless of whether it was likely to end up with the Planning Tribunal. Councillor Bobby Vine asked how binding the altemative route could be made. (Some objectors are

happy with the proposed altemative route but are concemed that it could not be as legally binding as a road reserve). "I thing that can be achieved," Mr Houston assured council. In answer to questions about how the committee could eonsider the matter without seeing the site, chief engineer Bruce Dobson said they could rely on the advice of the council officers, just as they did with many other planning matters. There was also the option of visiting the site, he said. Councillor Stuart Shaw called for an amendment to the clause that called for Gary Rawnsley, owner of Ruatiti Wilderness, to pay a fee of $500 and "that subsequent costs incurred by Council be charged to Mr Rawnsley". Mr Shaw wanted the words "fair and reasonable costs" put in the clause. "Mr Rawnsley has already spent a lot of money on preparing reports etcetera and I'm concerned that council officers could ask for more reports, which he would then have to pay for," said Mr Shaw. Mr Houston asked, if a limit were placed on how much to charge Mr Rawnsley, where the rest of the money would come from as he did not have a budget for such items. He said it would be unfair to single out Mr Rawnsley as all other planning applicants had to cover council costs associated with their applications.