BEACH RESORT PROPOSALS

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28371, 2 September 1957, Page 12

BEACH RESORT PROPOSALS

Lyttelton Scheme Considered

/From Our Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, Sept 1. A scheme to make 12 sandy beaches around Lyttelton harbour into accessible seaside resorts is receiving Ministerial attention. The scheme calls for improved reading, the cost of which would be met by the Government. This would involve a change in the status of the 25-mile route from Lyttelton to Purau Bay from a main highway to a State highway, linking the chain of beaches with the Christchurch-Lyttelton road tunnel. Also proposed is a supply of artesian water from Christchurch to be piped through the tunnel and reticulated to beaches and market gardens in the harbour basin. Diamond Harbour, which takes water by submarine pipe from Lyttelton, has the orfly wholly satisfactory supply in the area at present.

Development of the harbour as a tourist attraction and as a playground for Christchurch residents who will be within easy reach of the beaches when the tunnel Soes through, is the idea of the Mount Herbert County Council. Two councillors, Messrs D. Cresswell and’ J. H. Mathias—comprised a deputation which brought the proposals to the notice of Mr H. R. Lake (Government Lyttelton) this week. The beaches, or “safe, sandy areas” marked on a chart for development are Corsair, Cass and Rapaki Bays, two places before Governor’s Bay, two spots in Charteris Bay, Church and Purau Bays, Ripa Island, Shelley Bay and Camp Bay.

Minister’s View The feeling of the Minister of Works (Mr W. S. Goosman), to whom the matter has been referred, is that the reading proposal should be put before . the District Roads Council in Christchurch. Mr Goosman has undertaken to discuss it with the National Roads Bo'ard, of which he is chairman, and seek sympathetic consideration. The present policy is not to declare any more roads State highways. The water reticulation proposals are unlikely to gain Government financial support.

Mr Goosman says that a Government subsidy of £1 for £2 is available for approved rural schemes of potential economic value; but he does not think the economic return in the harbour area would warrant such a scheme being promulgated there with a view to subsidy. He considers that the reticulation system from Christchurch is more a matter for local bodies, including the Road Tunnel Authority, than the Government.