Rolleston Avenue

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30678, 18 February 1965, Page 12

Rolleston Avenue

Sir, —As convener of the meeting called last year to discuss the destruction of the Rolleston avenue trees I am most concerned at the failure of the reserves department and the Christchurch City Council to state their replanting programme, in view of the fact that the ideal time for replanting the avenue will soon be with us. From the rather cautious statement made recently it would appear that the council are considering two alternatives, namely, replanting the avenue with groups of trees, which appears to have considerable merit, and second, tragic as it may seem, leaving the avenue without trees. The city fathers are the guardians, or should be, of the city’s heritage, and failure to replant Rolleston avenue with suitable trees, such as limes, pink chestnuts or pine oaks, would be considered by many citizens a betrayal of this trust.— Yours, etc., ROLAND H. HAMMOND. February 9, 1965. [The director of reserves of the Christchurch City Council (Mr H. G. Gilpin) replies: “Mr Hammond can be assured that his concern is quite unnecessary as plans have been prepared for submission to the council and planting in accordance with the council’s decision will be carried out during the next planting season. I think, also, that Mr Hammond’s persisting with the use of the word ‘destruction’ in connexion with the removal of the trees in Rolleston avenue, after explanations and reasons have been clearly stated through both the press and public meetings, is rather odious.”]