PYLON ROUTE CRITICISED

Press, Volume CV, Issue 30998, 2 March 1966, Page 11

PYLON ROUTE CRITICISED

The way in which the New Zealand Electricity Department chose the route for its new transmission lines from Islington to Bromley, disregarding the view (which it sought) from the Christchurch Regional Planning Authority, was criticised by Mr C. M. A. Thompson at the authority’s meeting yesterday.

Mr Thompson said that the i department had sought the i views of several authorities, ; and the Regional Planning 1 Authority and others had ap- I proved the proposed route, 1 line “A” which kept the pylons away from the existing 66 kv line. The Summit Road Advisory Committee had also expressed a preference for line “A.” They were now told by the department’s general manager that line “C" was to be the route, although it had been approved by only one council. Line “C” ran alongside the existing line for part of its length. “There' was no question of reconsidering or taking the majority opinion,” said Mr Thompson. He said the Minister of Electricity (Mr Shand) had said on February 1 that the route decided on “comes as close to the majority as ingenuity, patience and genuine good will can bring it. This evidence of co-operation from among the department and the various authorities in Christchurch contrasts with die harsh accusations flung at the department in Parliament when the Summit Road (Canterbury) Protection Amendment Bill was debated last October.” Mr Thompson said that in his view consultation and cooperative effort meant “taking heed of views expressed and negotiating with the parties to a satisfactory conclusion.” It was not to be effected by simply informing the various authorities affected of what the proposals were and what the decision was without giving any reasons, and making no effort to bring differences of opinion together. “Mutual Problems” One of the Regional Planning Authority’s main purposes was to deal with the mutual problems of the various authorities, said Mr Thompson, and the route of the pylons was such a problem. If the Minister had been genuinely concerned about the regional view, he should have dealt with the Regional Planning Authority. If he were concerned about planning, he should have dealt with the Ministry of Works, which in turn would have consulted the Regional Planning Authority. Mr Thompson said it seemed that the sole reason for deciding on route “C” was that it avoided interference with one air strip. “I am aware of the importance of this strip,” he said, “and of the difficulties of resiting it, but I wonder what is the permanency of this airstrip compared with the permanency of this major national and very costly construction intended, according to the reports, to satisfy the needs beyond the turn of the century.” Mr Thompson said the pylon line could be another typical monument to bad planning—“another kink in a major road when the reason for the kink has long since disappeared.” He said it was not too much to hope that the Minister would investigate the life expectancy of the air strip obstacle. The authority should persist in its efforts to have the Act amended to give itself a watching brief on the actions of Government Departments as they affected the Summit road.

Mr H. E. Denton told the authority that the Christ-

church City Council reserves committee was “thunderstruck” when it learned on Monday that line “C” was to be the route of the pylons. “I’ll leave no stone unturned if this absolute sacrilege of Victoria Park is gone ahead with,” he promised. He said Victoria Park was going to be despoiled without reference to the City Council or anyone else, simply on the grounds of expediency. The reserves committee would fight “tooth and nail” against the power lines going through the park. Mr R. C. Neville said he could not understand Mr Denton at all. Line “A” which the authority favoured, and which Mr Denton knew about, also went through Victoria Park. It differed from “C” only in the angle it took across the park. Mr Denton confessed that he was "not too clear” about it, but, as he saw it,,line “A” did not interfere with the park to any great extent, although he understood that it did interfere with some farm land.

The authority deferred a decision on the matter pending its discussion by the Christchurch City Council.