“Mona Vale” Park Action Deferred

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31236, 7 December 1966, Page 8

“Mona Vale” Park Action Deferred

“Are we going to be so timid that we will not move?’’ Mr E. J. Bradshaw, the chairman, asked the Christchurch Regional Planning Authority yesterday when the proposal that “Mona Vale” should be bought as a metropolitan park was discussed. “Do we think we would be acting in the public interest by allowing the bulldozers into the property and losing the opportunity of acquiring it for all time?”

Mr Bradshaw pleaded for action, rather than prolonged discussion, on the purchase of the property for £64,000 from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, which has given the authority an option until June 1.

Mr A. R. Guthery (City Council) with the support of several other members of constituent councils, urged that there should be time for discussions and said that unless there could be some agreement the City Council might be left to buy the whole property, which was not even in its area.

The authority agreed that representatives of the local bodies should meet as early as possible in the New Year to discuss the purchase and report back to their councils.

Government Help

“Sooner or later the Government will be asked to contribute, either from the Golden Kiwi funds or somewhere else,” said Mr R. C. Neville (Waimairi). An application now would be of help to the councils in reaching a decision.

Mr Bradshaw: Each council has been asked to consider the proposal and make a decision by February 28. That was not the way the City Council had taken it, said Mr W. P. Glue (City Council) said. The finance committee had looked at the proposal, but it wanted a lot more detail before a recommendation could be made to the full council. The details included a plan, how much land could be sold for private development, the share of other local bodies and the likely Government assistance. Councils had been asked to take an interest in the property, Mr Bradshaw said. Naturally they would want to know the Government contribution, but he did not think that should effect the decision. It was straightforward —was the area to be lost or preserved? “Everyone would agree that it would be a most desirable project, but it boils down to finance,” said Mr C. M. A. Thompson (Heathcote). There should be an immediate approach to the Government. “There is an impression that this authority tries to force its views through rather too quickly,” Mr Guthery said. “Local bodies are slow-moving and want to be fully informed. The City Council committee yesterday was strongly of the view that it was necessary for our delegates to meet those of other local bodies.” “Afraid”

"You could not hold a meeting until late in January,” Mr Bradshaw replied. “The report would not get to all councils

before March, and bear in mind that the option expires in June. I think we are afraid to express our personal views in case they commit our councils, and by not doing so we will miss out.

“I am sorry to be tough, but

I think we are being led along and not given the support we deserve. We have had a certain amount of support, but no action. If we were authorisedto act we could go to the Government to see what is available and see what sections could be sold off.” Mr Bradshaw said the Riccarton bush was financed by a levy on the local bodies, and no ratepayer would notice the bush levy on his demand. Similarly, the Canterbury Museum was financed by a levy on ratepayers, and again it was almost unnoticed.

“We are asking the councils on behalf of their ratepayers to say they would pay a small, very small, amount to preserve the ‘Mona Vale’ property.” “If we took your suggestion the City Council would finish up by buying it, and it is not even in the city boundaries,” Mr Guthrey said. By the other procedure we may delay things, but we will get a better result. I am frightened that if we adopt your procedure we will miss out altogether on a property which I think should be preserved.” “What are the local body representatives going to talk about?” Mr J. F. Fardell asked. What are they going to report back on? As far as I can see you would be doing no more than has already been done.” Last Meeting

The Paparua County Council had held its last meeting and would not meet again until the beginning of Feb-, ruary, Mr J. U. Barclay said, so it could, not appoint representatives.

Dr. W. R. Holmes, Haven’t you got a ’phone? In private conversation with some Papqrua councillors he had found they held the view that if the cost was to be shared on a metropolitan basis something similar to the Riccarton bush arrangement whereby Riccarton borough and adjoining ridings of Waimairi county paid double the contribution of others would be necessary, with Christchurch city being included in the areas paying double, said Mr Barclay. Dr. Holmes That would not impress the ratepayers of Sumner much.

“What is £64,000 spread over the total ratepayers of metropolitan Christchurch?” Mr Farwell asked. “If it was half-a-crown to save ‘Mona Vale,’ I would say double it.” During the discussion Mr Bradshaw said the rates on the property were about £6OO. That would be foregone by the Riccarton borough if the land became a park.