Conservation doubts on Castle Hill plan

Press, Volume CXI, Issue 32604, 12 May 1971, Page 3

Conservation doubts on Castle Hill plan

Conservation interests opposed outright or asked for more detail when the Reid Development Company’s application to have 800 acres of the Castle Hill pastoral run rezoned from rural to enable the eventual development of a 10,000-population tourist and holidav resort was heard by the town-planning committee of the Malvern County Council at Darfield yesterday.

The Castle Hill sheep station, of 30,000 acres, straddles the West Coast highway 60 miles from Christchurch and is described as geologically important, unique in its botany, and with old Maori shelters among its limestone tors.

In seeking a change of land use. the company gave an assurance that it would i accept expert guidance on the preservation of these features. . . After submissions had been made by about 30 wit[nesses for 23 objectors, the 'committee chairman (Cr G. E. Wright) said that the committee would report to the council in due course.

Mr W. H. Barker, one of the council’s town-planning consultants said the dangers were obvious—visual pollution from yet another group of baches, physical pollution from waste disposal, physical damage to the surroundings and ecological damage to some small part of the system affecting the whole of it.

“The rise in leisure time I and purchasing power willj increase the demand for sites in the mountains,” said Mr] Barker. "The population increase will increase yet again the demand. The present method of accommodating the demand—one bach here, five over there, 14 at Bealey Spur, some more further away from the road, and so on—will very rapidly destroy permanently the mountain environment we now, tenuously, have." To ban development was not feasible, he said. The second solution was to permit people to be ail in one place so that services could be

arranged without degrading the environment. The Castle Hill site was such that a complete town could be married to the landscape so as to enhance geological features by contrasting their immense size with the insignificant buildings below. While a site better for this than Castle Hill might be found, he could not find one. Mr Barker said the council should set conditions to protect physical, aesthetic and scientific aspects, and staged development as wanted by the council was the most responsible method. Before any development occurred the company should be required to reapply for approval of plans for’ roading, services, major land uses and of architectural control. Mr A. Hearn, solicitor for the company, sought to preserve and conserve. “Could anyone suggest that the Hermitage detracts from Mount Cook, that the hotel detracts from Milford Sound?”

The company wanted to provide residential sites, a camping ground, a tourist hotel and club, Lido swimming pools, a museum, skating rink, golf course, airfield, i improved ski field access and •access for reserved land of scientific interest. Private building would be in terms of a covenant to a specified standard. Counsel for a group of objectors, Mr D. M. Palmer, said an earlier plan showed a hotel among limestone tors. Mr Reid’s evidence now did not bear that out. This could affect the position of the objectors. "This brings out a vital point," said Mr Reid. "The original idea, only, had features, but we now have no firm plan. It will be evolved after consideration of the points raised by objectors. Evolution of the scheme could be spread over 10 years, the demand dictating building.” Mr J. A. Frizzell, owner of the Castle Hill run, said it was of 30,000 acres, with 860 acres of freehold. He had become aware of growing pressure from the public. Mr Reid’s proposal seemed the ideal solution, as nearly all the land would remain for fanning and he would have capital for run development that he could not get elsewhere. The company itself would develop farm land. Sewerage from up to 10,000 visitors staying overnight and 5000 day visitors could be adequately disposed of without offence by an oxidation pond and irrigation use of the effluent, said Mr D. L. Steven, a consulting engineer. He based his calculations on 400 people in hotels, 600 in motels, 9000 in cabins, and 5000 day visitors.

LAND USE No consent could be given until substantial detail was given as to what land was to be used, and how it was to be used, said Mr G. C. Suggate. the Ministry of Works design engineer. Part of the run was Crown land and Land Settlement Board agreement would be needed for its use.

The possible loss of good agricultural land had to be considered.

Other safeguards, said Mt Suggate, were needed in public health provisions, the viability of the farm, and on soil and water conservation. Miss B. McCulloch, for the Archaeological Society, asked the council to permit nothing that would destroy or jeopardise archaeological sites at Castle Hill, in particular limestone shelters containing rock drawings, moa bones and other occupational debris. She said that a full survey should be made of these sites. For the Tussock Grasslands and Mountain Lands Institute. its director (Professor K. F. O’Connor) said that no approval should be given without conditions guaranteeing no visual value detraction, especially from the I highway; the enlargement and greater protection of a flora reserve; the preservation of approved scientific and educational access; and appropriate public use of the natural recreational resources of the limestone

ridge. Mr Palmer made submissions on behalf of the Christchurch Civic Trust, the Canterbury branch of the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society, the New Zealand Scenery Preservation Society, the Canterbury Botanical Society, the New Zealand Historic Places Trust and the Royal New Zealand Horticultural Society. "One cannot decide what detriment there will be unless one knows in some detail what is proposed,” said Mr Palmer. "Mr Reid in previous literature postulated a village of 2000 houses and 10,000 people, but I don’t know now whether this applies in view of his reply to me earlier today.” Witnesses called by Mr Palmer argued that the application was premature, that Castle Hill was not appropriate for the admitted need for resort accommodation, and that much more should be known on all aspects of the scheme. The North Canterbury Catchment Board asked for safeguards to ensure the completion of soil conserva-

tion work planned for the river to reduce erosion. ' The application should be 1 refused on the grounds of in- ■ sufficient information having ■ regard to the scenic value of - the district as a whole, said i Mr C. D. Mouat, district • solicitor for the Lands and • Survey Department, on bes half of the National Parks . Authority. There was no jnI formation on the location of - buildings, and this was very 1 relevant. He made a similar 1 objection for the Land Settlet ment Board.