Opposition hardens on Bishopscourt

Press, 18 February 1983, Page 6

Opposition hardens on Bishopscourt

Opposition to the proposed $4 million retirement complex at Bishopscourt has grown since the plans were released two months ago. The opponents fall -into two camps: those who believe that the stately 56-year-bld residence should be preserved as is and those who disapprove of the planned development. The ’ vicar of Sydenham, the Rev. Graham Brady, was reported as saying when the scheme was launched last December that the complex would become “a ghetto for rich wrinklies”. \ Units in the developmentwill cost from $60,500 to $72,500 with an additional life care endowment of $12,500 for single persons and $22,500 for married couples. Mr Brady said yesterday that the prices would deny

all but the wealthy access to the facility and that anybody with $lOO,OOO to spend did not need assistance from the Church. “I am very much against it and the reaction that I have had apart from the Establishment is totally in support' of my stand,” he said. His objection to the plan, which provides for the building of units in the ground, was two-fold. Mr Brady said that the residence, now costing the Church almost $25,000 a year to maintain, could be developed for . purposes which would not involve sacrificing the lawns and gardens.' Bishopscourt was “a lovely old shack” which the Church should hold on to. whether the Bishop, the Rt Rev. W. A. Pyatt, wanted to live, there or not. he said.

“The Bishop is a representative person and the trappings are representative also. If the Queen wanted to live in a cottage in London that would be her business, but they would not sell Buckingham Palace,” Mr Brady said. Others have come to the defence of Bishopscourt. The former Dean of Christchurch, The Very Rev. Michael Underhill, said that he was heartbroken when he heard the announcement but, was unwilling to comment further because he was retired and did not want to be accused of disloyalty. Mr Arthur Garrett, of Garrett Books. Ltd, has written to the Church Property Trustees who administer Bishopscourt. suggesting a number of options "preferable to turning the mansion into an infirmarv for a limited num-

ber of sickly elderly people." . These included subdividing it into three separate apartments—one for the Bishop, one to accommodade Royalty and the Governor-Gen-eral when in Christchurch, and one for important guests of the city and of the University of Canterbury. A member of the Historic Places Trust, Mr M. L. Griffin, has written to “The Press” expressing his “consternation and horror” at the • proposed retirement complex. “The grounds provide the setting for this superb example of one type of architectural form and without them the building would be devoid of its charm and attraction." he said. However, the chairman of the Historic Places Trust's Canterbury committee. Mr D. E. Donnithorne. said that

it had not yet discussed the plans. The item was on the agenda for the next meeting. Because Mr Donnithorne has been engaged to design the retirement complex, he will withdraw from the meeting when the project is considered. The director of Anglican Social Services, which will administer the retirement complex, the Rev. Ted Johnson. said that the issue of whether the building and grounds should be preserved was outside the scope of his responsibility. "That is nothing to do withus. The decision belongs to the Church Property Trustees." he said. In reply to Mr Brady's “rich wrinklies" comment, he said that the social services organisation had had "very, very little negative reaction." ,

Of the 35 units on the market. 30 had been spoken for and for the rest inquiries were coming in at the rate of five a day. The interest had been tremendous, Mr Johnson said. The complex would cater for those who were not rich enough to provide adequately for themselves but were too wealthy to qualify for assisted housing. Many were buying the units with the proceeds of the sale of their homes, he said. The plan was to retain the exterior of the house almost unaltered and to preserve a large grassed area in front of it so that the vistas would not be lost. Mr Johnson said. Bishop Pyatt said that the scheme was proceeding as originally outlined and that it looked as if it would go ahead. The plans were final.