Gondola project

Press, 21 February 1986, Page 16

Gondola project

Sir, — Crßurn and other members of the Christchurch City Council are quite wrong in claiming council ownership of the Mount Cavendish Scenic Reserve. The reserve is owned by the Crown (that is, the people of New Zealand) and its control is vested in the City Council. This means that the City Council is a caretaker Of an area whose prime purpose under the

Reserves Act, 1977, is the preservation, in perpetuity, of scenery and other natural values. The council is not taking its caretaker duties nearly seriously enough with respect to this reserve. If the people speak strongly enough the council will be forced to rescind'its decision to agree to the gondola cableway being sited in the reserve. — Yours, etc;, COLIN BURROWS. February 18, 1986. ~s

Sir,—lnstead of accusing opponents of the gondola and restaurant on the Port. Hills of being behind the times, B. Finnerty (‘‘The Press,” February 15) should ask the question of himself. Gondolas have been in New Zealand for at least 15 years. Is not the idea old hat? How many times do tourists want to ride a gondola in their short New Zealand stay? Is the idea to catch them first in Christchurch, regardless of the opportunity to ride existing gondolas in Queenstown and Rotorua? — Yours, etc., H. HOBBY. February 17, 1986.

Sir,—Obviously from H. Steincamp’s letter (February 19) on the gondola proposal, he has not sufficiently acquainted himself with the reality behind the proposers’ rosy glow. Are tourists really going to be attracted to yet

another gondbla ride to a restaurant that could be reached by a scenic bus or car ride? No doubt, as he predicts the developers would now .have thoughts of casinos, but would we not find . that, as in Hobart, patrons are primarily locals? Little local employment would come of this ill-X conceived project, which could only survive economically by. providing the) amusement rides, such as the artificial, ski-slope, and toboggan rim, also known as "the scream jnachine” for local ? use next to a;residential area in Heathcote Valley. Surely we need less naive developments that do not merely ape overseas tourist areas,' and fail to recognise the unique attraction of New Zealand. — yours, etc., RON HAZLEHURST. February 20, 1986.