Gondola gets two differing responses

Press, 26 February 1987, Page 5

Gondola gets two differing responses

The Port Hills gondola will be supported and opposed by the Canterbury United Council. Differing opinions by its committees have resulted in the council’s endorsing seemingly contradictory reactions to the proposal. It voted against the proposal yesterday because a planning sub-committee, the Summit Road advisory committee, had recommended it be declined under the Summit Road Protection Act The United Council, not wanting the public to take the sub-committee’s views for its own, also passed its planning committee’s recommendation that the gondola be approved in principle.

The council’s chief executive, Mr Malcolm Douglass, said that the two-fold decision would be understood when the project was inevitably taken before the Planning Tribunal.

The Heathcote County and Lyttelton. borough councils would' have no option but to decline the gondola proposal after the United Council’s decision, Mr Douglass said. Their decisions would undoubtedly be appealed against.

The United Council’s x dilemma arose when the Summit Road advisory committee decided earlier this month that the Port Hills’ scenic amenities outweighed the other part of the protection act providing for enjoyment of recreational facilities. The committee's members were constrained from considering other issues outside the act, such as commercial benefit

United councillors at yesterday’s regional planning committee meeting had to decide whether to adopt that opinion or send it back for review.

Cr Oscar Alpers won the support of several councillors when he moved that the decision be reviewed, noting that the vote had been close and that several members of the Summit Road Advisory Committee had been absent.

The regional planning committee's chairman, Mr Trevor Inch, said it was "dangerous” to suggest that the Summit Road advisory committee had made an unbalanced decision. Had the absent members been present they too would have been

constrained by the act.

“The committee wouldn’t come up with a different answer,” he said.

Some councillors feared that the council’s credibility would be put at risk by presenting conflicting planning and environmental views to the Planning Tribunal, but Cr Alex Clark said the committee had “no choice but to accept it.” To remove any misunderstanding, however, Cr Brian Shackel moved that the project be approved in principle or the council’s over-all favouring of the gondola would be “in danger of not getting through.” The motion was passed by a good majority. Technology park Support was given to the establishment of a high technology park in Fendalton. The council was told that approval would be sought today from the Land Settlement Board to buy the Royds block in Waimairi District for a “park” of technology companies, aimed at fostering new directions and growth in the field as well as providing jobs.

It could lead also to support for other high technology activities such as those at the University of Canterbury and Air New Zealand's training centre at Christchurch Airport

Several companies have already expressed interest to the working party on the park. The party, headed by the Canterbury Regional Development Council, Includes representatives of BurroughsLine, the District Council, the United Council, and private developers. The party said the venture would make “a significant contribution to the development of the region” if it could get approval to buy the land, owned by the Lands and Survey Department It advocated a jointventure company to manage the park’s development but said it would only be feasible if it was granted the whole block, as small areas were "inefficient and Uneconomic.”

Councillors said today would be an' important day for Canterbury. “It would be a tragedy for the whole of Canterbury if it were to fall through,” Cr Hector McAllister said.