‘Desecration’ label for Q.E. II plans

Press, 2 December 1987, Page 9

‘Desecration’ label for Q.E. II plans

By

KAY FORRESTER

Some North New Brighton residents yesterday described the Christchurch City Council plans for Queen Elizabeth II Park as a “desecration.”

Mr Graham Goodliffe, of the Queen Elizabeth II Park Environmental Action Committee, told councillors that the plans for the park totally disregarded the community’s need.

The officer project team’s report on development of the park had a “Let’s build it quick before the neighbours complain” attitude, he said.

His group objected to the proposed lease of public land to a private developer for a number of years for the development of the leisure centre. It also objected to the expanding of the leisure centre at the expense of

green, open space.

The development proposals gave no consideration to passive recreation and green, open space, Mr Goodliffe said.

Rezoning the park to allow developments would only allow increased noise levels and large buildings and downgrade existing protection to residents. Mr Mike Lewis, a sound engineer, also spoke for the group. He said the officers’ report gave no consideration to holding or reducing noise levels generated at the park. Instead, it seemed to provide for their increase. Not all residents of the area oppose the council’s

ideas on development at the park. Mr Orm Innes, the secretary of the North New Brighton Community Council, said his organisation believed the development would be in the best interests of the community.

The council’s committee would have liked some consultation about the proposals and would like better liaison in the future about happenings at the park, but it supported the development concepts.

Mr Goodliffe added that, although Queen Elizabeth II Park was a regional park, it was also the only district park or

open space for the area. That function should not be neglected in planning. The area of open space accessible to the public now was only a very small part of the total park.

The council’s parks and recreation committee yesterday received the residents’ comments and called for another report from officers for discussion at a later meeting. The development proposals were presented to last month’s committee meeting and recommended for approval. They were then deferred at the full council meeting two weeks ago for consultation with residents.