Second move to halt hotel appeal

Press, 26 January 1988, Page 5

Second move to halt hotel appeal

Another attempt will be made to get the Canterbury United Council to withdraw its appeal against a multi-million dollar hotel development in Memorial Avenue.

Cr Brian Shackel, a member of the United Council, has given notice of a motion that could overturn the decision the council made late last year to appeal to the Planning Tribunal.

The motion, “that the council does not proceed with the objection to the hotel zone adjacent to Christchurch International Airport on the corner of Memorial Avenue and Russley Road,” will be put to the United Council at its next meeting on February 24. The United Council appeal is against a Waimairi District Council decision to lift planning restrictions on Christchurch’s green belt that would have prevented the development of a hotel which could attract another 50,000 visitors to Christchurch and boost tourist income by $5O million a year. Cr Shackel, who is also a member of the Waimairi District Council, said yesterday that the United Council objection

could cost Christchurch the development and the jobs the venture would have created.

“It is my belief that the Canterbury United Council should be flexible enough in the implementation of the regional planning scheme to recognise a good commercial opportunity when it sees it and give the promoters every encouragement we can.”

Cr Shackel said the site was ideal for the hotel development and the Waimairi District Council decision had been recommended by a prominent independent town planning authority, Mr Tony Hearn, Q.C.

He had said: “... (A) major hotel development of this nature near Christchurch Airport at this time may well be the catalyst for more direct international flights into Christchurch and more rapid development of the tourist industry.”

The United Council vote to appeal to the Planning Tribunal had been carried

very narrowly, 16 votes to 12. . “I think there are one or two councillors who did not completely appreciate the risks we can in losing the project completely,” said Cr Shackel.

“If they are given a proper understanding of the risks then they may well take a different stand.”

. Cr Shackel’s move follows one by the Christchurch City Council late last year which asked the United Council to “urgently reconsider” its opposition to the hotel zone.

Mr Malcolm Douglass, the United Council’s chief executive officer, said last evening that Cr Shackel’s motion would be considered “at the discretion of the council.” The matter was already on the agenda for the meeting because of the City Council’s request, he said.

It was likely that the two items would be considered together, he said.