‘Fair consideration not given' to gondola

Press, 10 February 1988, Page 2

‘Fair consideration not given ' to gondola

The Canterbury United Council may have “contravened a statutory right” when it disapproved the Mount Cavendish gondola last year, the Planning Tribunal asserted yesterday.

Judge Treadwell, chairman of the tribunal, hearing an appeal by Payeo Developments, Ltd, against the decision, said that if it was proved the gondola proposal was a predominant use, the United Council’s refusal last year "would appear to be a contravention of a statutory right.” Judge Treadwell was responding to a submission by Mr Tony Hearn, Q.C., that the United Council did not give the proposal fair consideration under “natural justice.” Mr Hearn, with Mr Phillip James, represented Payeo Developments. In an almost four-hour opening address to the tribunal on its first full day of hearing, Mr Hearn questioned that the Summit Road Advisory Committee and the United Council gave the development proper consideration. He contended that the

council should have given the developers a hearing and questioned if the council “asked itself the right questions.”

He said evidence would prove that the gondola proposal was a predominant use and a conditional use in parts and “any disapproval by the authority would amount to a contravention of the provisions of a district scheme and be ultra vires (outside its jurisdiction).” He continued: “I take no pleasure in saying it but I think it is my duty ... to say that for an advisory body such as this to reach its decision in the manner it did — without hearing the parties, without taking advice as to its status, without (referring to) the findings of the Commissioner (Mr Ron De Goldi, appointed by the Heathcote County Council in 1986 to investigate and either approve or decline the original application from Payeo) and giving reasons for not

accepting them, must be described as less than responsible. “I submit it harms their cause,” Mr Hearn said. He criticised the United Council for accepting without investigation its Summit Road committee’s decision and said, “Surely no responsible United Council should feel itself bound to accept an advisory decision where it seems plain the decision reached was one to which no reasonable body should come.” Mr Hearn further submitted he would prove that the United Council was in favour of the gondola proposal. The hearing’s first witness, Payee’s director, Mr Peter Yeoman, gave a detailed submission on how the gondola would benefit Canterbury’s tourist industry and would be used by as many as 300,000 people each year. During Mr Yeoman’s evidence Judge Treadwell intervened and asked the

Lyttelton Borough and Heathcote County councils to "theoretically consent” to the gondola and provide conditions for its construction giving the tribunal guidelines to follow if it found the proposal suitable. Mr Nicholas Till, for the Lyttelton and Heathcote councils, did not wish to cross-examine Mr Yeoman.

Mr John Fogarty, for the United Council, asked Mr Yeoman if the company would agree to certain conditions if planning consent was given.

Mr Yeoman agreed to conditions being imposed on the gondola’s cars and pylon colourings and to restrictions on car-parking near the gondola’s peak. The hearing will continue today and is expected to last a fortnight. The tribunal comprises Judge Treadwell and Mesdames E. M. Jakobsson and A. L. McMillan and Mr R. G. Bishop.