Gondola

Press, 20 July 1988, Page 16

Gondola

Sir, —I would like to congratulate the Department of Conservation on its wise decision on the gondola. The department has considered the possible precedent that could be set by allowing such a development on a scenic reserve. It has also acted to ensure that the integrity of the reserve is maintained. I challenge the stance taken by Bruce Dunstan of the Canterbury Promotion Council (July 18) that Mount Cavendish is “just one section of the Port Hills.” Such a position immediately ignores the reason why we have a scenic reserve there. Not only are the scenic values most praiseworthy, but Mount Cavendish has also been credited with the highest scientific rating of all the reserves on the Port Hills. If Mr Dunstan is annoyed by the decision he could recommend the alternative site, which is also “just one section of the Port Hills” to the developers.—Yours, etc.,

GABRIELLE O’CONNELL. July 18, 1988. Sir, —After the on-again, offagain permission to build a much-needed boost to our tourist and employment situation in the form of a gondola and restaurant at Mount Cavendish, the Department of Conservation in its selfish attitude has seen fit to give the thumbs down to the use of the site. The developers have offered 18 hectares of land in return for the use of the site, which is under half a hectare. This half-hectare had probably never been noticed by most of the objectors until the building proposal was tabled. The conservationists would do well to think of the number of unemployed in Christchurch and the state of our tourist industry as, by their decision, they are again endangering the project. Their argument seems to be that this particular area is rich in flora and native plants and they lead us to believe that there are no other areas with equal abundance of plants. If this tourist venture is to succeed, Christchurch has to obtain the best possible siting for the restaurant and gondola, as we are competing with similar attractions overseas. The conservationists would do well to place the well-being of their fellow citizens ahead of the possession of this land. — Yours, etc., G. A. SIMMS. July 17, 1988.

Sir, —Congratulations to the Department of Conservation for its decision not to lease Cavendish Scenic Reserve for the gondola development. The Canterbury Promotion Council and Christchurch City Council are irresponsible in regarding public reserves as commercial development zones. Reserve legislation is designed to protect natural and/or scenic reserves from exploitation. Without this legislation our last natural areas would be

sacrificed. Indeed, one wonders if it is clear enough, given an earlier decision of the City Council’s to turn Lyttelton Scenic Reserve into a carpark — a ludicrous situation. Scenic reserves have intrinsic values and are not just “grandstands” for a view. It is not a question of who, or how many, visit or botanise in Cavendish reserve. It is a case of drawing the line for development and allowing values other than the dollar to prevail. — Yours, etc., A. M. BAIRD. July 19, 1988.