Image TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage TileImage Tile
Image size: 5120x7680 Scale: 35% - PanoJS3
Page overview thumbnail

Article text

LETTERS to the Editor1
Black Mountain
tower
Sir, - Recent concerted attacks
of the environmentalists on the
decision of the Government to
proceed with the construction of
the Black Mountain communica
tions tower compel me to take
a stand in this matter. I do so
with some hesitation, because I
am generally in agreement with
the need for protection of the
environment on a large scale. In
many cases such protection is
long overdue.
However, in the case of the
Black Mountain tower the par
ticular pressure group seems to
be acting with zeal rather than
wisdom, with emotion rather
than reason.
The two main arguments
against the tower are that: {a)
it would not form an aesthetic
r "Xunity with its natural surround
ings, and (b) that its presence
would cause a disturbance of
the ecological balance of the
mountain. The first argument is
of course purely subjective and
seems to have been dropped in
the latest attack.
The second argument seems to
overlook several factors.
A recent exhibition of photo
graphs and plans of the tower
in the Monaro Mall has shown
that the area required would be
practically the same as the exist
ing one occupied by the two TV
towers, the CTC building, park
ing facilities etc.
This means that there would
be no encroachment on the
natural areas of the mountain
as was the case with the con
struction of Caswell Drive be
tween Lake Burley Griffin and
Aranda, and to a lesser degree
Barry Drive between the city and
Belconnen Way. Neither project
elicited half the outcry heard at
present.
The argument that the tower
would increase traffic on the
mountain and haw people crawl
ing all over its slopes thus dis
turbing the ecological balance
seems to be grossly exaggerated.
There is considerable traffic there
already, day and night, and 1
fail to see how even a 100%
increase or more would change
existing conditions. Fauna on
the mountain must be quite used
to traffic by now.
I have been many times to
the top of Black Mountain and
have never seen people straying
from the top look-out area more
than a few yards. It is most
unlikely that they would be do
ing so in future, when their
prime aim would be to enjoy
the view, be it from the look-out
or from the tower restaurant. It
is much more likely that people
who go to the existing picnic
area lower down the slope could
be found exploring the surround
ings.
Contrary to the beliefs of the
present vociferous conser
vationist group, I believe that
the new communication tower
would be aesthetically pleasing
and a welcome addition to Can
berra's sky-line. The view from
its restaurant would be magni
ficent, as all three existing urban
areas, Canberra, Woden and
Bclconnen, would be plainly
visible. The aesthetic pleasure
alone, thus achieved by an
untold number of people, should
hv far outweigh any other con
siderations, even if they were
deemed to be valid.
I sincerely hope that the ACT
Trades and Labour Council will
not be swayed by the pressure
tactics which have been applied,
into imposing a black ban on
the project. The council may
wish to consider that there are
probably many more people in
Canberra of a similar opinion
to mine rather than to that of
the noisy protesters.
If the members of presently
active pressure groups stop to
reconsider their case in a calmer
manner, they may find that there
are many other areas of much
greater need and importance to
which they could apply their
abilities in defending the envir
onment.
KLIM
Hughes.
$