Cycleways not as necessary as city road repairs

MAY I suggest to Ian Smith that his plea (ODT, 21.8.18) for more action from the Dunedin City Council to protect Dunedin pedestrian pathways from encroaching vehicles and other obstacles will inevitably fall resoundingly on deaf ears at the DCC because of a fundamental error on his part.

If, when championing ‘‘the lady with twins seated sidebyside in a pram and leading a toddler by the hand’’ who is forced on to the roadway by errant vehicles, he had also thought to mention that ‘‘cyclists’’ were probably also being affected in their pursuit of pleasure, he could have reasonably expected prompt and efficient action with ratepayers money, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars, no object.

An example from this council of such largesse is the upgrading of the Portsmouth Dr cycle/pedestrian way from ‘‘clearly fit for purpose’’ to ‘‘RollsRoyceplus’’ standard, presumably in response to a reported comment in the ODT from a cyclist, some time ago, that some cyclists found it ‘‘bumpy’’.

Whatever the reason the DCC give, the fact is it was not nearly as necessary as other road repairs which abound in this city. B. A. Murphy

Dunedin

Boost Wanaka Airport

I NOTE the concern (ODT, 20.8.18) about the increasing number of flights into Queenstown Airport and the issue of excessive tourism.

While jets cannot land at Wanaka Airport, I understand that the ATR and Q300 turboprops, the mainstay of Air New Zealand’s and Jetstar’s regional routes, could do so.

Might Wanaka not take some of the load off Queenstown, especially since a fraction of travellers will have Wanaka and surrounds — not quite so overrun with tourists — as their destination anyway?

Would it not be possible to strengthen Wanaka’s runway and extend it for jets?

(Declaration of interest: we have a holiday spot in Queensberry, directly under the flight path to Wanaka Airport, and actually enjoy seeing lowflying planes above us.) R. Gardner

Waverley