Glamping plan ‘preposterous’

Re the article ‘‘Spring Gully plan gets the go-ahead’’ (Leader, February 7).

Approval of road access and clearing of a hazard reduction zone  at the edge of Royal National Park for the planned 6 glamping tents, a kitchen and a caretakers cottage in Bundeena's Spring Gully is preposterous. 

As the proponent has engaged legal representation for one legal obstacle after another to gain this approval, it is easy to estimate the legal costs involved and the likely returns from a 6-tent facility.

Does this business case actually add up?

If not, could it be that the "eco resort" is a foot in the door for a much more lucrative development to be proposed if, surprise surprise,  the 6-tent business proves unviable after the bulldozers and chainsaws have wreaked their destruction?

Many people will be angry if that eventuates. The Land and Environment Court and the Minister have much to answer for.

Murray Scott, Heathcote