Posts by Hebe
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Rob Stowell,
You’ve nailed the questions we really need answered, and replied to (and re-asked when the answer is not adequate). Distribute them widely please Rob. You have it too? You need down time: enjoy that harbour and the sun.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
I know what you are saying….but I differ in that I do find merit in lots of it. I would like the drivers and rationale behind all these big plans more widely understood in this city, so people understand what they can influence. I see lots of opportunity; it’s a city much less locked down by the old power structure – of course a new one has grown and will evolve in its place.
The broad brush of the city will be from the planners; the city property owners will decide much of the physical appearance, and the people will give the city its spirit. That spirit is fierce and strong, and a lot more open to adventure than I’ve ever known in Christchurch. Yeee-hah. ( we quietly think these days that the rest of youse kiwis is a pack of sissies ;-)
Enough ranting from me: I've got the flu (hoping its the three-day version rather than the ten-day beast) and I'm off for another sleep.
-
PS And we wouldn’t have to spend megabucks on a new library if the convention centre wasn’t plonked on top of a perfectly repairable old one.
-
From today’s Feature in the Press;
Their first priorities were the siting of the convention centre and a landscaping of the Avon to remove the building clutter, making the river once again visible as the sculptural spine of the town.
So who made those the priorities? Why is a dedicated convention centre a priority? It is because the South Island tourism industry has been hammered by the quakes; and the Govt is intent on sorting that as it is a huge income-earner for the whole country. (Christchurch is a hugely important feeder destination for the rest of the south.) That is justifiable.
See http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/business/6950687/New-hope-for-Canterbury-tourism
What is not justifiable is telling Christchurch people, many of whom are under severe financial and other pressures, to pay for it. Then leveraging off all that to try to enforce council asset sales when it has been a long-held desire of the Nats, and when they know it is an absolute electoral line in the sand down here.
Fine. Put your convention centre in our Square; but don’t send the bill to Christchurch when it’s not entirely for our benefit. A dollar on every tourist, and fifty on every convention-goer would pay for it.
-
Sustainable? Cutting edge? Green. It is fucking not. It is, however Canadian and Australian-pension-fund-investor friendly, and that’s what really counts innit?
There’s a slight green tinge but it’s pragmatic: the river corridor park for instance is the land that be rebuilt upon without huge cost. The frame is a negotiable asset for the later rebuild stages.
I dont see a future -thinking city: energy provision, transport provision are all resolutely backward-looking.
It’s a rebuild not a rethink, and as far as that goes, it’s pretty good. But it’s not cutting edge.
Fran O’Sullivan obviously didn’t realise her Kool Aid was the Ken Kesey recipe ;-) Oh the swirls! The colours! The ideas!
And I totally agree with Rob above about the billion-buck monuments. I can spot a major case of legacy disease.
-
Love those LEDs' Outer Room swirls. The pictures: South Brighton,
Marine Parade, the QEII roundabout -- whoever would have thought they could look cool. And at 2.00 the fairy lights on the right are Smash Palace and the wall-less Knox Church shows up well. -
Capture: Two Tales of a City, in reply to Gudrun Gisela,
Mmm, spring soon. Snowdrops or snowflakes? One has the green dots, one doesn't.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Ed Muzik,
Well said Ed! Please run for council.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Sacha,
Some of that protecting value would appear to be true but I reckon the frame is a landbank and sop to the green desires of the “make a wish” consultation. When that compacted core fills up, and I’m picking that won’t take too many decades – 10 to 15 years? – the govt will sell the by then high-priced land and recover costs. Some of the deals will be land swaps rather than buy-outs, and the council will probably be in on that as it has surplus chunks through the whole city.
I can’t reliably interpret the city plan amendments because I don’t know enough. Others on PA will know far more.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to andrew gunn,
I agree with all of your comments. But, as ’everyone” says, the devil is in the detail. One detail is that the green frame is not a Hagley Park-type forever green space; the CCDU reserves the right to flog it off as deemed necessary; in other words a big landbank that will be sold off when the compact core is full and will help recover the govt’s money.
Another detail: there are a huge number of amendments to the City Plan. Some are far-reaching. See the plan and the amendments here: http://ccdu.govt.nz/the-plan