OnPoint: Plague, Famine, By-Election
57 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
So, it's not "cynically populist" to play up to the NIMBY vote
Well, yes, but in a different way. They're all politicians, after all.
-
So, it's not "cynically populist" to play up to the NIMBY vote and engage in what can most politely be described as hysterical scaremongering?
Actually, it's Not-Over-My-BackYard. 40m underground in my backyard, that's fine.
It's a serious distinction, though. If they were real NIMBYs, they'd try to get the road back through Rosebank. They're not. They just want the impact of the tunnel to be mitigated by burying it underground.
-
Does Nimbyism really include wanting to put a motorway underground rather than in someone else's neighbourhood altogether?
I wonder at the social effect of Auckland's motorway network when I hear stories about all the long-demolished student flats in Newton and Grafton gullies, or see the bifurcated communities from any trip on the Southern motorway.
Yes, transport that benefits many will inevitably impose some costs on the locals. It's just that the cost-benefit equation has to make it worthwhile, and as Joshua points out, the Waterview case is pretty shaky on that front. Be nice if someone had invested the same effort into analysing his alternative rail option.
But, oh no, we all know that transport is only about cars, surely. Joshua's story about who is paying for changes to Tamaki Drive should make clear that transport is very much a topical local council issue.
As for concern about the biggest change in Auckland's local body arrangements in a very long time, hard to see how that qualifies as Nimbyish unless you're buying into the whole jafa crap, Craig.
-
Snap.
-
Joshua Arbury has already had a look at this issue on his excellent Auckland Transport Blog (hit me if he doesn't become Auckland's Transport Czar in 20 years time).
Ouuu... excellent. Thanks for that.
-
And contrary to popular belief, "NIMBY-ism" is not monopolised by card-carrying Greenies. The blue-rinsers got uppity when plans for affordable housing on surplus Hobsonville Air Base land were announced. Another very public case in point was this infill proposal in Khandallah, where the architect threatened to build a bikie HQ instead.
-
belief, "NIMBY-ism" is not monopolised by card-carrying Greenies. The blue-rinsers got uppity when plans for affordable housing on surplus Hobsonville Air Base land were announced.
Indeed - that's the first time I'd heard of John Key. At the time I remember thinking how unpleasant it was to have an MP basically saying "We don't want any poor people living around here, thanks."
-
As for concern about the biggest change in Auckland's local body arrangements in a very long time, hard to see how that qualifies as Nimbyish unless you're buying into the whole jafa crap, Craig.
No, but it's not creeping fascism either -- which was the well considered view of one called to talkback today. While I shouldn't take that serious, it's not coming from nowhere and my contempt for people who spread that particular F-bomb is well on record.
And I've also rang the North Shore City councillor who told my next door neighbour that her rates would double if the super city happened, and asked what that claim was based on. Was met with a point blank denial he said any such thing...
-
The ultimate relevant example of transport nimbyism was the proposed Eastern motorway that offended the good folk of Hobson Bay last time C&R were in power.
-
Craig, that certainly doesn't sound kosher.
-
Indeed - that's the first time I'd heard of John Key. At the time I remember thinking how unpleasant it was to have an MP basically saying "We don't want any poor people living around here, thanks."
And it goes to show that relaxing metro limits isn't really about affordable housing, but rather it's about getting cosy with McMansion developers like the Demographia crew.
-
It can produce affordable housing in the form of slum suburbs. Hardly original.
-
I agree that it would be great if we didn't lump people together by broad regional characteristics. 'Asian' doesn't fairly distinguish a Korean from Chinese or Indonesian, and certainly not in the ways that they think of when they think of their own identity. Perhaps, as another poster points out, this apply equally to Maori or Pacific Island peoples also. However, whenever this discourse arises, there seems to be a subliminal suggestion that its yet again, the responsibility of the white/Pakeha/Caucasion/European led media/establishment to pay more attention to this.
Umm... I'm long used to being a European NZer, or Pakeha (still not sure if that's an originally well intended word or not, and it sure isn't very specific, but I'm not strung out about it), or often a Caucasian, and I'm not even from there! Sometimes, rarely, the term Irish NZer arises, and I guess that could mean me in more specific terms.
Anyway, my point is simple... get over it. Being referred to in the general sense happens, and this is often a pretty broad category. Never mind, its not personal and aren't we all just Kiwis now anyway?
(P.S. I'm in Asia a lot, and I'm variously a farang, guilo, guyjin or yangnom. Oh, the injustice.) -
Michael, it might be fine if we also got any sense in our media that the finer grained distinctions existed and meant anything. Not a lot in common between an Indian and an Indonesian. Both "Asian" the way we count it.
And just whose responsibility do you think it is to be aware of that, if not those who set public agendas, including media and politicians?
-
Guarantee most of the public hearing the figure of 24% Asian voters in Mt Albert will not be picturing any of them as Indians.
-
Putting state houses on the, ahem, pristine land at Hobsonville would have been "economic vandalism" when there was the opportunity to build "something pretty good there". - John Key's finest hour.
-
something pretty good
He was probably thinking of Omaha by the sea, bastion of McMansions for wholesome white folk of means.
-
One person's NIMBY is another's place-protective action, or a third person's valiant struggle to defend local environmental quality and neighbourhood character.
And another person's head-up-arse fuckstick who objects to a fire station in their area because of the noise from the appliances, with an estimated 1200 movements a year, despite it going on a road travelled by no fewer than 900 buses a week and also by many hundreds of heavy trucks travelling to nearby quarries and industrial areas.
Thankfully that particular spot of NIMBYism didn't fly with the local council, and the Avalon fire station was constructed as desired. Seriously, some people just object for the sake of objecting. -
Labour also seem to be the only party aware that Pt Chev is in the electorate.
The Green billboards are going up this week, and you may be pleasantly surprised at the ones in your locale...
Actually, I quite like the new billboards, and I think they nicely develop the "Vote for Us" theme. But I would say that, my kids are in them...
-
Wow thanks for all the kind words everyone.
The one flaw in the "surface level Waterview Connection" versus "southwest rail corridor" argument is that you can't build that southwest rail corridor unless you build the CBD rail tunnel first. You just simply couldn't squeeze the necessary 6 trains per hour from the airport to Britomart without causing chaos.
However, if you spent $400 million on duplicating the eastern approach to Britomart you could buy yourself 10-15 years to build the CBD rail loop and do it properly.
$400 million on duplicating the Britomart tunnel plus the whole southwest rail corridor AND you'd still have a few hundred million in change from your $2.8 billion full tunnel option.
-
Did they leave enough space to duplicate the existing Britomart tunnel?
-
Not really, it's one heck of a squeeze between Quay Street and Vector Arena. You'd need to narrow Quay Street a bit I imagine, although eventually the line would be far enough underground to avoid too many problems.
I think. I haven't looked in TOO much detail into that, although it's certainly a necessity as in a few more years we won't be able to increase the number of trains going in and out of Britomart. ARTA were considering terminating Onehunga trains at Newmarket for this very reason.
http://transportblog.co.nz/2009/04/16/dooming-the-onehunga-line-to-failure/
Fortunately ARTA have come to their senses and the Onehunga trains will run all the way to Britomart.... for now.
-
You'd need to narrow Quay Street a bit
You mean - gasp - prioritise public transport over private vehicles?
-
Well the silly thing is that Quay Street is only a problem because it was shifted southwards in the 1990s, so the port could expand a bit. If you have a look at it on an aerial photograph you'll see that if Quay Street had stayed on its original alignment we'd have masses of room for 4 or 6 tracks into Britomart.
I just wish we had a bit of vision for public transport in Auckland. We should be trying to sell to the public a visionary scheme for 2030 - something like this I reckon: http://www.angelfire.com/tv/jarbury/aggins/auckland-rail-dream_copy.jpg
-
That network map is fantastic. Recommended viewing.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.