Posts by Ed Muzik
-
Speaker: Facing the floods, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
Correct. I don't have any problem with a disclaimer. For those of you that don't follow me on twitter, I am the Labour candidate in Ilam, going up against Gerry (who was pretty quiet yesterday). I had a drive around Bishopdale and the Ilam electorate yesterday. It was pretty wet. Definitely some surface flooding and probably a few pinch spots, but not as bad as Flockton or Opawa.
Also, I have seen a few people using this as an opportunity to bring up Climate Change. I totally on board with climate change, and don't have any doubts that it is real. But we need to make it clear that this is about earthquakes, not climate change. The quakes have damaged our rivers, creeks, and the wider drainage network. This is why this should be the domain of the Earthquake Recovery Minister primarily.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Emma Hart,
Exhaustion? It’s been nearly two years, Leigh. Quite a lot of us are knackered.
I'd also argue that going to a meeting to talk to planners who will probably not answer direct questions such as "do you know how much this stadium will cost" or "has anyone done a feasibility study on this?", knowing that they have absolutely no responsibility to take notice of anything you say sounds like an utterly depressing waste of time.
-
A couple of unconnected thoughts that popped up over the weekend. First, the proposed stadium is meant to be a great venue for concerts. But unlike Dunedin - which has only had the one big concert and don't have any more on the horizon - Christchurch still has other indoor concert venues. If the covered stadium were to be a concert venue, it would be cannibalising business from other venues, such as the CBS Arena at Addington - which is a council-owned facility. Pitching one council-owned asset against another.
Secondly ... the Frame runs between Madras and Manchester St. Now, aside from bookstores, what else was Manchester St known for pre-quakes? Are we going to create a 1km long park land for prostitution? Is that the safe, clean green vision for the "new Christchurch?"
-
Also, Mike Coleman is quoted in the paper this morning with a leak from the council that suggests the three big ticket items – stadium, convention centre, metro sports hub – will come to 1.2 billion. I was talking to someone in the know – ironically enough, at a gallery opening for the Art Gallery, being held at NG Space – who said that the costings were appalling. Will be very interesting to see Brownlee having to front up to questions about cost in the next few weeks – he can’t continue to say that it’s up to the council, when he is the one who decided on these things.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Lilith __,
And BTW it’s great to have you on PAS, Ed Muzik! Your long form is even better than your tweets. :-)
Cheers! I think people who read my tweets think I'm really angry and cynical ... which is probably true. But I also have a weekly column in the local rag the Mail, which is now delivered with the Press on Thursdays I think. I have to somewhat temper my language for that format :-)
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Hebe,
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.
I agree with the landbanking and the comment about playing to green desires. I think it says a lot about this government's view on "green" issues - people called for a "green city" through share an idea, and so the government is saying "look - we listened! Lots of parks!". When actually as much, if not more, of the "green city" argument was around sustainability in a broad context - public transport options so we can reduce a dependency on cars and a need for carparks; streets with a more human scale so that pedestrians and cyclists felt more comfortable; development of mixed-used 3-4 storey buildings that brought businesses, offices and residents together into a more sustainable community. Those points - arguably more important than "green space" (after all, it's not like Christchurch was lacking in green space in the central city *cough* Hagley Park *cough*) - have been left by the wayside somewhat.
-
I'd be happy to see the golf course go as part of a deal for the Oval. But they aren't proposing that. I love cricket, it is a great space to watch it. I don't have problems with cricket so much, but the blurb Canterbury Cricket sent out said that it wouldn't be closed off from the public very often - and then went on to list how great it would be as a space for ticketed concerts and events. Canterbury vs Wellington is all well and good, but A Day on The Green featuring Brooke Fraser and Skrillex is a different story.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Emma Hart,
Lancaster Park is also just a short walk from the CBD, and could be a dedicated cricket ground. Once the stands are down you'd have a great view of the Port Hills. It's right next to the train line, if we ever get that going for public transport. It has history - Astle blasting 222 in a test against England springs to mind. And it doesn't involve fencing off part of Hagley Park. But no-one seems to want to talk about it.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Peter Martin,
Woah, hold up. You know how you could avoid playing in 3 degrees? Play games in the afternoon. Oh, Sky won't let you? Then why the hell aren't they paying for the goddamn stadium, rather than ratepayers.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Lilith __,
Wondering how many people in Share an Idea advocated for a covered stadium or Hagley Oval.