E-Mail 'A backward step for the Town Belt' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'A backward step for the Town Belt' to a friend

* Required Field






Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.



Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.


E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...
 

5 comments:

  1. Elaine Hampton, 20. November 2012, 22:37

    The only certainty evident in the new Town Belt Management plan is that the Council Officers have deliberately made it so unreadable that will Councillors know what they are voting for when it’s put to them for approval. (Shades of Creswick Terrace).

    It is interesting the New Management Plan expressly prohibits activities such as the spreading of ashes or placenta – (9.6-a) (presumably this is not profit making) but is totally silent on TABs and or Pokies. These are already on the Town Belt and may multiply as the gambling merchants insist on ever greater returns on the thousands of dollars going into the new sports hubs using the decreasing open space of this precious resource.

    Is a Casino now a definition of recreation?

     
  2. Judy, 20. November 2012, 23:02

    David Lee’s comments raise serious concerns about WCC intentions for the Town Belt.
    As inner city living becomes more and more common, open space is more and more precious. it is extremely concerning WCC wants the right to erect buildings a sit sees fit. Recreation means very different things to different people and Wellingtonians may see a variety of buildings for occupation for activities very loosely described as recreation. With commercial activities such as the revolving restaurant and Gondola proposed for Mt Victoria in the 1980s reappearing.

     
  3. Honorata de Leon Mandilag, 21. November 2012, 22:33

    The comments expressed by David Lee are very clear and full of wisdom. Loosely defined terms and legislation are the perfect avenue for wrong interpretations. Business entities, under the guise of concerned Wellingtonians, will define it to suit their plans and programs for their own gain.
    Wellingtonians, let us support this advocacy that David Lee and others like him are pursuing. It is a worthwhile cause that will benefit not only this generation but the future generations as well.

     
  4. Laurie, 23. November 2012, 10:01

    The unintended effects of well intentioned law changes have been all too apparent recently. Yes the Council is faced with increasing pressure to utilise Town Belt land for an ever widening variety of uses. Whilst the existing arrangements are undoubtedly inconvenient for the Council, the answer is not to provide itself with greater flexibility to do whatever it deems appropriate. To do so denies the vast majority of Wellingtonians (the Town Belt’s beneficial owners) the right to have a say. That is not only a tragedy for the citizens of Wellington but in the long run the City Council as well.

     
  5. Bystander, 24. November 2012, 20:17

    In general terms I agree with the direction that the TBMP is going but I am opposed to the speed with which it is trying to do it.
    Where is the informed debate in the public arena? How many people have had time to read what has been presented let alone discuss a possible submission?
    For 17 years the WCC has chosen not to revise the present TBMP. Now it makes this huge step in breathtaking speed and includes the sensible idea of new legislation to replace the Trust Deed that has served for 170 years.
    “The Devil is in the Detail”. I am deeply distrustful of undue speed. David Lee’s critique is well argued and plausible. The WCC proposals should be left “on the table” and used to generate sensible discussion – after Christmas, not before.
    As a public consultation process on a very important subject, the timescale cannot deliver a good result.

     

Write a comment: