Email a copy of 'Flyover: lingering, or loitering' to a friend
Loading ...
Join the ScoopCitizen Community
20 years of independent publishing is a milestone, but to keep Scoop thriving we need your support. We are building on our Wellington.Scoop and Scoop offering with thedig.nz our new In-depth Engaged Journalism platform. Now, more than ever sustainable financial support of the Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism will help to keep these vital and participatory media services running.
Find out more and join us:
If the Transport Agency can afford to pay for a cricket pavilion, will it also pay for gardeners to maintain the flower beds? And will it pay for the prompt and regular removal of the inevitable graffiti? Or will these costs be inherited by ratepayers?
John Clarke, 6. February 2014, 18:42
Looking at Karo Drive (previously the Inner City Bypass), Cobham Drive and the Korokoro interchange on SH2, it’s obvious that NZTA’s “artistic renderings” are nothing more than an exercise in deliberate institutional deceit. The finished result won’t look anything like the moodily-lit green-swathed expanses of fashionable lounging spots shown in the pictures – they’ll look like the pig-ugly concrete and shingle wasteland on Karo Drive between Taranaki St and Cuba St. I hope the board of inquiry conclude that NZTA’s pictures are no more than – in the memorable words of another inquiry – an “orchestrated litany of lies”.
Elaine E, 6. February 2014, 19:24
NZTA should be challenged to find actual pictures of any real intercity flyovers anywhere in the world that are attractive, pleasant places to walk under or “sunbathe” beside. Have you been to Hong Kong lately?
In Shanghai when I visited in 2008, many raised motorways had plant boxes attached to the sides. Many of the plants were dead or nearly so. Would NZTA pay for the maintenance of the green wall they are proposing to shield the Grandstand Apartment? Or are they planning to use plastic plants?
Driver, you are one of the many who think that graffiti will happen to the flyover legs where they meet the ground. This would of course be a huge PR embarrassment for NZTA, as they have said that it would not. And so, they’re one step ahead of you. Not only will the concrete supports for the flyover be finished in a particular way that doesn’t support graffiti, the actual legs will be surrounded by plants that do not encourage you to come near them. Spikey plants. Plants that grown in a bog. Quicksand. Plants that give you an electric shock if you walk past them. Stinging nettles. Cactus. Meulenbeckia. Venus fly traps, that sort of thing.
Traveller, 6. February 2014, 22:31
Quicksand would be a great idea, as long as the flyover didnt sink into it. They could also cultivate a colony of poisonous spiders. And if they prepared for the possibility of possums, they’d have an excuse to place cyanide among the flowers.
Nostra Damus, 11. February 2014, 7:22
Look you cynics, in twenty years time when the flyover is realised to have been a big mistake, it will be turned into an aerial linear park as in New York. Then we will be able ramble through the bramble and pick blackberries in summer whilst watching the son of McCullum score a triple century in 5:5 over match against Australia.
Loading ...
If the Transport Agency can afford to pay for a cricket pavilion, will it also pay for gardeners to maintain the flower beds? And will it pay for the prompt and regular removal of the inevitable graffiti? Or will these costs be inherited by ratepayers?
Looking at Karo Drive (previously the Inner City Bypass), Cobham Drive and the Korokoro interchange on SH2, it’s obvious that NZTA’s “artistic renderings” are nothing more than an exercise in deliberate institutional deceit. The finished result won’t look anything like the moodily-lit green-swathed expanses of fashionable lounging spots shown in the pictures – they’ll look like the pig-ugly concrete and shingle wasteland on Karo Drive between Taranaki St and Cuba St. I hope the board of inquiry conclude that NZTA’s pictures are no more than – in the memorable words of another inquiry – an “orchestrated litany of lies”.
NZTA should be challenged to find actual pictures of any real intercity flyovers anywhere in the world that are attractive, pleasant places to walk under or “sunbathe” beside. Have you been to Hong Kong lately?
In Shanghai when I visited in 2008, many raised motorways had plant boxes attached to the sides. Many of the plants were dead or nearly so. Would NZTA pay for the maintenance of the green wall they are proposing to shield the Grandstand Apartment? Or are they planning to use plastic plants?
Driver, you are one of the many who think that graffiti will happen to the flyover legs where they meet the ground. This would of course be a huge PR embarrassment for NZTA, as they have said that it would not. And so, they’re one step ahead of you. Not only will the concrete supports for the flyover be finished in a particular way that doesn’t support graffiti, the actual legs will be surrounded by plants that do not encourage you to come near them. Spikey plants. Plants that grown in a bog. Quicksand. Plants that give you an electric shock if you walk past them. Stinging nettles. Cactus. Meulenbeckia. Venus fly traps, that sort of thing.
Quicksand would be a great idea, as long as the flyover didnt sink into it. They could also cultivate a colony of poisonous spiders. And if they prepared for the possibility of possums, they’d have an excuse to place cyanide among the flowers.
Look you cynics, in twenty years time when the flyover is realised to have been a big mistake, it will be turned into an aerial linear park as in New York. Then we will be able ramble through the bramble and pick blackberries in summer whilst watching the son of McCullum score a triple century in 5:5 over match against Australia.