Regional Football - powered by Park Life

TURF4WELLINGTON is Launched

177 replies · 7,560 views

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Vote passed for one artificial at Wakefield for the 2011 season and money is available for a 2nd to be built for next year subject to external funding being found.

www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Fruglo on 15.01.2013 wrote:

Fuck this stupid game

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Result!

Take a bow Marius and everyone else who has bitched at a councilor recently.

Has anyone got the actual votes cast just so we identify any of them still not "turf-friendly".

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Great News, .... Perhaps they should consider making all of that sh*t hole known as Wakefield Park artificial Turf!!!!

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I'm glad BNU stayed in Cap1 now

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Feverish wrote:

I'm glad BNU stayed in Cap1 now

You are such a thoughtful person......

Anyway apprently the work for this will satrt very soon....My only concern is the issue around the installation of the light towers....as according to the regulations no "fixed fixtures" (ie light towers...) can be within 5 meters of the playing field....

So where will they be installing the towers between the two fields...?? I am sure they have done their homework....

Through this forum I would like to aknowledge Gary Oosterbaan. Gary has done a lot of hard work towards this behind the scenes for the last couple or so years.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Well done everyone who has done far more work than they are likely to get recognition for. Great news for the winter codes. All going well the 'ball will get rolling' on a few more soon.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Feverish wrote:

I'm glad BNU stayed in Cap1 now

Now they may have to play football.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

terminator_x wrote:

Result!Take a bow Marius and everyone else who has bitched at a councilor recently. Has anyone got the actual votes cast just so we identify any of them still not "turf-friendly".ï¿½

good point!!

and great work Marius and co

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

The first vote, to commit dollars to the first Wakefield artificial, was 13 for and 2 against. The two that voted against were Goulden and Pepperel. Goulden has previously been supportive but he was being difficult because I get the impression that's in his nature plus he was p!ssed about the politics being played. Still, not a good enough excuse.

The second vote, to commit dollars to the second Wakefield artificial (once 500k private funds available) is trickier to assess. It was won something like 9-6, but be careful to read too much into that. Several of those who voted against claimed not to do so bc they didnt want to build a second artificial but bc they felt more consideration should be given to where that second pitch is built before the $ committed. Read into that what you like.

Also, the important issue of the extent of user charges is yet to be fully resolved and i dont think its necessarily the case that councillors which voted in favour of both key propositions are necessarily going to be those who will be the strongest advocates for keeping user charges at a level that is reasonable and in line with what other community user groups pay (some will, some wont).

My final note of caution before you vote based solely on the outcome of the other night's council meeting. Dont forget there are some candidates not currently on Council that would be more supportive than some of those that voted for Wednesday night's proposal. That's why I recommend you look at backofthenet.co.nz before voting.

Marius Lacatus2010-10-01 09:49:36

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

JOhn Morrison sent me this email as an update and clarification and said I was welcome to post on the forum ...

Sam,

I thought you might like to see a slightly more accurate picture of what actually happened last night at Council in terms of artificials --- the Dompost article was pretty brief on detail.

Just to clarify the ï¿½private fundingï¿½ is nothing to do with user pays (as I see some of your colleagues are suggesting). We have $500,000 for pitch one finalised and confirmed, and we have approx $500,000 committed for pitch two but all details havenï¿½t been finalised etc like fully signed deals etc---- shouldnï¿½t take too long to complete.

Also negotiations and discussions will continue with Wellington College and St Pats College, both boards of Trustees have agreed to continue discussions with us.

I notice some of your colleagues on Yellow Fever seem sceptical regarding these two projects. From our point of view we finish with 50% access to two grounds (whats more they are artificials) that we currently have 0% access to (thus add to our portfolio of sportsgrounds). The advantages are obvious, the price is halved to both parties, we get approx 20 to 25 hours use per week (as long as those using it are with clubs, Associations, Capital football etc etc --- we take a totally neutral stance on what code or what team as long as the team is affiliated), we have minimal problems getting resource consents, we have on site supervision --- and when you boil it down the half the school gets --- they are our kids anyway often playing our clubs. Both of these artificials are planned to be full sized grounds with lights.

John Dow and I are pleased with this entire artificials project but as I said last night at the Council meeting we regard it as still ï¿½work in progressï¿½.

Hope this is of assistance --- you are welcome to post this and the News Release herewith on the Yellow Fever site if you wish.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

My voting is done and will be posted tomorrow.

"Phoenix till they lose"

Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.

Genuine opinion: FTFFA

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Marius, going to put a different spin on the Goulden vote. This being based on the fact he knew it was going to pass.

The fact is that 6-weeks ago we basically (where the money was coming from was different, although it was just bringing money forward rather than new money) had the same vote, it lost. Morrison, Prendergast all voted against it. Goulden voted for it. I've found it pretty hypocritical for Morrsion since then to have lead the charge on these, its nothing but politics as far as I am conerned. Kerry a year ago wasn't even a supporter of artificials full stop. At initial discussions on them at council she was suggesting things such as they catch on fire in the summer, she plain didn't support them though seemingly does no. So my spin on the Goulden vote was that it was perhaps the most principled of anyone there (those words often don't get bandied around in the same sentence)

Great that it got us the result that was so desperately needed and a major amount of credit should go to you and others in the sporting community on this.

The other point I will add and it is about artificials based at school, 6-weeks ago I was in a meeting with council officers and we were discussing future sites for artificials, the exhbition ground at Rongotai came up as a possible option, as was a partnership on the back field at St Pats. The council staff said those were just in the to hard basket because of the management of relationships with schools. I can't imagine things will have changed much so I feel for the people who are going to have to manage these with schools and ensure that groups from outside the school are getting the use that the contribution warrants.

www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

As on the front page, this is John Dow's take on the campaign ...

http://www.wotzon.com/diary/JDow/

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

how about someone achieves something before they pat themselves on the back

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Where is Parkie to call them all c**ts?

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

You guys are priceless --- you scream and yell for artificials --- John Dow and myself have worked for the last six months to deliver you two artificials, plus two more are in the midst of very positive negotiations (St Pats and Wgtn College both full size with lights) and I would remind you officers look after management, Mayor and Councillors look after governance.

You harp on about a failed vote six months ago which I said at the time was inadequate and I would vote against it because it proposed one only artificial the year after next "YES 2012"--- one only. I said at that very meeting that John Dow and myself were working on a plan to get at least two up and running for the 2011 season, "yes 2011"--- next season!

We have now delivered those two with approx $1m sponsorship and you guys seem to want the failed vote back with no sponsorship along with defending one of the two Councillors who voted against the whole proposition.

Hope this is of some help to you guys!

Best Wishes

John Morrison

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Care to comment on the Karori Park redevelopment John? Or the general crapiness of most sports grounds?
2ndBest2010-10-05 22:37:48

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Yes, more than happpy to comment on Karori Park --- the Council spent around $4.5m on this redevelopment and it has been a huge dissapointment and totally unnacceptable. --- I believe the intention was right but end result has been a disaster. We can obviously rant and moan about this with total justification but what do we do --- we are making another big effort to put in drainage this Spring, the Basin Reserve Trust has also thrown an additional $50,000 to assist in the drainage effort and sure this may be cricket orientated but if it adds to the drainage effort it benefits all users.

There is a feeling and I am one of them that we could well be putting good money after bad but we will give it one more go --- if that doesn't work I am first to admit I'm not sure where we should go then but I'm more than happy to listen to any suggestions. I should add that I am very conscious that the Karori Park problems have been extremely negative for football and it has impacted particularly on the Waterside Karori Club.

Best Wishes

John Morrison

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

my suggestion if things dont improve - artificial at the far end of KP. Might be something about KP in the Dom cos Burgess rang me up today sniffing around.

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

And what about the accusation that the council was warned 4 years there was a problem with the quality/quantity of sports fields? Yet jack all has been done until the last year or so.

Forgive me if I'm a little skeptical but the first pitch was 3/4 size, the second only happened because of the rugby world cup, and the third and fourth were stitched together weeks before local elections.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

What is the best time to hit Councillors? surely just before an election --- I said earlier that I voted against an ammendment to give us one artificial the year after next 2012 --- I said John Dow and I had been working on delivering two for next year 2011. If you are smart you work out how to win the vote because losing and wining about it is hopeless as you've found out.

When, then, is a good time to put the question?

answer --- just before the election and guess what what happens --- YOU WIN!

You are so preoccupied with finding something sinister out of the whole thing you have failed to realise that the vote has been won and you have got two artificials for next season plus the likely hood of two more at the schools.

So how about applauding the tactics rather than bagging them!

Best Wishes

John Morrison

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

JohnMorrison wrote:

John - awesome that you have delivered on these two artificials. Absolutely awesome, you wont find anyone in the sporting community who doesn't say that.

But clarify this for me, hypothetically if you hadn't found the money for these two new ones would you have voted yes on the previous vote had it been put again in the next week or two? Because one artificial sooner that it would have existed is better than none.

www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

JohnMorrison wrote:

I can assure you that I realise the outcome for the football community. And obviously it is better than nothing. But like a good politician you've sidestepped the other question and haven't mentioned the 3 years of inaction after you had advice there was an issue.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

I voted "no" six months ago to an ammendment that I thought was hopeless --- it proposed an artificial, one only for the year after next 2012 --- I was confident that we could find some outside money to start with and we could also persuade Councillors to look at at least one artificial next season if not two.

If I had failed in, one, getting together any outside money and two, persuading Councillors to vote for artificials next season I would still have plenty of opportunities to promote and vote for artificials, at worst, for the 2012 season (which is what the ammendment in question requested).

So to me the failed ammendment six months has been promoted a long way beyond its relevance and in truth anyone who just wanted to sit back and be happy with one artificial the year after next I must say surprises me.

Best Wishes

John Morrison

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

So if it had come up again you still would have voted no? As I said one artificial a year ahead of the schedule (as was publicly known at that stage) is better than nothing.

www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Three years of inaction! --- it's very easy to find some advice that suggests nothing has been done --- we get advice every day from some quarter that suggests this that or the other.

My biggest problem over the last three years was that we had $50m sitting in the sports budget for an Indoor Sports Stadium and until that was put to bed it was extremely difficult to find additional money for the many sporting demands out there. Unfortunately as most people are aware we had extraordinary difficulty in putting this project to bed because we were constantly dragged through inquiries after inquiries and enviroment courts etc etc which probably put the artificials programme back two to three years --- simple as that.

So I'm sure if you look at what the sports budget and spend has been over the last three years you will find it is far bigger than ever before.

Rest assured I would like to spend alot of our budget on sport --- however as you can imagine I strike a few opponents along the way.

Best Wishes

John M

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Mr J Morrison, it must be frustrating to be a councillor where you have to deal with conflicting needs and limited resources as well as facing idelogically driven maties on coincil. You would have faced many one idea driven people who come to you for your vote in council and if you don't they will turn against you and vote for other candidates. Soccer people are only focussed on their needs, netball people, cricket people are no different. Money and cosents no object, you would have 100 artificial turfs in Wellington next year. Then you just ahve to make it generate a return. If you make profit, then you can export the idea country wide and all soccer people will be happy.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

JohnMorrison wrote:

Three years of inaction! --- it's very easy to find some advice that suggests nothing has been done --- we get advice every day from some quarter that suggests this that or the other.

So I'm sure if you look at what the sports budget and spend has been over the last three years you will find it is far bigger than ever before.

Rest assured I would like to spend alot of our budget on sport --- however as you can imagine I strike a few opponents along the way.

Best Wishes

John M

Hi John! Been a while.

I just want to make sure I've got this straight though - I'm actually not taking the piss here, just want to make sure I've got my facts straight (for once).

First of all, the turfs:

1. You were responsible for the half size nairnville turf, which NZCT funded two thirds of, and WCC picked up the other third?

2. The Te Whaea turf was required because of the RWC, but WCC paid for all of it?

3. There is one new turf going in at Wakefield for sure, which WCC is wholly paying for?

Am I right so far?

Because I have also heard some banter that the new Wakefield turf will have quite a serious user-pays component to it and that clubs or teams or Capital Football will have to shoulder that cost - is that the "extra private sector" money that you and John Dow found?

Just wondering.

Also is any of this chatter about artificials at schools true and if so is it actually anything to do with you (no disrespect) or are the schools doing the legwork themselves? I know Tim Brown has been hard at work pushing along fundraising for Wellington College to build one, but that's not really something you can claim is it?

Yours in the spirit of shameless self promotion,

Park Life.

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

2ndBest wrote:

And what about the accusation that the council was warned 4 years there was a problem with the quality/quantity of sports fields?ï¿½ï¿½ Yet jack all has been done until the last year or so.Forgive me if I'm a little skeptical but the first pitch was 3/4 size, the second only happened because of the rugby world cup, and the third and fourth were stitched together weeks before local elections.

I think its easy for football fans to be on the artificial bandwagon now but I was in wgtn 4 years ago and there were very few people putting the message out there that artificials were the answer. It's not just councillors jumping on that band wagon.

Also, it's hard to blame the council for K-town. Again, I was at Karori when that was happening and no-one raised an issue then. Great plan poorly executed, not sure how the decision makers are to blame.

The indoor sports centre is the major cock up, far too much time and money invested in a centre that does what a lot of other facilities already do. Meanwhile major lack of investment in outdoor fields etc has meant 2-3 years have been lost. Overall sports spend is a smokescreen councillor, it's all gone on a single facility with a huge capital outlay. Wellington's sports fields have become a disgrace

I think the explanation for the no vote is a reasonable one. What is clear is that some motivations for the no vote were different (i.e. vote no to look for a better proposal vs vote no because they don't want to spend the cash).

I think we're seeing some decent local body politics here - the council is actually responding reasonably quickly to an issue that is being raised by the constituency, and involving local businesses and communities in the solution.james dean2010-10-06 12:57:56

Normo's coming home

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

You could be cynical and say that footy is losing out because what once was a purely football ground (Wakefield) is now football and rugby.

Kilbirnie is primarily a rugby ground also. Marist have a whopping great cricket block on their pitch that no drainage work is going to help with.

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

that is being rather too cynical. let's not lose sight of things guys.

THIS IS a good result.

Marius Lacatus2010-10-06 15:28:41

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

james dean wrote:

At least one person within the council system was saying that artificial were the answer.

"The council's parks and garden manager, Paul Andrew, said this week that the council knew four years ago it had a problem but a proposal to speed up work on artificial grounds was turned down by councillors at that time."

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/editorials/4070653/Editorial-A-chance-to-vote-for-childrens-sporting-birthright

[QUOTE=james dean]
Also, it's hard to blame the council for K-town. Again, I was at Karori when that was happening and no-one raised an issue then. Great plan poorly executed, not sure how the decision makers are to blame.

Remember 5 or so years prior to the K park redevelopment, Redwood Park got a 'make over' too. Although that seems to be a clusterf**k. It is in a worse state than when they started work. My point is that it seems very little seems to have been learnt from that experience. And hence similar results have occured in K Park

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Marius Lacatus wrote:

that is being rather too cynical. let's not lose sight of things guys.

THIS IS a good result.

this is a football forum - whatya expect?

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

The blame for these matters where they have fked up work lies with the officers ï¿½ not so much the councillors. The contractor who did KP should be hauled over the coals.

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Feverish wrote:

The blame for these matters where they have fked up work lies with the officers ï¿½ not so much the councillors. The contractor who did KP should be hauled over the coals.

I've talked to the contractors who did the work there and they say it was poorly designed (NZ Sports Turf Institute) and there was nothing they could do to prevent the problems that resulted from it. They were merely employed to build exactly what was designed. I don't know what NZSPTI's answer to that is but they'd probably point the finger strait back tbh.

Fruglo on 15.01.2013 wrote:

Fuck this stupid game

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Great to hear from you Park Life ---- I seem to remember a very complimentary piece from you last year.

(By the way, why do you people all hide behind these funny names, is it some sort of secret seven or famous five type set up with secret handshakes etc)

Nairnville Park --- 3/4 size --- WCC two thirds NZCT 1/3 Approx

Te Whaea --- WCC -- 100%-- $1.5m (important point --- its there!)

Two at Wakefield Park --- WCC 2/3 ---- sponsorship 1/3

User Pays ---- at the moment Capital football picks up the payments and they or the clubs may continue to do that. Estimated payment over and above current set up will be around $2 -- $4 per player per game. (We asked an awful lot of stakeholders in both codes whether if given the option they'd prefer to pay $2-$4 per head and play or pay nothing and not play--- I'm sure you know the answer). No its not the extra private sector money or whatever it was you heard.

The chatter about schools is very straightforward --- John Dow and myself have had considerable discussion with both Wellington College and St Pats College. In both cases both parties (WCC and School) are looking at a joint deal, probably 50/50 but thats not set in stone. Obvious advantages are --- it halves the price for both parties instead of $1.5m each it's $750,000 each. So it makes it far more achievable for both parties in terms of getting over the line. Resource consents and other compliance matters are easier within school grounds. Because you can get so many hours from these (Nairnville and Te Whaea were doing up to 60 hours per week) each party can see themselves getting a very adequate go. The schools are happy for outsiders to access these as long as they come in under a Club, Assoc or Union banner as it were.They will both be full size with lights and for football, rugby and rugby league. From our point of view we should also be happy that the kids in the school are our kids (Wellington) anyway.

Fundraising for these --- interesting point Park Life --- I think we've been able to look at an opportunity of halving our costs and achieving 50% of two artificials that we had 0% of before.

Adding to our sportsfields portfolio which as many of your colleagues have pointed out is desperately needed.

I have also been involved in speaking with some potential funders who may well assist one or both parties get this over the line.

Both schools and WCC have expressed a commitment to continue the discussions/negotiations to get these underway as soon as possible.

If you call all that shameless self promotion then I suppose I'm guilty.

Best Wishes

John M

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

TopLeft07 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

The blame for these matters where they have fked up work lies with the officers ï¿½ not so much the councillors. The contractor who did KP should be hauled over the coals.

yarn - they left the dirt in a pile for friggin months

Founder

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

Feverish wrote:

TopLeft07 wrote:

Feverish wrote:

The blame for these matters where they have fked up work lies with the officers ï¿½ not so much the councillors. The contractor who did KP should be hauled over the coals.

yarn - they left the dirt in a pile for friggin months

ha ha! so the whole problem at KP stems from a pile of dirt being left there for months? sorry but I think there is a little bit more to it than that.

Fruglo on 15.01.2013 wrote:

Fuck this stupid game

Permalink

over 15 years ago · edited over 13 years ago

John, the names are customary on this kind of football forum all over the world. You can identify some people by clicking on their "alias".

Anyway, good to have you on here providing your perspective.

For one, and whatever has or hasnt been done before and for whatever reasons and whatever the politics, I am very pleased with the result - but am still concerend we finish the job and dont dump too much of the financial burden on clubs and players. You and your Council colleagues need to be mindful of that.

Permalink