Post history

History for martinb

The Auckland Stadium Question

Back to topic

Current version

Posted October 08, 2024 12:34 · last edited October 08, 2024 12:51

20 Legend
Footy_Fella
Buffon II
Still have no idea why they choose to live by a speedway if they hate it so much.

Same goes for the Eden Park lot.

This falls apart given a brief look at history.

EP has only had night games for 30 years.

It's only had concerts for 3, which it now wants to double.

The argument that you don't have a say because you chose to move next to it, doesn't really work out when the nature of 'it' is constantly changing.
The argument that a national stadium in a growing city should operate how it did 30 years ago is also nonsense.

I agree these residents shouldn't have to deal with people pissing in their front yards - that should be dealt with. But noise and traffic management? Suck it up. It's like living on the viaduct and complaining about the night clubs.

That’s the f- annoying thing.
That’s exactly what has happened to midsize music venues in central Auckland. They’ve been pushed out. Bloody crickets of complaints there. Almost like the people complaining don’t care at all about the music industry or NZ music in general.

But in one of the oldest residential suburbs in the country with I’d guess around 100k in walking distance where the residents have worked closely with the stadium for decades we get every one weighing in with their two pence about how they should give up their property rights.

When all the rich suburbs get to exclude even the most minimal of density, nothing. Jaysus- check this level of entitlement out in Grey Lynn - there’s nothing remotely like this around Eden Park. Yet there is all over the city, and those suburbs are the ones putting their thumbs on the scales of the housing market. The Eden Park residents are by and large fine with most of it.

There’s two issues- one is the actual inconvenience and infringements on property rights. 

The second is the amount of dickheads who are happy to have a go at a whole suburb based on nothing other than Helen Clark lives there and they wet themselves in glee at the thought of getting one over her. It’s mostly culture war nonsense.  And a stadium desperately trying to make money and not always being honest with the public doesn’t mind playing up to it on occasion.

It’s not at all like the viaduct- that’s the entire point of a waterfront stadium suggestion, so that two land use purposes that don’t really coexist properly don’t have to. The viaduct is an entertainment precinct with hotels, places for Mark wotsit to go shopping and one or two high end apartments. 
Kingsland and Mt Eden were suburbs long before Eden Park needed a lot of night time entertainment to survive. 

Previous versions

2 versions
Unknown editor edited October 08, 2024 12:51
20 Legend
Footy_Fella
Buffon II
Still have no idea why they choose to live by a speedway if they hate it so much.

Same goes for the Eden Park lot.

This falls apart given a brief look at history.

EP has only had night games for 30 years.

It's only had concerts for 3, which it now wants to double.

The argument that you don't have a say because you chose to move next to it, doesn't really work out when the nature of 'it' is constantly changing.
The argument that a national stadium in a growing city should operate how it did 30 years ago is also nonsense.

I agree these residents shouldn't have to deal with people pissing in their front yards - that should be dealt with. But noise and traffic management? Suck it up. It's like living on the viaduct and complaining about the night clubs.

That’s the f- annoying thing.
That’s exactly what has happened to midsize music venues in central Auckland. They’ve been pushed out. Bloody crickets of complaints there. Almost like the people complaining don’t care at all about the music industry or NZ music in general. 

But in one of the oldest residential suburbs in the country with I’d guess around 100k in walking distance where the residents have worked closely with the stadium for decades we get every one weighing in with their two pence about how they should give up their property rights.

When all the rich suburbs get to exclude even the most minimal of density, nothing. Jaysus- check this level of entitlement out in Grey Lynn - there’s nothing remotely like this around Eden Park. Yet there is all over the city, and those suburbs are the ones putting their thumbs on the scales of the housing market. The Eden Park are by and large fine with most of it.

There’s two issues- one is the actual inconvenience and infringements on property rights. 

The second is the amount of dickheads who are happy to have a go at a whole suburb based on nothing other than Helen Clark lives there and they wet themselves in glee at the thought of getting one over her. It’s mostly culture war nonsense.  And a stadium desperately trying to make money and not always being honest with the public doesn’t mind playing up to it on occasion.

It’s not at all like the viaduct- that’s the entire point of a waterfront stadium suggestion, so that two land use purposes that don’t really coexist properly don’t have to. The viaduct is an entertainment precinct with hotels, places for Mark wotsit to go shopping and one or two high end apartments. 
Kingsland and Mt Eden were suburbs long before Eden Park needed a lot of night time entertainment to survive. 
Unknown editor edited October 08, 2024 12:50
20 Legend
Footy_Fella
Buffon II
Still have no idea why they choose to live by a speedway if they hate it so much.

Same goes for the Eden Park lot.

This falls apart given a brief look at history.

EP has only had night games for 30 years.

It's only had concerts for 3, which it now wants to double.

The argument that you don't have a say because you chose to move next to it, doesn't really work out when the nature of 'it' is constantly changing.
The argument that a national stadium in a growing city should operate how it did 30 years ago is also nonsense.

I agree these residents shouldn't have to deal with people pissing in their front yards - that should be dealt with. But noise and traffic management? Suck it up. It's like living on the viaduct and complaining about the night clubs.

That’s the f- annoying thing.
That’s exactly what has happened to midsize music venues in central Auckland. They’ve been pushed out. Bloody crickets of complaints there.

But in one of the oldest residential suburbs in the country with I’d guess around 100k in walking distance where the residents have worked closely with the stadium for decades we get every one weighing in with their two pence about how they should give up their property rights.

When all the rich suburbs get to exclude even the most minimal of density, nothing. Jaysus- check this level of entitlement out in Grey Lynn - there’s nothing remotely like this around Eden Park. Yet there is all over the city, and those suburbs are the ones putting their thumbs on the scales of the housing market. The Eden Park are by and large fine with most of it.

There’s two issues- one is the actual inconvenience and infringements on property rights. 

The second is the amount of dickheads who are happy to have a go at a whole suburb based on nothing other than Helen Clark lives there and they wet themselves in glee at the thought of getting one over her. It’s mostly culture war nonsense.  And a stadium desperately trying to make money and not always being honest with the public doesn’t mind playing up to it on occasion.

It’s not at all like the viaduct- that’s the entire point of a waterfront stadium suggestion, so that two land use purposes that don’t really coexist properly don’t have to. The viaduct is an entertainment precinct with hotels, places for Mark wotsit to go shopping and one or two high end apartments. 
Kingsland and Mt Eden were suburbs long before Eden Park needed a lot of night time entertainment to survive.