Reading that page is doing my head in. So think I might have to stop.
The Phoenix play AFL apparently by the way. No wonder we nearly finished bottom - we've been playing the wrong game!
Does cricket really lose 4 of their wickets? On Sladden the cricket ground takes up a fair chunk of the senior football pitch and a couple of the junior pitches. If that's the case I could only ever see 3 maybe 4 wickets total on the rec.
Reading that page is doing my head in. So think I might have to stop.
Well welnix have said that the organisation that runs facilities in the hutt approached them, so its not just Welnix at fault its also the council's own organisations.
I'm beginning to feel a right dick going in to bat for something that isn't supported by the very people I am trying to defend. Egg on my face?
I'm beginning to feel a right dick going in to bat for something that isn't supported by the very people I am trying to defend. Egg on my face?
It couldn't hurt to have someone supporting this and someone like Iffy, Daniel or Tim Brown coming out and saying it would be a good idea etc.
You start to remember that Infratil (I think ) were the jokers behind losing the Hop card tender in Auckland and then getting on the phone to someone and then rolling out their Snapper hop card just on buses first and then having to remove it at the cost of a lots of $$. Not how we'd want this to go.
Has anyone heard anything from the club or Welnix on this recently?
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
Mr Positive
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
Which began when they stated on their Bookface page very early on, when confronted about the misleading information they were perpetuating, that they "simply didn't want it built here".
"We think there is a need for a botique stadium, we just don't want it built here" has repeatedly been the message by this mystery person running the NIMBY bookface
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
Add the Workingmens club extention and the Ryman healtchcare village as well as the stadium.
Much NIMBY. Such Objection. Wow.
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
BANANA would probably be a better term for that Alan Waller guy who spams the NIMBY Facebook page with misinformation and irrelevant articles.
BANANA is an acronym for "Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything" (or "Anyone"). I had a good laugh at that BTW thanks for info.
Mr Positive
Sorry for this but WTF is NIMBY? Whats it mean or stand for?.
Might have to update that page to immortalise Petone alongside Puttgarden, Surrey, Nova Scotia and West Palm Beach as one of the NIMBY capitals of the world.
Looking over the last few pages it looks like the proverbial snow ball's chance in hell of getting built ....
What if anything does this mean for the Nix & the ROF ????????
Socceroo/ Mariner / Whangarei
Looking over the last few pages it looks like the proverbial snow ball's chance in hell of getting built ....
What if anything does this mean for the Nix & the ROF ????????
Looking over the last few pages it looks like the proverbial snow ball's chance in hell of getting built ....
What if anything does this mean for the Nix & the ROF ????????
It means that the Nix will stay at the RoF.
Looking over the last few pages it looks like the proverbial snow ball's chance in hell of getting built ....
What if anything does this mean for the Nix & the ROF ????????
Looking over the last few pages it looks like the proverbial snow ball's chance in hell of getting built ....
What if anything does this mean for the Nix & the ROF ????????
It means that the Nix will stay at the RoF.
Pretty sure Midfielder wanted you to say we are doomed.
Socceroo/ Mariner / Whangarei
I know it is fashionable to jump on the 'NIMBYs' but some of their concerns aren't unreasonable.
1) Parking - no obvious plan. Without serious investment in parking infrastructure, it woud be shambles given the current configuration.
2) Loss of green space. Yes, there will still be some but they will be losing a massive chunk. Like it or not, it's a valid concern.
3) PRFC and PCC loss of fields. They may be spreading misinformation about how many pitches are being used, but facts are that both clubs would lose playing fields. Whatever the case is elsewhere in the Hutt, Petone Rec is still one of the more heavily used Rugby assets in the community. Not just the #1 but the three other senior pitches and countless junior pitches. I can't comment for the cricket club, but I can't imagine it is dissimilar. Now you might not care about what happens to Petone Rugby but it is a massive club and the 2nd oldest in Wellington. It's concerns are valid and its political clout is hefty.
Now, as many of us have commented from the get-go, if the original announcement had included a plan for how parking would be dealt with then that could have been put to bed from the start. Similarly, PRFC could have been bought on board, or at least properly briefed then it is unlikely they would have kicked up such a stink.
To write off all people that are opposed as 'NIMBYs' is a bit harsh, sure it seems that a large proportion are but even then I still feel they may have reasonable concerns.
www.kiwifromthecouch.blogspot.com
I know it is fashionable to jump on the 'NIMBYs' but some of their concerns aren't unreasonable.
1) Parking - no obvious plan. Without serious investment in parking infrastructure, it woud be shambles given the current configuration.
2) Loss of green space. Yes, there will still be some but they will be losing a massive chunk. Like it or not, it's a valid concern.
3) PRFC and PCC loss of fields. They may be spreading misinformation about how many pitches are being used, but facts are that both clubs would lose playing fields. Whatever the case is elsewhere in the Hutt, Petone Rec is still one of the more heavily used Rugby assets in the community. Not just the #1 but the three other senior pitches and countless junior pitches. I can't comment for the cricket club, but I can't imagine it is dissimilar. Now you might not care about what happens to Petone Rugby but it is a massive club and the 2nd oldest in Wellington. It's concerns are valid and its political clout is hefty.
Now, as many of us have commented from the get-go, if the original announcement had included a plan for how parking would be dealt with then that could have been put to bed from the start. Similarly, PRFC could have been bought on board, or at least properly briefed then it is unlikely they would have kicked up such a stink.
To write off all people that are opposed as 'NIMBYs' is a bit harsh, sure it seems that a large proportion are but even then I still feel they may have reasonable concerns.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
I wonder if the Nimbys were so vocal when they built that new overbridge onto the motorway? A few sections of land went under the bulldozer for that effort.
I know it is fashionable to jump on the 'NIMBYs' but some of their concerns aren't unreasonable.
1) Parking - no obvious plan. Without serious investment in parking infrastructure, it woud be shambles given the current configuration.
2) Loss of green space. Yes, there will still be some but they will be losing a massive chunk. Like it or not, it's a valid concern.
3) PRFC and PCC loss of fields. They may be spreading misinformation about how many pitches are being used, but facts are that both clubs would lose playing fields. Whatever the case is elsewhere in the Hutt, Petone Rec is still one of the more heavily used Rugby assets in the community. Not just the #1 but the three other senior pitches and countless junior pitches. I can't comment for the cricket club, but I can't imagine it is dissimilar. Now you might not care about what happens to Petone Rugby but it is a massive club and the 2nd oldest in Wellington. It's concerns are valid and its political clout is hefty.
Now, as many of us have commented from the get-go, if the original announcement had included a plan for how parking would be dealt with then that could have been put to bed from the start. Similarly, PRFC could have been bought on board, or at least properly briefed then it is unlikely they would have kicked up such a stink.
To write off all people that are opposed as 'NIMBYs' is a bit harsh, sure it seems that a large proportion are but even then I still feel they may have reasonable concerns.
Cry me a river bop.
There are definitely some legitimate concerns. Nobody that I've seen has actually discounted any of them. That's why we have a resource consent process.
The fact of the matter is that the NIMBY collective have refused to fairly discuss the proposal. They've told porkies at every turn, and have whipped a small group of locals up into a frenzy.
Good on them I guess, they're going to get what they want. But they don't want it because of the Rugby or Cricket club. They want it because they want it at they have done what they needed to do to get there.
In and of itself that shouldn't have been any surprise to anyone. The sad thing is that all the people who thought that it was a good idea worth exploring will probably not get the opportunity to have those arguments heard. They won't get that opportunity because the stadium proponents (except for the Fever) have remained silent.
Normo's coming home
Er, to tell the truth, people up in Wadestown and Thorndon complain reasonably regularly about noise from the RoF at nights, don't they?
Er, to tell the truth, people up in Wadestown and Thorndon complain reasonably regularly about noise from the RoF at nights, don't they?
Nope. Practically never.
Incredible stamina. No shame. Yellow Fever.
As a K-Town resident I was particularly annoyed about the noise from a Bon Jovi concert three or so years ago.
#bittertillIdie
#neverforget
"Phoenix till they lose"
Posting 97% bollox, 8% lies and 3.658% genuine opinion.
Genuine opinion: FTFFA
As a K-Town resident I was particularly annoyed about the noise from a Bon Jovi concert three or so years ago.
#bittertillIdie
#neverforget
Grumpy old bastard alert
Er, to tell the truth, people up in Wadestown and Thorndon complain reasonably regularly about noise from the RoF at nights, don't they?
Nope. Practically never.
Er, to tell the truth, people up in Wadestown and Thorndon complain reasonably regularly about noise from the RoF at nights, don't they?
Normo's coming home
Er, to tell the truth, people up in Wadestown and Thorndon complain reasonably regularly about noise from the RoF at nights, don't they?
They complained long and hard beforehand - since the thing was built, it's not a problem in the slightest
Supporter For Ever - Keep The Faith - Foundation Member - Never Lets FAX Get In The Way Of A Good Yarn
I know it is fashionable to jump on the 'NIMBYs' but some of their concerns aren't unreasonable.
1) Parking - no obvious plan. Without serious investment in parking infrastructure, it woud be shambles given the current configuration.
2) Loss of green space. Yes, there will still be some but they will be losing a massive chunk. Like it or not, it's a valid concern.
3) PRFC and PCC loss of fields. They may be spreading misinformation about how many pitches are being used, but facts are that both clubs would lose playing fields. Whatever the case is elsewhere in the Hutt, Petone Rec is still one of the more heavily used Rugby assets in the community. Not just the #1 but the three other senior pitches and countless junior pitches. I can't comment for the cricket club, but I can't imagine it is dissimilar. Now you might not care about what happens to Petone Rugby but it is a massive club and the 2nd oldest in Wellington. It's concerns are valid and its political clout is hefty.
Now, as many of us have commented from the get-go, if the original announcement had included a plan for how parking would be dealt with then that could have been put to bed from the start. Similarly, PRFC could have been bought on board, or at least properly briefed then it is unlikely they would have kicked up such a stink.
To write off all people that are opposed as 'NIMBYs' is a bit harsh, sure it seems that a large proportion are but even then I still feel they may have reasonable concerns.
Cry me a river bop.
There are definitely some legitimate concerns. Nobody that I've seen has actually discounted any of them. That's why we have a resource consent process.
The fact of the matter is that the NIMBY collective have refused to fairly discuss the proposal. They've told porkies at every turn, and have whipped a small group of locals up into a frenzy.
Good on them I guess, they're going to get what they want. But they don't want it because of the Rugby or Cricket club. They want it because they want it at they have done what they needed to do to get there.
In and of itself that shouldn't have been any surprise to anyone. The sad thing is that all the people who thought that it was a good idea worth exploring will probably not get the opportunity to have those arguments heard. They won't get that opportunity because the stadium proponents (except for the Fever) have remained silent.
We were driving through the Hutt on Sunday so stopped to check out Petone Rec for the first time in years.
A few thoughts:
- We were there for about 20 mins at 3pm on a Sunday afternoon and literally saw two people walking dogs and about 10 seagulls. That's it. It may get used a lot at other times but clearly not all the time. To be fair, it was pretty cold and windy on Sunday but in some ways that just strengthens the case for the stadium. If it is built it locks in a minimum amount of usage of that space, regardless of other factors. At 3pm on a Sunday there could have been 10,000 people there. Over the course of a year there will be approx. 150,000 visits to the Rec just to watch football.
- The Rec is massive. I stood approximately where the northern side of the stadium would be and there was still 5 rugby pitches in front of me. Compared to a lot of other communities around the region that's still a big space to have available.
- The stand at the western end should probably be knocked down regardless of whether it is assessed as an earthquake risk or not. Either that or it needs a major upgrade. As it is now it would not be fit for purpose.
- If Petone Rugby/Cricket and Hutt City Council are facing the prospect of that stand possibly being demolished anyway maybe a way to sweeten the deal for them would be to include building a brand new stand/clubrooms in the proposal, located somewhere else on the rec. Yes, it would add to the cost but it still might be worth doing to get the whole thing over the line? It might also help to more clearly delineate the football and rugby/cricket parts of this development. At the moment I suspect that Petone rugby and cricket think this is all downside for them and that they won't ever actually get to use the new stadium themselves. So why not turn that right on it's head and say "you will actually be better off than you are now, sitting in your comfy new 500 seat stand and clubrooms". It's possible this sort of discussion is already happening in the background. Maybe Petone rugby are simply using their rejection of the proposal as a starting point for negotiation?
And give Nick Willis get his own running track around the stadium.
This topic is locked.
