Concerns waterfront will not ease ratepayer load
IAN Taylor (ODT, 1.12.18), in a response to a letter from me querying aspects of the foreshore development, relates the foreshore fantasy to the dream he had years ago to set up his present sports animation company, which has done very well. The vital difference between the two is that he did this with his own capital, started small and bore the financial risks himself.
He claims that this project will ease the ratepayer load, but rapid growth and expenditure on such huge projects has never held or reduced rates and never will. You only have to look at living costs in Auckland and Queenstown to see the proof that bigger and flashier comes at high cost to ratepayers.
A recent MBIE assessment concluded that the project was not economically viable, as envisioned, and a downscaling and retreat has had to be done already. The DCC now accepts that the project will also have to be carefully staged. Some common sense prevails at last.
It all boils down to who is going to pay for this vision, how much they will be expected to pay and by when. Most importantly, the project has not gone through the 20182028 LTP process properly, with only the architectural bridge having been signed off by the council, so the rest has yet to be fully costed out and put up for public submission.
It is surely not too much to ask that due legal process and full transparency be observed when so much money and economic risk is involved. The vision of the few could so easily become the nightmare of the many. Stewart Webster
Halfway Bush
IAN Taylor’s work in the sports media field is outstanding by anyone’s measure. But does that undoubted expertise stretch to fivestar hotel development on a tricky waterfront site?
There is also a disconnect between his and Mr van Brandenburg’s assertion that the project will be built in a sustainable way and what appears to be its prime function, attracting increasing numbers of overseas tourists.
The news from the latest climate change conference is that we are on the verge of catastrophe unless we cut back in short order on CO2 emissions, in particular. Yet Mr Taylor would like everyone to keep flying flat out internationally, as his cool Hong Kongpurchased tartan jacket and latest excursion to the US exemplify.
He would be better off putting his vision and energies into a future for Dunedin that is selfsufficient and sustainable for people who actually live here, not onepercenter, highflying tourists. Philip Temple
Dunedin
I AGREE with the comments made by David Tordoff and Leyton Glen (ODT,
22.11.18) about the ‘‘flight of fancy’’ plans for the waterfront.
Neither the bridge nor the cockleshells are appropriate for this site, nor the expense of building a structure of questionable appeal.
The water in the harbour with its boats coming and going is not dependent on the weather and is appealing enough. The DCC should be catering for necessities before splashing out on frivolous luxuries. Noelene Ombler
St Leonards
Art installation
CALL me uneducated, behind the times, or backward focused, but I cannot see how the installation shown in today’s ODT (29.11.18) can be called art in any form, cutting edge and conceptually rigorous as it supposedly is.
Maybe those more aware than I can see something I have missed and can point out why I would want to teach myself, a New Zealand resident, to appreciate this type of ‘‘artistic’’ offering from China.
Humphrey Catchpole
Dunedin