Mosgiel pool sites to cost green space?
I HAVE been following the developments around the Mosgiel pool with interest, and the debate over the two sites. I have visited the website, viewed the two options, and noted that the diagrams only show the footprint of the proposed pool itself, and therefore do not show the true impact on Memorial Park.
Clearly, the pool will need additional parking, earthworks, landscaping etc, increasing the impact on the loss of green space.
The diagrams that we have been shown in relation to site A, (the existing pool) show little encroachment on to the playing fields of Memorial Park. However, upon inspecting the markings at Memorial Park recently (March 1) , it appears the pool essentially extends out to the cricket pitch, and takes approximately a third of the playing area.
I also note that early in the week, the site would essentially be chosen without reference to either the traffic plan or parking requirements. This raises the question — will even more playing space be lost once the parking requirements are factored in?
While a new pool is clearly desirable, both the proposed sites show in reality a zero sum gain with whatever increase in amenity value the pool will bring, is at the cost of highly valued green space.
David Young
Dunedin [Abridged. Taieri Community Facilities Trust chairwoman Irene Mosley replies: ‘‘We appreciate Mr Young taking the time to look at the site information and the markings in the park and gardens at Party in the Park. We also had an information tent there to explain to people that Site B in the gardens showed actual placement and Site A on the sports field, demonstrated the footprint in clear space to try and give people an understanding of the size and scale of the build. If we had tried to mark out around the existing pool and caravan park, it would have been difficult to see because of the buildings.
‘‘The decision on final placement will be made by the city council, not the trust, at the end of this month after considerable consultation and gleaning of local knowledge and potential impact on each site. While the DCC was not able to present parking and transport plans for each site, considerable work has gone into planning for these factors and these were explained at the info tent. I am happy to meet with Mr Young if he would like more information. With an estimate of around 200,000 users a year, the pool, wherever it is placed, will be a wellused asset for our community.’’]
Unhappy with Sky
SKY Television is the news again, not only for its failed merger with Vodafone, but also for its reported subscriber base erosion. As a longterm subscriber with them I am somewhat disillusioned in what is on offer.
There is the basic package for $49.91 and all subscribers pay for this. There are 13 channels, or 28% them, in the basic package which are the ‘‘free to air’’ ones and the rest, without exception now have commercial breaks in them. When I signed up for Sky TV there were very few ads, but now I am paying for them.
Most of these channels are rubbish and are full of repeats. There are 16 channels where you have an option to pay more to watch. Two of these are sport and movies. The movies are not firstrate and Sunday night is the only night you may get to see a good one. To have movies and sport shown in high definition, you have to pay extra for it. No cost for high definition if you are watching the ‘‘free to air’’ stations. I can understand the odd advertisement with sport, as it has always been that way.
Without sport to watch on Sky TV I would probably be one of those subscribers referred to as ‘‘churn’’, but I do not think I am alone in this. SKY needs to lift its act, get rid of commercials and get some quality channels to watch. Ross Davidson
Wakari [This letter was referred to Sky TV for comment, but it declined to respond.] ..................................
BIBLE READING: Live such good lives that they will see the good things you do. — 1 Peter 2:12.