Logan Park Redevelopment: Compromise for Old Art Gallery

### ODT Online Thu, 19 Nov 2009
Art gallery demolition on agenda
By David Loughrey
Demolition of part of the former art gallery at Logan Park appears to be getting closer, as behind-closed-doors negotiations reach their conclusion. The Otago Daily Times understands the Dunedin City Council is planning partial demolition of the former art gallery, with bays at the end of the building by the University Oval to go.
Read more

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

7 Comments

Filed under Architecture, Business, DCC, Design, Economics, Heritage, Media, Name, New Zealand, NZHPT, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design, What stadium

7 responses to “Logan Park Redevelopment: Compromise for Old Art Gallery

  1. Fliss

    ‘Cos I’m into looking out for visual and other pollution, I noticed the new anti Stadium/Council graffiti posters that are being plastered all over CBD DCC property with photos of Councillors and Mayor along with silly little derogatory bylines. Sigh…..no doubt that will cost us poor old ratepayers a sum to remove. Does anyone have any suggestions as to who might be responsible? Shall we find culprits and bill – yeah right!

  2. Phil

    What has happened with the CCTV proposal for the CBD? Has it stalled, or just not happened yet? That might discourage a few posters, taggers et al. I think that DCC operates their own CCTV system for the civic buildings area already. I wonder if that system can be expanded to pick up a wider area. Even on a temporary basis, to nip things like this in the bud.

    I recall the tale of a Dunedin commercial building owner buying a number of “this area is monitored by cameras” signs, to deter taggers. Never had any cameras, but no one took the risk after that. That might be something worth investigating, if funding is an issue. A couple of cameras moved around a large number of camera sites. In the same way the fixed speed cameras are moved around. No one ever knows which one will be working, so they take care around all of them.

    • Elizabeth

      Pretty sure funding was/is the problem, as you say. But it’s not really that expensive in the grand scheme of things:

      “The council said a study on CCTV had found it would cost the city between $200,000 and $300,000, depending on installation costs and level of monitoring.” (ODT 17.6.08).

      ****

      A more recent DCC report: (haven’t bothered to read it, I’m out of time)

      Report – Council – 21-23/01/2009 (PDF, 72.7 kb, new window)
      Proposal for CCTV Coverage in the Octagon

  3. Phil

    $200,000 sounds a lot. Just for the Octagon. But, as you say, is a drop in the bucket in the grand schemes of today. And I would presume that the cost would reduce as the system was expanded throughout the CBD. The $200k will presumably include the special software and computers used to operate the system. Which additional camera sites can be hooked in to.

    I remember a colleague of mine looking recently at a single camera system, linked to a continuous 3 day recording video recorder, that would have cost him just a touch over $2,500. From a local specialist security company. It was another $250 each for any additional cameras he wanted to purchase. To a maximum of 6 cameras I think. A dumbed down system of what was proposed in the report, but illustrates the sliding costs scale.

  4. Richard

    As “ticked off” at a recent Council meeting, application has been made for funding for the proposed CCTV cameras in the Octagon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s