UPDATED POST 26.9.12
Who is behind the resource consent application? Find out here.
How do I make a submission on the application? Go to DCC webpage.
—
Dunedin City Council
Media Release
Resource consent sought for major hotel
This item was published on 07 Sep 2012.
Betterways Advisory Limited has confirmed its interest in building a waterfront hotel and residential apartments on Dunedin’s Wharf Street. Further information sought by the Council has now been provided and formal notification of the company’s plans for the site will proceed.
The proposed hotel will have 27 floors plus a basement and will contain 215 bedrooms, two restaurants, two bars, a swimming pool for in-house use, as well as 182 on-site parking spaces, and a drop off/pick up area for two coaches. The building will also accommodate 164 self-contained apartments.
The application, which will be notified in Saturday’s Otago Daily Times, is accompanied by an assessment of environmental effects, revised plans and elevations, an architectural design statement, montages of the proposed hotel from viewpoints around Dunedin, shade diagrams, an integrated transport assessment, a reverse sensitivity study report, an infrastructure feasibility report, and a wind assessment report.
The Wharf Street site is zoned Industrial 1. The general area is shown on the Hazards Register as being reclaimed land, at risk to seismic activity. Commercial residential activity and residential activity are considered to be non-complying activities under the District Plan and so the resource consent for the hotel needs to be notified.
Anyone wanting to make submissions on the application has until 5 October 2012 to do so. The application can be viewed at www.dunedin.govt.nz/rma or by visiting the City Planning desk at the Dunedin City Council Service Centre. Information on making a submission and copies of the submission form can also be accessed online or obtained from the DCC Service Centre.
Contact Resource Consents Manager on 477 4000.
—
Related Posts and Comments:
8.9.12 Waterfront Hotel #Dunedin (Applicant names?)
23.6.12 Mis(t)apprehension: website visits, not bookings?
16.5.12 Dunedin Hotel
—
Betterways Advisory Limited
Previous name: DOLCE LMW LIMITED (15 Dec 2011)
Company number: 3142026
Incorporation Date: 23 Sep 2010
Company Status: Registered
Entity type: NZ Limited Company
Company Addresses:
Registered Office: RODGERS LAW, Level 4, 151-155 Princes Street, Dunedin
Address for service: RODGERS LAW, Level 4, 151-155 Princes Street, Dunedin
Directors: (1 of 1)
Stephen John RODGERS
20 Braeview Crescent, Maori Hill, Dunedin 9010
—
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
What if? Dunedin... 
### ch9.co.nz September 7, 2012 – 6:45pm
Public notification of project could result in battle
The battle for hearts and minds that is the lot of any major development in Dunedin, is about to begin for the city’s proposed 27 floor waterfront hotel. Public notification of the project tomorrow could be the start of another heated debate on the city’s future.
Video
43 Wharf St, Dunedin
c. 1865
http://artandmylife.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/dunedin.jpg?w=300&h=246
NEW ZEALAND HISTORIC PLACES TRUST
Dunedin Harbourside Historic Area
25, 31-33 Thomas Burns Street, Birch Street, Fryatt Street, Fish Street, Willis Street, Cresswell Street, Tewsley Street, Wharf Street, Roberts Street and Mason Street, DUNEDIN
Register Number: 7767
Registration Report:
http://www.historic.org.nz/TheRegister/RegisterSearch/RegisterResults.aspx?RID=7767
Written by Heather Bauchop; report completed 25 March 2008
Other Information: A fully referenced registration report is available from the NZHPT Otago/Southland Area Office.
Phone 03 4779871 Email @infodeepsouth@historic.org.nz
Have I missed something about the supposed identity of these developers who apparently fear that they won’t be granted a Resource Consent should their identity be known ? Exactly who could be hated that much ? Are we talking about Pengxin Group, the soon to be owners of Crafar farms ? Hotels are a large part of their global portfolio. Or are we talking about the infamous May Wang, former hotel developer and recently hunted down on bribery and corruption charges ? Hopefully, for the sake of the city, it’s neither of those to tarnish our name further. It’s hard to think of someone who believes that everyone would be against the project if they knew who was behind it. Unless it was CST of course.
The bullshit continues, anonymously.
—
### ODT Online Sat, 8 Sep 2012
Consent hearing for luxury hotel in December
By Chris Morris
The public will be able to have their say on a proposed $100 million, 28-storey hotel on Dunedin’s waterfront at a consent hearing scheduled for December. Council staff yesterday confirmed the company behind the hotel development, Betterways Advisory Ltd, had provided additional information requested by the council in July. That meant the company’s resource consent application could be publicly notified today, beginning the public submission process, and a hearing was scheduled to begin in early December.
The council had suspended the company’s consent application in July, while seeking further information on visual, shading and wind effects “resulting from the significant scale of the proposed building”. That had been expected by mid-August, but only completed in recent days, allowing the consent process to proceed to the next stage.
Read more
To confirm, the public notice and all information and reports associated with the resource consent application are now available on the Dunedin City Council website at:
http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/notified-resource-consents/current-notifieds/luc-2012-212
—
The text of the public notice reads:
.
RESOURCE CONSENT NOTICE
Public Notice of application for Resource Consent
Section 95A Resource Management Act 1991
________________________________________________________________________
The Dunedin City Council has received the following application for a resource consent:
Resource Consent Application No: LUC-2012-212
Name of Applicant: Betterways Advisory Limited
Location of Site: 41 Wharf Street, Dunedin, being the land legally described as Lot 3 Deposited Plan 25158, held in Computer Freehold Register OT17A/1107. The site has an area of 3961m2.
Description of Application:
Resource consent is sought for the construction and operation of a licensed hotel, together with residential apartments, at 41 Wharf Street, Dunedin. The proposed hotel will have 27 floors plus a basement. It will contain 215 bedrooms, two restaurants, two bars, a swimming pool for in-house use, 182 on-site parking spaces, and a drop off/pick up area for two coaches. The building will also accommodate 164 self-contained apartments. The proposal has been revised since the original application was received at Council, following a further information request.
The application is accompanied by an assessment of environmental effects, revised plans and elevations, an architectural design statement, montages of the proposed hotel from viewpoints around Dunedin City, shade diagrams, an integrated transport assessment, a reverse sensitivity study report, an infrastructure feasibility report, and a wind assessment report.
The subject site is zoned Industrial 1. The general area is shown on the Hazards Register as being reclaimed land, at risk to seismic activity. Commercial residential activity and residential activity are considered to be non-complying activities pursuant to Rule 10.5.5(ii) of the District Plan.
The application will be available for viewing at the City Planning Desk at the Dunedin City Council Customer Service Centre, Civic Centre, 50 The Octagon. It will also be available on the DCC website at http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/rma. Please contact Lianne Darby, ph 477 4000, if you have any questions
about the application.
Anyone may make a submission on the application. You may do so by delivering a written submission to City Planning, Dunedin City Council, at 50 The Octagon; or mailing to PO Box 5045, Moray Place, Dunedin 9058; or by facsimile to (03) 474 3451. The submission must be in Form 13. Copies of this form are available from the Dunedin City Council and from http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/rma
Submissions close on 5 October 2012.
You must serve a copy of your submission on Betterways Advisory Ltd, the applicant, whose address for service is C/o Anderson & Co, PO Box 5933, Dunedin 9058 as soon as reasonably practicable after serving your submission on the Dunedin City Council.
.
____________________________________
Signature on behalf of Dunedin City Council
.
____________________________________
Date
### radionz.co.nz Updated at 7:48 am today
Radio New Zealand News: Regional
Plans for Dunedin hotel open for public submissions
A controversial 27-storey hotel on the Dunedin waterfront is a step closer to being built. […]The resource consent application for the $100 million venture filed by Betterways Advisory Ltd is now out for consultation. Public submissions on the plans close on 5 October.
Betterways Advisory Ltd has not named the developers though its company website says it promotes cooperation and commerce between China and New Zealand.
Read more
****
New Zealand Companies Office:
Betterways Advisory Limited
http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/3142026
****
Betterways Advisory Ltd http://www.betterways.co.nz/
Betterways is all about making a difference
Our offices are in Queenstown, the hub of tourism in New Zealand. Our company promotes cooperation and commerce between China and New Zealand. We provide advice to businesses and high net worth individuals who wish to successfully navigate through the many opportunities in both countries.
Our people consist of industry leaders and leading professionals. We are a multi-lingual firm, with expertise and experience in English and Chinese culture and business etiquette.
Adding value in today’s business world is at the heart of what we do. Whether it is linking clients with businesses, local community groups or individuals; providing logistical supply chain support; offering guidance on language, culture and/or education; helping companies plan inter-country business trips; or VIP luxury hosting, we pride ourselves on being unique and truly innovative.
We are Advisors
Providing professional and passionate guidance and support for you – call us
Betterways Advisory Limited is a group of leading professionals focused on providing services to ensure you are successful in your business venture. We provide accounting, tax compliance services, financial and operational due diligence and immigration assistance. We also provide a luxury hosting services to those who wish to experience New Zealand privately and exclusively. Betterways Advisory ensures only the highest integrity. Your success and ours depends on that. Over the years we have built up a network of professional independent legal, financial and tax advisors both in New Zealand and China. We get the right advice for you. Our aim is to work towards being a value added partner in the advisor-client relationship because we recognise that the client requires the best knowledge and resources to achieve the best result.
Queenstown contacts given at website:
Betterways Advisory Ltd
PO Box 1640, Level 2, The Mountaineer Building, Cnr Beach & Rees St, Queenstown, New Zealand
Phone: +64 6 868 8990
Email: info@betterways.co.nz
****
Betterways Advisory Ltd as listed by Queenstown Chamber of Commerce:
Betterways Advisory Ltd
Postal Address: PO Box 1640, Queenstown, 9349
Website: http://www.betterways.co.nz
Contact 1: Jo Wright – Business Manager
Contact 2: Jing Song – Asia Pacific Advisor
Email 1: jo@betterways.co.nz
Email 2: song@betterways.co.nz
Phone: 03 442 4474
Categories: Business and Management Services
http://queenstownchamber.org.nz/directory/member/Betterways-Advisory-Ltd
****
A darling refresher on the impact, souped-up views by ARL:
ARL [Animation Research Ltd] was asked to visualize plans for a 28 storey hotel on the Dunedin waterfront in 3D, on behalf of development company Betterways Advisory Ltd. A team of international architects, including New Zealand firm Moller Architects, had been briefed to design a tall, elegant building with high-quality aesthetics.
http://arl.co.nz/index.php/arl-news/124-dunedin-hotel [see slideshow]
If they’re that sure we wouldn’t want to do business with them I think that’s warning enough – except for the DCC for whom all warnings mean the same: “Those aren’t real rocks. Full steam ahead.”
I wonder where the Spooks are in all of this? Working for the Dunedin Corrupt Council’s interests, presenting their rebranded and unoriginal marketing bullshit to clueless and desperate executives, or quietly acting in the best interests of Stakeholders? There is something off about this hyped up project and my gut feeling is we’re getting done again. There are too many desperate and stupid individuals governing council and the same evil bastards happy to screw the city down a little more if there’s something in it for them. These are the people the Spooks are working for.
Make sure to make submissions on the application, people – supporting, opposed or neutral, with or without conditions you want the hearing committee to consider.
For good measure stick it to Mr Rodgers and Dunedin City Council for not playing straight on naming the applicant.
That will be the short paragraph of my initial submission that gives the greatest pleasure to pen in recognition of the current state of business and politics in this Disreputable City. The Concerns I have about Resource Management, of course, will carry the meat.
No-one says you can’t have fun with written and oral submissions. With decorum.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/5600153/Couple-hold-lavish-wedding
It is understood the wife of the developer is a University of Otago graduate who went on to work at Dunedin accountancy firm WHK, where she worked with present managing principal Otago, Matt Taylor.
The ODT was told the woman recently married and her “relationship” with Dunedin meant she wanted to give something back to the city.
Brash crap, eh. Naturally the local boys are falling over themselves to be in the “relationship” too. We heard the story but didn’t pick up that link, Phil. Thanks…….
The new Colonialism. I’d be happy to put some explosives under the slab (hotel) if it helps remove the cancer.
Email:
How about she buy the stadium then? The city can throw in naming rights too since we’re getting truck all for that anyway. The couple are a whole lot prettier looking than the old ducks screwing the ratepayers presently.
Uh-oh, Cull’s Cargo Cult Red-Carpet Council.
Comment at ODT Online:
God forbid
Submitted by Dunner Runner on Sat, 08/09/2012 – 7:40am.
A hotel in that location is a good idea if it’s an attractive feature for the area.
Read more
If that is who the developers are, and there is no shady character hiding in the background, then, in insisting that their identities be kept secret, they may be overestimating their emotional worth in our community. They seem like pretty average kids playing in their rich (by Chinese standards) parents’ companies. We have a bucketload of those here. I don’t see anything on the surface about these 2 young people which is worth all the fuss they are making. Reads more like a cheap marketing stunt.
Nice, now the media is no longer bound to the payments received for their silence. Because there is no other excuse that explains why the ODT, D Scene and any other local or national media hasn’t yet figured out the WHO in this pipe-dream.
Probably a good time to grab JingSongHotel.co.nz.
This does help to explain why Michael Hill is involved it, although technically it is just name dropping by the developer’s lawyer, Steve Rodgers. But it still bothered me why his name was alongside Eion Edgar in the same sentence but I’m guessing it’s another unreality where in their world a Rich Man must be a Good Man.
11th May:
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/208915/100m-hotel-dunedin-waterfront
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/208858/harbour-hotel-proposed-dunedin
I suspect if the media bothered to look they would find Lizhen Ning is behind the artist for this (very expensive cast-iron) project installed at The Hills golf course:
25th July:
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/218526/wolves-bound-lair-hills
That’s a bit rich from someone who signs comments as ‘Anonymous’
Maybe they want to remain under the radar because of nasty personalised attacks and innueundo such as the stuff going on here.
(Links and emails are getting around… looks like a nerve has been struck.)
Couple hold lavish wedding
Nelson Evening Mail on 10 September 2011
Tags: Grand Mercure Nelson Monaco Resort, Ping Cao, China, Jing Soong[sic], Lizhen Ning, Erin Brady Got It Covered, Otago University, Yue Song
A high-budget Chinese wedding ceremony took place at Grand Mercure Nelson Monaco resort on Saturday. The groom Ping Cao owns a major construction business in China and the bride Jing Song’s father, Lizhen Ning, is also a prominent businessman in the country.
Wedding planner Erin Brady, of Nelson-based company Got It Covered, said she was asked to help organise the wedding after Miss Song approached the resort and said it was where she wanted to get married.
Miss Song had three dresses for the event. They include a dress handmade in Hong Kong covered in Swarovski crystals and a handmade dress with special lace from Paris made by Cartier.
About one third of the wedding guests came from China, the rest were from around New Zealand and Australia.
Miss Song went to secondary school in New Zealand and attended Otago University.
Her mother, Yue Song, has moved to Nelson after living in Queenstown and Miss Song had visited Nelson when her mother moved here in the past year.
Miss Song had been captivated by Nelson and said she loved the feeling she got stepping off the plane in Nelson as she felt so relaxed and happy in the region.
Guests were served a menu showcasing New Zealand produce, including prawns, oysters, salmon, scallops, beef and grouper. The cake by Sweet Passion was an apricot liqueur, banana and apricot.
Ms Brady said Mr Cao and Miss Song met, by coincidence, when their mothers arranged a dinner.
The couple met a few times following the dinner and realised they were falling in love, Ms Brady said.
“He went to great lengths to woo her.”
Ms Brady said despite the time pressures and the demands of the wedding, the planning of it had gone smoothly.
She said Monaco Resort staff had been incomparable and suppliers and others involved had been fantastic.
—
{Link as supplied by Phil above http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/5600153/Couple-hold-lavish-wedding -Eds}
### D Scene 26.9.12
Hotel plans opposed (page 5)
By Wilma McCorkindale
The owner of the site of a proposed multi-storey waterfront hotel achieved height restriction changes during harbourside consultation last year. Arthur Barnett Properties [sole director, Tim Barnett] was among those lobbying for the Dunedin City Council to rezone industrial land and successfully sought alleviation of height restrictions for its strip of land at 41 Wharf St during harbourside consultation.[…]The application has attracted 31 submissions so far. Dunedin CBD residents are among those against a towering hotel and apartment project on Dunedin’s waterfront.
{continues} #bookmark
### stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00 30/09/2012
Fancy a litte Miami Vice in Dunedin?
By Olivia Carville – Sunday Star Times
A proposed $100m, 28-storey hotel that will tower over Dunedin’s waterfront has been slammed by local architects as a design that has been helicoptered in straight off the set of Miami Vice.
The New Zealand Institute of Architects southern branch would lodge a submission to raise its concerns with the proposal.
Read more
http://m.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/latest-edition/7748235/Fancy-a-litte-Miami-Vice-in-Dunedin
“The New Zealand Institute of Architects southern branch would lodge a submission to raise its concerns” – bless ’em, it’s going to be damned hard to convince our local cargo-cultists without high-viz credible outside support.
I still say it will never be built. When you consider the fact that there are 164 upmarket apartments – to be sold – as part of the project, it is simply a question of where is the market for them? Not in Dunedin that’s for sure. The project’s commencement will depend on many of these being pre sold. No developer would go ahead without that assurance. Would they? $200 million idiots? Oh! we have seen them haven’t we? Maybe I am wrong, again.
Luckily for Jing Song and her husband, was it, gaining resource consent isn’t reliant on market viability. The Resource Management Act (RMA) can’t touch this. What does the ‘true exception’ – if the planning argument succeeds – provide to the local boys, that is the question. Mr Don Anderson (& Co) has some explaining to do. Bring it on.
—
What is regional economic development under a Key government?*
[*Momentary flow of overseas funds to escalate New Zealand property speculation? – in the manner of Queenstown Lakes? More pain for south of the Steamer Basin, and around town? Build it and they will come, er sadly rugby isn’t coming, is China? #SustainableCommunities – Tui]
LUC-2012-212 Betterways Advisory Limited
Submissions close this Friday 5 October 2012 at 5pm.
Find out how to make a submission at these DCC webpages:
http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/notified-resource-consents
http://www.dunedin.govt.nz/council-online/notified-resource-consents/current-notifieds/luc-2012-212
Betterways sounds like laundry detergent or a discount product line at supermarkets.
I love that Sunday Star-Times selected the Taylor image showing the proposed hotel from the water, as the headline image to its story today.
Wherein, the imaginary gulags flanking the tower (to be built on the railway corridor… noddyland) are synonymous with the life of ‘crime and vice’ perpetuated by CST, ORFU, DCC stadium councillors, DCC-owned company directors, and their tartan friends at Dunedin, Auckland and Eiontown – the same men who once wore bad shorts together at OBHS, some of whom later came to covet and swap trophy wives. Hell, throw in a little Hollywood.
We know these sorts of buildings as The Projects, elsewhere. In the image they serve to take the thrust away from the height of the dead-copy slab. The animator left off carcasses of seized drugrunner boats lining the foreshore, something that adds vernacular charm to Florida and the Everglades, an established sign of blackmarket prosperity.
The Dunedin modelling really should carry the rancid whiff of associated murders, deaths and GBH. Important to stay true to cultural and architectural precedents boldly stolen from paradise capitals, in a colourful waterside resort town for the aged.
Auckland architect Jeremy Whelan has the basic toolkit for this kind of disorder. Not much else. Although, when a student, he could draw quite well. Wonder what he’s on, these days.
The depth of foundation required for this project should be enough to sink it. I really don’t know why it has progressed even to this stage.
Depth of foundation is not an issue for either consents or construction. Why? Well, we already have a major public building that is supported by ‘friction’ piles that float freely in this hydraulically deposited filth way above any solid footing. In the absence of a significant pad or raft to hold them together at the top end (not seen on the cross sections shown at construction open days), they are also free to move independently in small groups of two and three according to the immediate and varied dynamic and static loads that will be placed on them in the event of an earthquake.
The second danger with liquifaction, in the unlikely event that the two major grounded elements of this existing structure actually hold together that long (unlikely in my opinion), is individual ‘capsize’ of each of these structures – Which is what was beginning to happen to the Grand Chancellor in Christchurch. This tendency can be mitigated by having a decent pad and a balanced structure resting on it. The GC appears to have ticked both these boxes and saved its occupants as a result. This second requirement (balance) has been addressed in a novel manner in the Stadium by having a massive third major element (the roof) not only loaded on to one side of each of the two separate grounded stuctures that support it, but actually cantilevered several metres outside the footprint of the two structures relying on the friction piles. This imbalance may be further aggravated by the fact that this roof element appears to be pretty much hinged in the middle above the major beam above the South stand. This would eliminate any arching effect and if either of the two stands started to capsize, could allow the roof to open out at this point and shove outwards horizontally against the capsizing sub-structures even more effectively, thereby accelerating the process.
And it STILL got its consents!
Or did it? The report of the Royal Commisison on the CTV building will guide us on the questions to be asked of the DCC via the LGOIMA with regard to stadium seismic design, inspection and consent documentation when it comes out. Until then Calvin, I suspect the answer to the builders of this structure from the DCC will be ‘No problemo compadre – Hasta la vista!”. With this precedent to appeal to how could it be anything else?
Key’s economic plan is the same as the neoliberals on council, sell off assets (water), privatise them; make a few stakeholders very rich at the expense of the many. After all, the rich have made good choices and so deserve all the help that neoliberals can give them; the not rich have made bad choices that’s why they are not rich, so who cares about them?
Once you could build a Great Wall of China or a Hadrian’s Wall to keep out the barbarians. What a shame this kind of defence doesn’t work anymore.
### radionz.co.nz Monday 1 October 2012
Nine To Noon with Kathryn Ryan
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon
11:50 Urbanist Tommy Honey
Controversial plans for a new waterfront hotel in Dunedin. (8′03″)
Audio | Download: Ogg Vorbis MP3 | Embed
Links provided by RNZ:
Fancy a Little Miami Vice in Dunedin? The Press
Animation Research Ltd slideshow
Dunedin City Council’s current notified resource consent applications
On the weekend several people kindly asked me for some input on district plan matters to be aware of when writing their individual submissions.
Despite my fascination with planning matters and things urban, design, heritage and architecture, I can’t pretend to be a resource management [planning] consultant or legal adviser. If you need advice of this sort you will need to contact an appropriately qualified professional.
—
For initial submissions I rarely go beyond a simple outline of my areas of concern, briefly worded so to allow my expansion at hearing – and beyond, should the decision go to appeal at Environment Court or enter the jurisdiction of another court.
Also, it’s rare for me to draft my initial submission more than three days out from the closing date for submissions.
I used to work alongside a senior planner who like me prefers to meet deadlines when ‘under pressure’ (as much panic as possible)… We would never set out our thoughts and references too soon for the Applicant and their consultants to attempt the demolition of.
Note: These brief initial submissions really only work if submitters are committed to presenting a full submission (written and oral) to the commissioners on the hearing panel.
I can’t stress enough how important it is for each submitter to present at hearing, as a valued member of the Dunedin community.
The time you take, short or long, in front of the hearing panel presenting your submission and being available for questions is the best way to lend weight to your views and opinion. The panel is welcoming to submitters who have never before presented at a hearing.
—
Some submitters will have their own ability to tease out the clauses of the District Plan, the Resource Management Act, the Otago Regional Plan, and other guiding documents (eg the non regulatory Dunedin spatial plan), in assessing the pitfalls or strengths of the Application – their submissions will be available to all formal submitters prior to the resource consent hearing. These submissions can be a great source of information for submitters who are less (or not) familiar with statutory planning requirements and associated legislation. Submitters with less technical planning knowledge can then elect to agree or disagree at hearing with statements made by people with greater knowledge…
—
To write your initial submission due by this Friday, from your own point of view – as a Dunedin citizen, community organisation, neighbourhood group, professional institute or association, or business concern – is of major benefit to the hearing committee. Don’t ever think you need a university degree to have your views taken seriously. This applies whether you support, oppose, or remain neutral on the application.
Should you want the hearing committee to consider conditions you would like tied to the consent if the application is successful, note these in the initial submission.
If among other things you think the application, if consented, is likely to undermine the integrity of the Dunedin City District Plan, say so in your initial submission. You can spell out why in your submission to hearing.
If you think the application, if successful, works for or against the aims and objectives of the Dunedin spatial plan, say so in your initial submission. You can provide your reasons, as you see them, in your submission to hearing.
Note: The district plan (2 volumes) and the spatial plan are both available at the DCC website.
Lastly, for now – City Planning is there to help submitters with any queries about the application and the district plan, and the application/submission process as a whole – don’t hesitate to contact them!
Please make a submission. Please please present your submission at hearing.
[If for any reason you’re not going to present at hearing, then concentrate on writing a more detailed submission by Friday 5 October, 5pm.]
—
For those opposing the Application, these words are helpful when used in your initial submission and your submission to hearing:
“I oppose the Application in its entirety.”
and
“I want the Council to decline the Application.”
What I find amusing in the application is the Viewpoint Booklet produced by the consultants Truescape.
Wide angle shots from long distances show how tiny the hotel would appear to be. Other shots show that the hotel would indeed not be visible at all (when standing at the rear of a park so that the ground obscures the view of the harbour).
I am working on my own set of visualisations showing how the spectre of this building would follow you all around the city. These will be part of my submission at the hearings.
Excellent, chris.
I agree – the Truescape material is highly suspect in the townscape and landscape context. We’re dealing with a cultural heritage landscape, a planned city; the technical imagery presented in application therefore has to be faithful to the ‘real’ effects of this tall building on the city, should it be built. If (yes) the Applicant is minimising effects, they’re making a BIG mistake.
Beats me why the ODT editor would seek to abridge the chairman of NZIA Southern! Length?
[scanned/OCR]
Otago Daily Times
Monday, October 1, 2012
Letters to the editor (page 10)
Imported hotel design poor fit for Dunedin
Islay Little commented (ODT, 25.9.12) that if a large five-star hotel is viable, surely architects could do a lot better …
In fact, Dunedin is fortunate to have very good engineers, contractors, architects and others associated with design and the building industry. Generally, good design is all about community and a wise use of local resources, including people.
How does this hotel proposal stack up? Well, it is an import that did not grow out of our community and it does not fit our physical or cultural context at all well.
Topographically, it is a 28-storey fencepost in a three-storey landscape. Given the prevailing winds up and down the harbour, any wind at a tangent to the opposing building faces will cause turbulence on the windward and lee sides.
Within the existing context of smaller-scale structures, the proposed building also lacks visual manners. Colour use will not be effective in achieving a better visual fit because, from almost every viewpoint within the city, 28 storeys will silhouette against the sky.
The hidden infrastructure is even more scary. Twenty-eight storeys of hotel accommodation can house a lot of people. How do guests get from the harbour basin to the centre of the city? Vehicle traffic flows are equally murky.
For me, the greatest affront is in the name of altruism – doing something for Dunedin. Are the hotel planners totally unaware of the fabulous resource that Dunedin has in the adjacent warehouse district? This is a local, available resource and contains an embodiment of energy, past and future.
Tim Heath, Dunedin
Chairman, Southern branch of New Zealand Institute of Architects
[Abridged]
****
Tim’s letter is followed by Lyndsey’s, also abridged. Why?
Islay Little (ODT, 25.9.12) does well to remind us that our views on the proposed 28-storey hotel on Wharf St must be submitted to the council by October 5.
Miss this opportunity to tell our elected representatives how we would like our city to look and we have only ourselves to blame if the outcome is an eyesore.
In terms of both site and scale, an eyesore is exactly what this oversized edifice would be. Standing between the warehouse precinct and the nearby wharves, whose proximity was the reason for the development of so many commercial buildings in this particular area, it would loom over the many beautifully restored heritage properties in this part of our city, three times taller than the tallest of these, Consultancy House. It would block the view of the harbour, which would otherwise be available to guests at a refurbished chief post office hotel and detract from the dramatic impact of the nearby cenotaph.
The council has declared itself to be right behind the regeneration of this unique heritage precinct and has exciting plans for its future.
What a pity it would be then if the council were to undermine its good intentions by inviting a very large cuckoo, in the form of this incongruous hotel, into its own nest. Let’s do what we can to prevent that happening.
Lyndsey Garden, Broad Bay
[Abridged]
Now we have the craven editorial approach to the Waterfront Hotel – NOT an architectural or urban design brain cell in evidence at the editorial desk, just the stench of Old Boy cronyism! 41 Wharf St, a “wasteland” – an absurd statement. SHAME.
—
### ODT Online Sat, 13 Oct 2012
Editorial: Dunedin’s waterfront hotel
…But part of the wider debate must also be whether Dunedin needs to be more open-minded about development. If a private developer cannot spend many millions building on “wasteland” in a relatively low-density industrial area, on a project that could attract visitors and provide financial benefits to the city, where should such a developer go – other than to another city?
Read more (but why waste your time on nincompoops?)
—
We understand the Dunedin City Council is currently negotiating (PPP) to have the (waterfront) ‘hotel rooms’ built on available land it owns, corner Moray Place and Filleul St. The elevated site that has been earmarked for hotel development for many years in association with the Town Hall redevelopment project. It is currently a contoured car park area. Stricter district plan rules apply for the site – expect a lower building!
Tommy Honey had some choice things to say about it: “if you want to look at bad architecture, start here, this is hideous”; a building “with no redeeming features”; “completely inappropriate for the waterfront”; if a student had presented it to him it would have got a “fail”; … appears to be sandwiched on a traffic island…
http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/ninetonoon/audio/2534170/urbanist-tommy-honey.asx
Honey is unfamiliar with Dunedin so he believed the blotted in 6 or 7 storey developments on the other side of the rail corridor really existed – even so he thinks the scale of this is outrageous. In fact he thinks it’s so bad he wants Mollers to explain the connection they have with this design – he can’t believe that a reputable firm like Gordon Moller really was involved in designing it.
Yes Ro, it’s interesting that the initial press at the time of the ‘project launch’ at the Stadium said Moller was involved (welcome to the upper echelon of NZIA politics with that name; the club with Athfield as a member too).
However, then the application arrives and the “Dunedin Hotel Architectural Design Statement” (dated 29 August 2011) is by Ignite Architects Ltd (Managing Director: Jeremy Whelan, Auckland).
The Dunedin Hotel design statement is so minimal and ‘anonymous’ you have to wonder. Maybe they couldn’t afford Moller, or Moller wasn’t prepared to dent the Dunedin harbourside to this extent. Or some weirdo partnership is in place that conveniently leaves off the Moller name. How curious. Usually, there’s a whole lot of room for trumpeting.
Another thing Ro, the imaginary gulag buildings flanking the proposed hotel tower look remarkably similar to the Britomart Carpark project by IGNITE, see the mixed-use Britomart Oriental here. But maybe that’s just ARL (Ian Taylor) licence for a go-ahead Dunedin. Either way, it’s bad licence and merely fantastical (rail corridor precludes these buildings happening), except for construction potential in the new Harbourside Zone, south of the Steamer Basin, or which resource management consultant Don Anderson is more than well aware.
—
New Zealand Companies website:
IGNITE ARCHITECTS LIMITED (366601)
http://www.business.govt.nz/companies/app/ui/pages/companies/366601
—
IGNITE (from their website):
overview
The IGNITE Group comprises IGNITE Architects, IGNITE Building Consultancy, IGNITE Interiors and IGNITE Managed Environments.
The Group centres around IGNITE Architects Limited, which was formed in 1987. IGNITE is an established Australasian practice with offices located in Auckland, Tauranga, Christchurch and Sydney and a strong network of partners throughout the Pacific. Our core team comprises over 50 staff in our New Zealand offices and a further 10 in Sydney, who service both New Zealand and Australian projects.
IGNITE successfully delivers masterplanning, architectural, interior and building consultancy projects throughout New Zealand and other worldwide locations. Our team’s range of international experience enables us to adapt international best practice and develop relevant property solutions for the unique regional contexts of each project.
Our practice areas include:
Retail
Mixed Use & Entertainment
Commercial & Industrial
Masterplanning & Urban Design
Health
Education
Civic & Community
Leisure & Recreation
Hospitality
Hotels / Resorts
Workplace Environments
Residential
Sustainable Design
Consulting
IGNITE Link
@@@@ Notice the photo, IGNITE works out of a heritage building in Auckland (1 Watt Street, Parnell). Oh the cruel irony.
What I can’t believe is that those cramped and confined cabins are 5-star apartments. Surely your average Dunedin studio apartment of that size is let to your average student for $250 a week. Does gold-plating some taps up the star-rating or is it the swimming pool above the car park? Or the skyline restaurant?
Similarly the hotel rooms – they look the same size as what I’ve paid $100 a night for elsewhere in NZ or Aus – somewhat larger than what I’ve paid that for in the Marais (Rue de les garçons mauvais) or opposite the Duomo in Firenze … In fact, I know what the dimensions replicate! The somethings Inn – a chain of $50 a night motels in the US. So what am I missing?
[Well, I’m paying $250 a week for a one bedroom apartment in Pitt Street – and the 1930s non-student apartment building is two-storeyed in brick with serious earthquake proneness issues. We pay market rents. No gold taps here.]
The urban design statement is actually just a bit too half-hearted to be the product of the building’s architect, don’t you think? Where he’s not damning it with faint praise, he’s convoluting his sense so much as to make no sense at all.
Both documents are very weak:
8. Design statement (PDF, 78.4 KB)
This document is a scanned copy of the application for resource consent. [IGNITE]
9. Letter from Urban Design consultant (PDF, 147.9 KB) [Anderson & Co]
—
More reports – LUC-2012-212 (application)
Elizabeth. Sorry about Pitt St. How about an apartment in a 28 storey hotel…if the rental is competitive, of course? Classy, and you don’t know whom you could be hobnobbing with.
I’m in, Peter! :(
Actually, the former chief executive at Dunedin City Council when wearing that hat is unlikely to have got out the red carpet for the height and form of this proposed hotel, methinks. Unlike twitterings from Cull and Orders. I hope the good ones at City Planning have been schooling Orders meanwhile (in the background)
Hi Elizabeth
Here is a link to the Amenities Society webpage article on the proposed hotel development. http://wp.me/pv7k2-wH I hope your readers will take the time to read the Society’s views on the proposal. As a group we’ve debated this proposal deeply by committee, telephone and email. Our take on this matter is the lack of financial, infrastructural and reserve management analysis by the City Council over this development. Those aspects of the proposal are difficult to debate in an RMA forum, but need open discussion so that citizens understand what the Council’s commitment to this project might be.
Regards
Daseditor
Thanks Daseditor! The article should be published as an opinion piece in the ODT :)
I agree the RMA process cannot touch financial viability of the proposed hotel OR the effects the project, if consented, is likely to have for the Dunedin economy and the financial wellbeing of the Dunedin community.
Although these things can be mentioned in submission, the ‘independent’ hearing commissioners (which may include councillors…) have no real ability under the RMA to consider or act on information of this kind; very often they feel obliged to say exactly this – making it plain – to participants at hearing. Those attending the Stadium Plan Change hearings will remember this point (‘point of order’), delivered by the panel of commissioners. It’s acknowledged that not many submitters understood the point, or the context of it.
IMPORTANT
Please read the article at the Amenities Society website.
### ODT Online Wed, 3 Oct 2012
Hotel submissions: 92 against, 16 for
By Chris Morris
Two opposing views of Dunedin’s future are about to collide over a planned $100 million waterfront hotel. Critics of the planned 28-storey hotel have flooded the Dunedin City Council with submissions, arguing the building would tower over its surroundings and the proposal is an attack on the heritage fabric of the city.
Read more
• Council staff have scheduled a four-day public hearing, to begin in early December. Mr Worthington said it was not yet known whether that would be enough time.
“We should not turn business away merely in favour of a few ardent – and usually older – letter-writers who believe their own personal idea of aesthetics trumps all else.”
There’s that personal attack again the big vision supporters are so fond of. Anyone who disagrees with Stakeholder interests in this town seems to get labeled in various ways.
It was completely unnecessary to add “- and usually older – ” to that sentence but it gives you a clue to the person.
What I can’t get my head around is the discrepancy between wanting to rehabilitate the warehouse area and, at the same time, putting an ugly and towering 29 storey hotel in its midst.
When the council announced their support for helping those truly visionary developers in the warehouse area, I felt that, at last, something really good was happening here in Dunedin. Then along comes this hotel proposal. Is this just a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing or is it that powerful interests have pushed in and the council has just folded? Again.
A bad idea, that makes vague promises for future development in Dunedin, should not be grabbed in desperation.We have just been down this road with the stadium.I hope the council’s initial enthusiasm was just a knee jerk one and that wiser heads have since prevailed.The council needs to listen to the community’s concerns. Otherwise, it is buying into another divisive fight on top of the ongoing stadium saga. Does Dave Cull and his council want this to be another negative hallmark to be remembered by?
Just to confirm what was said above, Craig Moller from Moller Architects responded to my email and said ‘We are NOT the architects nor have we designed the proposed hotel in Dunedin’ (his emphasis).
Thanks for clearing that up. Craig Moller has more taste, as does his firm. He’s an excellent architect in his own right.
The council has a majority of members who go all googly-eyed at the sight of something chestbeatingly Big. Small alterations of probably benefit much larger than their cost, and very tiny risk should they not work out as brilliant as was hoped, just don’t cut it. These are the men of Bill Birch & Muldoon’s Think Big era. “Move on” is what they say when they have made another cockup, but moving on from Big Is Best is what they won’t, can’t, do.
Well, well! Amazing that someone had the gall to suggest their involvement at the outset
Distraction. Look what my left hand is doing, don’t notice the right.
Interesting, isn’t it – noting what’s been abridged! My latest concluded (abridged from *** to end):
“…Cycle tracks, the Caversham tunnel, playgrounds for all ages where children can play, skateboarders can practice and display their skills to less adventurous people who come to exercise by walking in a lively environment, a swing here and there around the suburbs for both children and adults to enjoy, these are small projects that do not involve the fools’ gold of Think Big promises. ***We have suffered mightily from that mindset, only to find that instead of taking Dunedin forward they have reduced our ability to even keep up with best standards of core business. No more naive belief in “One Great Answer” that will save Dunedin, please!”
Goodness me, another abridgement, this time a post about the misleading visuals. I wonder what else the writer had said???
The dear old Otago Rugby Times does not want us to make connections with the stadium ‘One Answer’ debacle; we might remember those responsible are still in positions of influence around council. It is clear that we are all expected to get ‘in behind’ the great pronouncements of the Business Geniuses at the Chamber of Commerce and on the DCC finance, strategy and development committee [FSD], both of which supported the stadium fiscal nightmare. Your mistake was you did not wax lyrical about the glories and wondrousness of the Oval Ball and its thick necked and very well paid managers.
Salaries paid by us and which makes corporate rugby and a bunch of feckless rates bludgers.
So if Moller Architects are not involved, why did Ian Taylor claim they were briefed to design it?
Personally I don’t believe the hotel will ever eventuate. If someone told me that an 8-10 story hostel for international students would be built on the proposed site then I might have believed them, but a 28-storey 5 star hotel stuck in an industrial zone sandwiched between a motorway off-ramp and some railway lines? It’s just not plausible. It was only reported a year ago that hotels and similar accommodation had done worse than expected as RWC visitors opted to stay in camper vans and holiday parks, so have things magically improved since then? Has the stadium surprised everyone and managed to procure a list of noteworthy events that will lure visitors to stay here? The answer is obviously no. Is there any chance of said events ever actually coming here? Very little to zero. What do we even know about the supposed developers? Virtually nothing other than they appear to be invisible. I predict their hotel will prove invisible as well.
Alerted by media to the fact that Jing Song’s name no longer appears in Betterways Advisory Ltd’s entry at the Queenstown Chamber of Commerce website. See previous comment:
https://dunedinstadium.wordpress.com/2012/09/07/waterfront-hotel-dcc-to-notify-resource-consent-application/#comment-26891
Damn those housemaids (Mr Rodger and Co), they vacuum everything, away.
****
Nor does Jing Song’s name appear at LinkedIn – gone disappeared.
She was listed there as “Jing Song (accountant; senior advisor at Betterways Advisory Ltd, Queenstown; formerly of Dunedin)” http://nz.linkedin.com/pub/j-s/55/895/860
See previous comment:
https://dunedinstadium.wordpress.com/2012/09/08/waterfront-hotel-dunedin-applicant-names/#comment-26924
Proof by deletion. The deletion is, however, too late.
How inept covering up something after the fact. It just makes things worse for them and creates further distrust. The fact that the developer is not formally announced speaks volumes about the people involved. They have certainly started off an unseemly paper trail on themselves.
It’s plausible because someone stands to benefit in a financial sense. Who? Well, one industry that comes to mind is the construction industry. They were mighty keen on the stadium too. And they got what they wanted then.
I even remember workers from the firm that built the stadium turning up at the South Dunedin meeting against the stadium; they were very keen to let us know that we were ‘glass half full’ kind of people.
She does still exist in the companies office as owning Crown Range Cellular
As advised:
‘Betterways and Crown Range Cellar Ltd (of which Jing Song is director and shareholder) appear to have the same office in Queenstown.’
I wonder if the ‘minders’ want to clean up the NZ Companies register too ?
Why hasn’t the media uncovered this? This is the stuff of conventional investigative journalism and should have a reporter bursting with enthusiasm to crack it. They’re all keen on providing press release type updates yet no-one has cracked it. That requires major influence and money to control and certainly excludes those small fry minders.
I still think the whole thing’s a crock of exquisite shite and somebody’s up to no good somewhere else.
SEEK – Marketing Analyst Job in Otago
http://www.seek.co.nz/job/230522593 Sep 2012 – … and CV via email to info@crownrangecellar.com Applications close 27th September 2012. Jo Wright Business Manager Crown Range Cellar …
Where have I heard that name, Jo Wright, before?
Jo Wright – Business Manager, Betterways Advisory Ltd, Queenstown
Well, well, well, well, well. Surprise, surprise. Was she ever employed by the Dunedin Art Gallery as their shop manager?
Don’t know, possibly? If the same person I think I missed her tenure there, oddly.
DANGER, DUNEDIN! DANGER! STAKEHOLDER APPROACHING!
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/228779/speculation-mounts-over-hotel-backers
Why should Dunedin people trust Eion Edgar. He was president of the ORFU when that organisation continued to take pokie funds illegally, via TTCF, from the poor of south Auckland, for professional rugby. And who is assisting the ‘blind’ for present and former directors of the ORFU Board, to avoid their being investigated and had up for fraud.
Edgar is past his use-by date of honesty and believability. All gone.
If he likes the $100m hotel design so much why doesn’t he plonk it on the Queenstown foreshore. Yeah, I didn’t think so.
Lol. Exactly right Anonymous. Good to see a stakeholder step forward and makes his connection known though. We can now make note of how this all proceeds. And who is pulling the strings. I love how Cull accuses anyone of racism if they dare to challenge the secrecy around who is behind this whole hotel idea. Almost as amusing as accusing people of ‘getting personal’ if they challenge his political decisions. He is becoming more entertaining the nearer we get to the election. Only comes out when he is protecting stakeholders though it seems.
I have just sent the following for moderation – I suspect it will be edited:
Strange that Eion Edgar should consider his word for the “credibility” of the backers sufficient to persuade Dunedin. First of all, I for one have drawn my own conclusion about the value of Sir Eion’s word from his involvement in the building of the stadium named for his firm. And secondly, is the backers’ “credibility” what is being questioned? Is anyone saying the backers are unbelievable? Aren’t the questions that their anonymity raises questions like whether or not they are criminals or members of a criminal organisation; whether or not they are eligible for the NZ citizenship that their money will buy? And whether or not they are open to the suggestion that they choose a more suitable site and a less offensive design?
Ha. Wonder if the ODT will do an investigation into the background of Sir Stakeholder’s ability to ask us to ‘trust him’? Nah. too awkward, too difficult, and so, back to looking the other way.
Cull is becoming increasingly fascinating to observe, I suspect we are watching personified in him the old maxin ” power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely'”. From a purely historical sense, it is a jolly good show!
It seems unlikely that this structure would ever realise a realistic return on the capital committed to on its own account if it was ever built. The market just does not seem to be there, and for a $100 million investment in improvements, one would have thought that a few hundred grand more site investment would have secured a far better lump of land to put it on. The ex-rugby stadium on a nice big flat well serviced piece of land quite close by with a motivated vendor for instance looks a lot more attractive for one example. The block of land occupied by weeds and semi-derelict woolsheds just North of the Foobar would be another. The vacant site of the ORC harbourside head office extravaganza yet another.
One is thus left with the strong possibility that this scheme is likely to deliver its benefits to its backers and associated ‘hangers on‘ in ways other than bums in hot tubs. As the networks that seem to be behind this proposal stretch both into the de-facto capital of the South Island (Wanaka/Queenstown) and beyond that back into China, it may well be impossible to establish just exactly what the ‘take’ is and when, in what form, how, where and by whom how it will be taken. However, it is hard to see how much of the final benefits would find their way back to Dunedin if the motivations and planning behind this building are not related to its eventual performance as a hotel/apartment complex.
The major issue then for Dunedin is whether these plans require the thing to be built or not, and it is here that the involvement of Chinese interests becomes significant. If it was just the locals backing it, then it might well be possible to assume that the money simply isn’t there, that the thing would not be built, and that the whole process was a bluffing play for planning rights for this land, land swaps or some kind of public infrastructure delivery for private development deal etc. This is an outcome that is still worth avoiding as it is hard to see how the wider community could fail to lose out in some way shape or form if this was the situation, but the effects might only be ’minor’.
Short of an outright rejection (preferred), a watertight requirement to complete the structure in its proposed form within a reasonably short period of time as part of any consent might well be enough to make this proposal go away if these are indeed the sorts of motivations that are driving it.
However, Chinese backing means that we could be looking at some kind of a credible plan that requires this thing to be fully or partially imposed upon this city to deliver its benefits to its backers, whatever those benefits are. There is no doubt that the capital exists in China, and in the hands of small groups of people with NZ connections, to build this thing. The potential damage to this community that could accrue from a structure that was fully (or partially) built for reasons other than generating the proposed type of commercial business within Dunedin may be very significant indeed.
For this reason, the DCC really do require full disclosure from the backers of this project. Who they are, and details of how this proposal fits into their wider business arrangements. A further requirement would be the acceptance of some binding guarantee of completion in a timely manner without any further public input if the Councillors responsible are to properly decide if this building and its various breaches of the regulations that are requested are truly justified by the benefits that it supposedly offers.
You can’t plonk it down adjacent to the Fubar because that would require a District Plan change due to the height restriction of 65m. That would require consent hearings and be notified etc etc additional expense.
You can only have it in an area which has no height restriction i.e. Industrial Zone 1. Which 41 Wharf St conveniently is. And is the only parcel of land with a harbour view in that area. Then you only incur the cost of a notified consent hearing, at far less expense.
No ratepayer input. I’ve heard that tune before. I’ve also heard an anti-stadium Mayor say “just enough more spending to make it work”. Making it work, when “it” is the stadium, involves large-scale ongoing siphoning of the city’s money from all sources away from necessary as well as highly desirable, high community return, spending.
A half-built edifice for which “making it work” roading, bridges and other infrastructure had already been provided…. tell me I’m being an old gloomy-boots if I foresee more of what’s already been proved to work for a small sector’s benefit, to the disadvantage of the rest of us.
And what difference would roading, bridge etc made to the value of other land over that side of the railway line? What other property owners would be delighted to see the DCC sweet-talked / thumbscrewed into setting up the area for more profitable (to certain individuals) uses, with scope for changes and variations of plan to be pushed because an increasingly debt-ridden council will bend over (in any direction they’re asked) for the “carrot” of increased rates.
Anonymous, if it was on a piece of land that was bigger than a bootlace it wouldn’t need to breach these height restrictions, and would probably be far cheaper to build and cop far less flak too for that reason. Ugly is far more acceptable if it lies low.
I don’t know if the hotel project, backed by Edgar, is an attempt to take attention away from the stadium debacle, also backed by Edgar, or if he really wants it to go ahead. If Edgar really is serious, then I think that it is a done deal. It will be the stadium again. The ODT will back Edgar’s vision, the stadium cabal will genuflect and back him, and Greater Dunedin and Butcher and Stevenson will be too timid to make a peep of protest. Dunedin citizens? Unfortunately we vote back in the very people who go right ahead and siphon our funds out for stakeholders. We do not scare them.
As we all know a financial investment is not important for stakeholders so long as Dunedin citizens get to pay, and the profit gets put into a few well connected hands. That is the stadium ‘business plan’ afterall.
I don’t need to rely on the word of Edgar as a recommendation for the ‘exceptional’ reputation of people he knows. I prefer to judge people for myself. He actually falls into a logic trap. If they are so exceptional, why be secret about them? Developers usually love to put their name out there for some exciting, new project they are initiating. A recent example are the people who are planning the 23 apartment complex in Filleul St. They were named in the ODT.
—
{Was that a Tartan tie? -Eds}
Note how the hotel is being sold to us as a necessary due to the stadium (god knows how they come up with this) which seems to be further evidence that the hotel is a serious idea and that the Hotel stakeholders will come to council with their hands out for ratefunds. Stakeholders like Edgar have obviously seen how gormless Cull and Greater Dunedin are (they know Syd’s cabal are on stakeholders’ side), so Edgar and mates see another opportunity to make good on ratepayers dime. That is the precedent that Cull and Greater Dunedin set when they could not unite and stand up to the stadium cabal, and when they let the ORFU walk all over them.
He operates in a different economy. So let’s try that.
(Thanks for the idea, Source)
—
WANTED
Design geek able to ‘superimpose’ image of the (Dunedin) Waterfront Hotel in the yard of Sir Edgar’s Queenstown property, blocking his view of Lake Wakatipu. The house is located at Kelvin Heights. Your recompense: the thrill of contemporary imaging, and definitely no pay.
Good grief. If he objected to this ‘vision’ in his own backyard, he would be a NIMBY. Not his type of people. Usually.
Is that stock photo of Eion from the black tie event where the Stakeholders, some multi millionaires many times over, left their booze bill to the ratepayers to pick up? I guess the salivating Otago Daily Times wouldn’t see the irony in that.
This latest ego blow up by the GOB is a repeat of his arrogance in the NBR article: http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/forsyth-barr-head-confident-dunedin-stadium-haters-will-see-light-104766.
How long do you think it will be before he calls anyone who disagrees with his latest money grab hotel haters too?
I think a photo of that big lifeless glass box out front of his Queenstown house would be totally appropriate.
ODT staffers will be rueing it’s not April 1.
Look, I understand how people can get sucked into that sphere. Wealth, power and glamour. The chance of a little going your way and all that. But I just can’t take him seriously. This bloke hangs out in a corporation that likes its name printed long and large across the tallest buildings it can find. Seriously, every time I see Forsyth Barr stamped on top of a building I can’t help chuckling.
This reference is dedicated to Sir Edgar. It appeared on the ODT opinion page today, and originally in the Fresno Bee newspaper:
Posted on Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Opinion
Unraveling the political art of the repeated lie
By ANDREW FIALA | The Fresno Bee
Politicians are adept at exaggeration and obfuscation. They spin the truth, occasionally telling outright lies. Large numbers of people then repeat the latest political hogwash, forwarding it, posting it and replicating it in the media echo chamber. With enough reverberation, even obvious humbug can sound like truth.
It is not surprising that politicians stretch the truth. Five centuries ago, Niccolò Machiavelli [1469 – 1527] noted that a successful politician had to be as cunning as a fox. A sly political fox knows how to manipulate, ingratiate, provoke and inspire.
A good politician understands that social life is lubricated by white lies and insincere pleasantries. We say thank you when we don’t mean it. We give unwarranted compliments. And we smile and nod even when we disagree. Social life would be cold and hostile if we were unwilling or unable to dissemble.
It is interesting that we are so willing to go along with the fakery and deception.
Politicians know how to appeal to our basic credulity. We are social animals who respond to the moods of our fellows without much concern for truth. We like to repeat gossip and rumours. We tend to believe and trust those who are like us.
We prefer stories that reinforce our other ideas and beliefs, pleasant stories that are easy to understand. No politician is going to admit that public affairs are incredibly complex, that human behaviour is difficult to control and that unpredictable events will disrupt even our best-laid plans. The politician tells us instead that he or she has a clear plan for success and confident knowledge of the situation. And we are glad to believe. We desire certainty in an uncertain world.
Read more
● Andrew Fiala is a professor of philosophy and director of the Ethics Centre at California State University Fresno.
Also to think the name, Forsyth Barr, an investment company, has attached naming rights to a financially failing enterprise that has divided a city. Not a good look. Invest with Forsyth Barr. Not bloody likely.
Yes, it got entirely cringe-worthy at: “But it does often seem the automatic response by many to development is overwhelmingly negative, even if there is no financial cost to the ratepayer.”
Overwhelmingly negative? No financial cost to the ratepayer? The first emotive and the second a bunch of crock. These are more examples of the paper’s desperate belief in the flawed visions of a few Stakeholders instead of focusing on balanced reporting and newsworthiness.
Holy farnarkles!
One thing we don’t need is more sprawl, more long gaps between occupied busy buildings. Imagine the impression of anyone staying at the cereal box, coming out the door into – what? Or are they intended to stay inside, shopping at the franchised shops, eating and drinking in the facilities inside the box, emerging only into the indoor parking area to get into a taxi or rental car to go to a tourist attraction (incl rugby at the Fubar, of course!) or the airport.
Spreading a slow-growing town out only makes it look depressed and depressing, blocks and blocks of inner city nuthin-happ’nin’. During university vacations it’s a bit like that, which permanent residents tend to appreciate for a change, knowing town will fill up again soon. But just think how sad it would look to visitors. “Opening up” the waterfront area can only lead to dilution of city buzz, at huge cost to ratepayers for infrastructure and no advantage to us or the vast majority of business people, only the few who seem to have special agendas.
Starting to harp…
http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/editorial/230227/dunedins-waterfront-hotel#comment-34791
Latest from the owner of the former Chief Post Office in the Exchange:
Work to date on the building includes it being secured, re-roofed, and steel beams for the atrium installed.
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/230184/committed-hotel-some-stage
‘A council hearings committee chaired by Cr Colin Weatherall would consider Betterways’ application for resource consent in public from December 3 to December 6…’
Cr Colin Weatherall. Stadium Councillor. Syd’s Pet.
It’s already a done deal.
If you still don’t believe it feel free to read the story and count the number of F.U. comments made by the lawyer.
Hotel project spokesman confident of go-ahead
By Chris Morris on Sat, 10 Nov 2012
http://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/234130/hotel-project-spokesman-confident-go-ahead
(And by the way, these hotel stories have the same marketing presence as the Carisbrook might-or-might-not-sale up-chucks.)