Baywatch Submission
Regional Sports Park Submission
On behalf of BayWatch HB 22/5/08
Written by Angela Hair and Anna Reid
Thankyou for the opportunity to comment on the proposed regional sports park.
This project has been in the planning for a number of years, growing steadily in scope and cost as
the months have gone on. It is timely to take a pause and ask the public if the ‘final’ plans and
financial and community consequences are indeed what they want.
In recent months the Mayor has invited members of the Hastings community to participate in a
Sustainability Forum of which I was a part.
A number of clear messages relevant to the RSP came from this forum:
- to build self-reliant and autonomous communities that are resilient in the face of
global warming and rising fuel costs - to encourage walking and cycling as a primary means of transport
- to increase public transport patronage
- to protect the fertile Plains land for the production of food
- to discourage urban sprawl and encourage well-designed urban intensification
- to use environmentally sustainable design principles
- to reduce, reuse, and recycle
In the light of these clear goals, how does the Regional Sports Park stack up?
1. Building self reliant and autonomous communities
Centralisation of sporting facilities into one huge park takes away the opportunity for sports to
be fostered within communities, flourishing on the strength of families and community members
working together. This is the way sport has flourished over the years and is still the best
formula for encouraging participation at grassroots level.
There is a risk that existing facilities will either lose patronage in favour of the Sport Park or
alternatively the Sport Park will not be well supported because people prefer to use their local
facilities. Either outcome would be a waste of ratepayers funding.
While the design team put ‘Not cannibalising other facilities’ as number 1 priority it seems to
me impossible that our region can financially support both a regional sports park and existing
sporting facilities when our Council already has projected debt of $108 million.
The funding that Mr Kelt is hoping to source for this Plan is largely coming from either our rates or our taxes. Where are the private investors who will fund this enormous investment?
What ‘user-pays’ assumptions underlie the financial modelling? Ever more borrowing doesn’t
sound ‘self-reliant’ or ‘autonomous’ but puts us ever more in the pockets of financial dealmakers
who can take the money and run when the going gets tough, leaving the rate-payer
funding the shortfall over successive generations.
2. Encouraging Walking and Cycling
Walking and cycling are a key part of all health and fitness strategies, both as a means of
transport and at a recreational level. Increasing fuel costs will accelerate the need for walking
or cycling options.
This park is much further from the centre of the population area it is to serve than many of the
existing facilities – too far for many to cycle or walk.The Sports Park, having the expressway
and the proposed Northern Arterial route along Everden Road at its boundaries, will make
walking and cycling difficult. From the maps I have seen cycling/walking links to the surroundings
suburbs are non-existent although there is mention of linkages with Frimley and
Lyndhurst in the larger documents. Why have these not been shown on the concept maps?
The recent investment by Councils in the Rotary Pathway has been a constructive means by
which to encourage walking and cycling and provide an alternative transport route. What
consideration has been given to how the Rotary Pathways would link to the Regional Sports
Park?
3. Increasing public transport use
Since the RSP was first mooted, the substantial increase in the cost of fuel is effecting families
throughout the district. Public transport becomes one means by which families could access
the Sport Park. While mention has been made of bus parks in the plan, the lack of consultation
with the HBRC Land Transport Committee regarding how public transport could
service the RSP or could be afforded by the region, suggests little real commitment to this
transport option.
4. Protecting the Plains Soil
The total land utilised by the Regional Sports Park is substantial (30 hectares) and, when
combined with the land ‘earmarked’ for surrounding residential areas bounded by the
Expressway, will deplete even further the Plains soil suitable for horticulture. Our soils, along
with our underground water resource and wonderful climate, are the engine that drive our
local economy and the scale of this project blatantly disregards the intent of the District Plan.
5. Discourage urban sprawl
Traditional Neighbourhood Design, built around the 5 minute walk, a clear centre and mixed
commercial, sporting and cultural facilities allow for sustainable communities to develop.
Encouraging urban sprawl by building the Sports Park and extending residential suburbs onto
‘greenfields’ rather than encouraging renewal within existing suburbs forces people to
become even more reliant on their cars or be excluded from activities, and makes public
transport costly to develop and maintain.
Centralising sports facilities will erode the strength of our existing communities through
diversion of families and resources away from existing facilities.
6. Use Environmentally Sustainable Design
The Regional Sport Park design does incorporate Environmentally Sustainable Design
standards including energy and water efficiency, use of sustainable materials etc. These
principles could equally be applied to a 10 year programme to upgrade the existing sporting
facilities, including the halls, sports clubs, toilet blocks etc that are already part of our
communities and may be better utilised by community groups if there were upgraded.
7. Reduce, reuse, recycle
Surely a thorough assessment of existing facilities, their current use, their suitability for
existing and future sporting codes is essential information for the public and Council
representatives to be able to assess whether the substantial outlay proposed for the RSP is
needed or justifiable. There could be some justification for moving the Soccer fields to the
RSP to make way for Softball expansion as has been publicly commented upon, but I do not
support moving Netball or Tennis as there is space at Sylvan Park and Havelock North to
expand both these sporting codes. With further investment and expansion, the current
facilities could meet current and future needs.
Finally I would like to remind you of an observation made in my 2006 during our LTCCP
submission.
Successful ecosystems are:
- complex,
- biologically diverse,
- self-sustaining,
- integrated
and buffering, - absorbing and more resilient.
Without these features ecosystems are monocultural, lack diversity, are dependent on ever
increasing and expensive inputs, and ultimately collapse. When a few powerful people are
allowed to monopolise the resources of the many we end up with unstable and unsustainable
community systems and a dissatisfied and disenfranchised population excluded from the very
resources they paid for through their rates and taxes.
We have grave concerns about the scale of this development and do not think that it should
proceed beyond Stage 1. We would however support a Sports Strategy that invested in existing
community facilities and gave people the skills, training and resources to participate at
multiple levels. Our schools and Council-owned sports parks already allow for sporting involvement
for young people and could be extended to allow for weekend, after school and
holiday programmes for a wider range of age groups, if a well-planned, well-resourced
community based sporting initiative was developed.
Comments
BEE-FRIEND BAYBUZZ
Baybuzz needs your support! Become a BayBuzz Friend and receive discounts from our local merchant supporters.
-
