172 days to go 20.3.2012

by

Yesterday the Gallery was closed for ‘electrical work’. Love to know what that’s about.

double-click to enlarge

 

And tonight the Laman Street plan was discussed at Council.

You can read the council papers on this page  Try not to feel the irony or the irritation I was overcome by.

‘The removal of the ageing figs has taken care of  a significant risk issue.’ There’ll be a ‘ceremonial’ space and the opportunity for outdoor art exhibitions and market stalls and cars will be a low priority – yeah: travelling so slowly you’ll be at risk of being run over.

And we’ll have a ‘link’ for pedestrians and cyclists between Laman, Darby and King Streets – as though we didn’t have that before – and an ‘enhanced’ entry to the gallery. But getting rid of the trees wasn’t about any of this.

At Council it was agreed to leave this to lie on the table till some reports are received: from the environmental section of council, something on cable vaults, and alignment with the street tree masterplan – watch out if the tree team have anything to do with this. Wonder if they’ve worked out you can bore under the street to put down cables. Probably not. Eejits.

I read every now and again in the Herald and online that there are people who love the look of Laman Street now. Takes all kinds.

An arborist friend said he had no doubt that in seventy years we’ll have a nice canopy in the street.

Home

And thanks to Sharon for this:

Advertisements

Tags: , , , ,

2 Responses to “172 days to go 20.3.2012”

  1. David Horkan Says:

    There wasn’t much discussion at the meeting. Councillor Claydon moved the amendment calling for the reports. Those in favour were Councillors Nelmes, Crakanthorpe, Osborne, Tate, Jackson and Claydon.

    Those against Luke, Cook, Boyd, Buman and King.

    On that basis it seems reasonable to believe that the resolution is a good thing.

    Councillors Connell and Sharpe were absent..

  2. Terry McCauley Says:

    I have only had a brief look at the Council documents but cannot help but laugh. They expect the public to embrace their bold concept?
    They propose to remove the kerb anbd guttering to improve access. They coulds have done that and left the trees.
    They want to invite the public to conduct open air markets in the area. Do they not realise that a large number of the stall holders from previous Laman St Markets were actively opposed to the tree removal and would most likely be loathe to return to the devoid and denuded site to support Council!
    They talk of reducing traffic to one lane. Why could they not have closed it all together and left the trees in place?
    They talk of an improved access for the gallery. This could have been achived and significantly enhanced with the incorporation of the majestic trees into any plan! To borrow a phrase I love EEJITS!

    I could go on but feel my blood pressure rising!

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: