Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
gjm

Help save Western Springs Speedway

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

Yeah, in the UK they were called NIMBYs = Not In My Back Yard. Move in then complain about something that's been there for decades before them.  Brands Hatch Race Track was a great example, been there since 1930s then some cock moves in and complains about the noise in the garden of his house next door - end result, fewer race meetings, no engine starts before 8.30am racing to be finished before 5pm, etc. Absolute BS, if you move next to a track, expect noise. If you didn't know it was there then you didn't do your due diligence - your fault.

Even heard about a case of a woman moving into a new estate on the edge of a country village, then complained about the "noise of the cows" and the fact they would stand in the field at the end of her garden and "look at her" - yup true story.

If this is truly about residents complaining about the noise from the springs, then this is very much in this category. It's like me moving into a new house and complaining about the neighbours curtains. IF the council is proposing a new site, and has put through planning permission and zoned the area accordingly to enable the Speedway to move to a more suitable (ie not so residential area) then fair enough, that's progress. But to just close it down and not have an alternative is not a solution.

When I was in the UK, we lived about 3 miles from Deighton Hills Shooting School. Been there forever. You'd hear occasional pops from the school, but nothing else.
Over time people moved in and complained. and complained. And as house prices went up, the complainers became more influential. Didn't quite get to the point where the school was closed, but it cost Mike Reynolds (former British Olympic shooter) a fortune in sound reduction stuff.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, E30 325i Rag-Top said:

 

Even heard about a case of a woman moving into a new estate on the edge of a country village, then complained about the "noise of the cows" and the fact they would stand in the field at the end of her garden and "look at her" - yup true story.

 

maybe they where wondering why she was on the out side and not part of the herd.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, gjm said:

Could be. I'd not seen that. I think there is a family speedway at Waikaraka already? Might make sense to put money into developing one site rather than having two.
Of course, that might mean more racing (as opposed to once a month) and that'll doubtless upset the locals (see Jon's post above!)

I live 3km from waikaraka as the crow fly's , when the wind blows my way we get it . when there is concerts at Mt smart we get it.

I'm all for people having fun, but the move  into "my area" so they can is wrong.

it's not just the noise but the parking, traffic control/management.

and what's to say that they wont close that down in the future

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And therein lies the problem, the locals don't want it where it is, but try moving it to somewhere else and the locals there don't want it "in my backyard" either. It certainly would make sense to combine the Springs and Waikaraka Park into one bigger, better location.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes it is a problem.

Combining it is a bigger problem too, Waikaraka Park run a top notch line up, full grids. Where do they expect to fit in...   midget,   tq's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like it is all a bit academic now.

Auckland Council have decided that the speedway will go - last races will be in 2019. :(

Western Springs have done a huge amount of work to reduce noise, dust and generally fit in with the neighbours, and have promoted the sport exceptionally well along the way. On this occasion it seems it is less a case of NIMBY-ism, but more a case of a bloody-minded council determined to do things their way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The usual lightweight dross that floats up masquerading as discussion / debate.

Cities evolve and in 1929 Western Springs was on the fringe - since then the fishing boats have gone out of the harbour, boatbuilders have moved out of what was the swamp now known as Freemans bay and Herne bay, the coal works have gone from Victoria park as have stinking fish factories and  the meat works from Otahuhu - Shortly all the fuel tanks will be gone from the waterfront . Should get rid of those container ships and cement silo as well most other international commerce / trade cities did it decades ago.  

As cities grow needs change and having a low rent activity  monopolising a council owned site (because they have a loud mouthed litigious millionaire patron)   is not a good use of premium inner city land close to transport systems. 

It's not nimby-ism or bloody minded council behaviour, its actually their land and they have a duty to deliver value for the rates you all cry about paying.  

Bung 500 more rate paying housholds in there and  shove the pain in the arse speedway guys out to the fringes like they shoved other activities out of western springs 20 years ago,  except now the fringe is not Rosebank road but Huapai 

 

 

Speedway.PNG

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

The usual lightweight dross that floats up masquerading as discussion / debate.

Cities evolve and in 1929 Western Springs was on the fringe - since then the fishing boats have gone out of the harbour, boatbuilders have moved out of what was the swamp now known as Freemans bay and Herne bay, the coal works have gone from Victoria park as have stinking fish factories and  the meat works from Otahuhu - Shortly all the fuel tanks will be gone from the waterfront . Should get rid of those container ships and cement silo as well most other international commerce / trade cities did it decades ago.  

Where do you suggest the container ships go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all what is the real cost of bringing them into Auckland - the channel is only 10 metres deep in places so regular dredging is required and large ships cannot enter ( you pay for the dredging in your rates) what is the impact on traffic movements and what is the risk. 

Trio  of ideas:

 1) being dutch - reclaim the Karore bank next to the airport - deep water channel 20 metres from Manukau heads all the way to the airport - reclamation could add 500 - 800  hectares to the warehouse park  currently at the airport , establish car handling facility - connects onto motorway system on the ring road not the central feeder, links to existing warehousing and logistics and airport? 

2) Whangarei also deep water 15 metres all the way to the working wharves they have been crying out for something to do and a port for decades and Whinnet will get some brownie points. - needs a rail link to Aucks - actually we have one still it just got trashed . 

3) Drop a nuke in Kawhia and put a rail link through to the inland port at Hamilton. 

All short term reasonable investments with HUGE long term benefits. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Container volumes by port 

 

Container ports.PNG

Edited by 3pedals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

First of all what is the real cost of bringing them into Auckland - the channel is only 10 metres deep in places so regular dredging is required and large ships cannot enter ( you pay for the dredging in your rates) what is the impact on traffic movements and what is the risk. 

Trio  of ideas:

 1) being dutch - reclaim the Karore bank next to the airport - deep water channel 20 metres from Manukau heads all the way to the airport - reclamation could add 500 - 800  hectares to the warehouse park  currently at the airport , establish car handling facility - connects onto motorway system on the ring road not the central feeder, links to existing warehousing and logistics and airport? 

2) Whangarei also deep water 15 metres all the way to the working wharves they have been crying out for something to do and a port for decades and Whinnet will get some brownie points. - needs a rail link to Aucks - actually we have one still it just got trashed . 

3) Drop a nuke in Kawhia and put a rail link through to the inland port at Hamilton. 

All short term reasonable investments with HUGE long term benefits. 

 

 

Ron, Sam, Dutch what ever your name is today, your options must be challenged ...

option 1,   the Manukau harbour is never going to be an option that's why the cement boats have stopped .  the channel can only be entered at high tide or the bigger ships carrying 2000 plus contains will ground. not to mention turn around area restriction with other ships ( the LPG one for starters).

Option 2 will never work.  A)  the trains would be 24 km long for each ship unload 2000 x 40 foot container = 80000 feet or 24km

Option 3 we are nuke free here  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, richard said:

Ron, Sam, Dutch what ever your name is today, your options must be challenged ...

option 1,   the Manukau harbour is never going to be an option that's why the cement boats have stopped .  the channel can only be entered at high tide or the bigger ships carrying 2000 plus contains will ground. not to mention turn around area restriction with other ships ( the LPG one for starters).

Option 2 will never work.  A)  the trains would be 24 km long for each ship unload 2000 x 40 foot container = 80000 feet or 24km

Option 3 we are nuke free here  

Like the idea of a challenge but how about a constructive challenge --  I don't buy into the imediate pessimistic response  but thats why we are still having this debate 40  to 100 years after most other countries worked it out - they are problem solvers kiwis still hang onto  the British 'it will never work culture and knock every  idea that will bring about change'  - go the pregnant one ---  a republic before the baby is born and Peters can be our first figure head president. 

1) Nope Manukau is deeper than the Auckland harbour all the way  and it was the first choice for a port in the 1850's - cement boats went out because they no longer manufacture in NZ so the boats & port facilities were redundant -  then some idiots got talked into spending $18 mil of rate payers money for the new silo at the port so they can off-load cheap imported cement. Facts and better homework please 

2) Only if you do it as one train,  average train is 660 m long - thats only 36 .4 standard trains - so  18 and a bit trains a day is only 2 days with a train every  hour  and  --  how many containers currently go out of auckland port on trucks - how many truck trips is that at two containers per truck 12 ,000 truck trips  ? never mind we like trucks wrecking our roads don't we.

3) Well maybe a small nuke then or maybe Aotea Harbour next one up or even better Raglan as it is a shorter route to Hamilton - I mean someone trying to jutsify the existing port got the rate payers to spend $250,000 investigating Muriwai as port - really now that is stupid. ? 

Edited by 3pedals

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, 3pedals said:

Like the idea of a challenge but how about a constructive challenge --  I don't buy into the imediate pessimistic response  but thats why we are still having this debate 40  to 100 years after most other countries worked it out - they are problem solvers kiwis still hang onto  the British 'it will never work culture and knock every  idea that will bring about change'  - go the pregnant one ---  a republic before the baby is born and Peters can be our first figure head president. 

1) Nope Manukau is deeper than the Auckland harbour all the way  and it was the first choice for a port in the 1850's - cement boats went out because they no longer manufacture in NZ so the boats & port facilities were redundant -  then some idiots got talked into spending $18 mil of rate payers money for the new silo at the port so they can off-load cheap imported cement. Facts and better homework please 

2) Only if you do it as one train,  average train is 660 m long - thats only 36 .4 standard trains - so  18 and a bit trains a day is only 2 days with a train every  hour  and  --  how many containers currently go out of auckland port on trucks - how many truck trips is that at two containers per truck 12 ,000 truck trips  ? never mind we like trucks wrecking our roads don't we.

3) Well maybe a small nuke then or maybe Aotea Harbour next one up or even better Raglan as it is a shorter route to Hamilton - I mean someone trying to jutsify the existing port got the rate payers to spend $250,000 investigating Muriwai as port - really now that is stupid. ? 

option 1 ) so a hundred years ago they pictured ships 399m long 59 m wide and a draft of 14.5 m. 2500 containers per ship. Nope. this is the future , right. Hong Kong , China, Singapore  flattered Islands or just made land , we cant do that.

Option 2)  even with your figures WHY would you put this on the tracks. you have unloading times, storage areas and so on. To far wrong place.

option 3)  the firth of Thames is the best bet. Its in the golden triangle , Auckland , Hamilton , Tauranga. lots of land and deep water.

Option 4)  move the Navy to Whangarei free up Devonport  and turn it in to a car yard for import's.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, richard said:

option 1 ) so a hundred years ago they pictured ships 399m long 59 m wide and a draft of 14.5 m. 2500 containers per ship. Nope. this is the future , right. Hong Kong , China, Singapore  flattered Islands or just made land , we cant do that.

Option 2)  even with your figures WHY would you put this on the tracks. you have unloading times, storage areas and so on. To far wrong place.

option 3)  the firth of Thames is the best bet. Its in the golden triangle , Auckland , Hamilton , Tauranga. lots of land and deep water.

Option 4)  move the Navy to Whangarei free up Devonport  and turn it in to a car yard for import's.

1) Yes they did and then they built them, we only get the tiddler class container ships, the big mothers have over 20,000 container units on board , which by the way is a 6 metre unit.

Container ships are designed around a maximum draft of 15 m to enable them to use existing ports. Auckland  port  has never measured up at only 11m without constant dredging . Tauranga is deeper does bigger ships up to 9,000 containers that's why their freight volumes are increasing in and out.  Whangarei and the Manukau and Tauranga all have far more future-- the Auckland horse has been flogged and the public suckered into paying for it - time to bury it.

2) because the bulk of freight goes through either the inland Wiri port or the Hamilton inland port which connect Auckland and Tauranga to the country ( by rail - that efficient transport system kiwis seem to hate) . The unloading storage and other issues are the same for truck or rail freight and we do it now and we double, triple and quadruple handle containers because we bring them into the dumbest place then feed them out on trucks to take them to another place where we unload them , stack them and then re-load them onto trucks again or rail . or we could just stick it all on rail at the port and move 110 containers at a time , not just 2. 

3) Firth of Thames is a stupid idea perpetuated by Auckland harbour centric people with no vision, it has no infrastructure, no rail link, no road link - it is too shallow,  has no real room for a port, has nobody to do the work, is prone to flooding- actually it has absolutely nothing going for it.  

Manukau has space depth and a ready work force and if you got serious you could dredge right up to the inland port at Wiri and load straight on to trains and trucks without having 10 thousand of them go through  Auckland city every day to get the same throughput - do some numbers instead of trotting out the usual dross laden superficial arguments . plus the route to the Manukau is shorter by about a day for international shipping 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 3pedals said:

Trio  of ideas:

 1) being dutch - reclaim the Karore bank next to the airport - deep water channel 20 metres from Manukau heads all the way to the airport - reclamation could add 500 - 800  hectares to the warehouse park  currently at the airport , establish car handling facility - connects onto motorway system on the ring road not the central feeder, links to existing warehousing and logistics and airport? 

2) Whangarei also deep water 15 metres all the way to the working wharves they have been crying out for something to do and a port for decades and Whinnet will get some brownie points. - needs a rail link to Aucks - actually we have one still it just got trashed . 

Whangarei cant be done. The containers cant even fit through some of the train tunnels, let alone being able to move that amount of containers. On top of that you would drastically increase costs to the consumer for all the extra travel.

The only person who thinks it can is Winston Peters, and we all know just how reliable his "facts" are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 3pedals said:

2) Only if you do it as one train,  average train is 660 m long - thats only 36 .4 standard trains - so  18 and a bit trains a day is only 2 days with a train every  hour  and  --  how many containers currently go out of auckland port on trucks - how many truck trips is that at two containers per truck 12 ,000 truck trips  ? never mind we like trucks wrecking our roads don't we.

No matter where the port is you still need trucks to take the goods from the port or the train.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1250.pngOK, lets start with the manukau harbour. here's a pic of the entrance. you'll have to use the north channel as the south is to shallow how will you deal with the north channel bar. it's about 10m at low tide and 2.5 km wide. the ships are Triple E class 399m long 59m wide have a draft of 14.5m carry 20000 containers. May as well do the big one if were moving the container terminal.

what sort of health and safety plan would you have in place in the event of a disaster ( they happen just look at the Rena )

manukau-map-07_05_15-_large.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, zero said:

Whangarei cant be done. The containers cant even fit through some of the train tunnels, let alone being able to move that amount of containers. On top of that you would drastically increase costs to the consumer for all the extra travel.

The only person who thinks it can is Winston Peters, and we all know just how reliable his "facts" are.

yes it can its just a couple of tunnel project maybe some just have tunnel vision 

18 hours ago, zero said:

No matter where the port is you still need trucks to take the goods from the port or the train.

 

Duh really why do most efficient ports have a rail terminal in the port - answer to eliminate the need for all those trucks  just like any other mass transportation system you structure the trucks come into play once you  break the freight down to smaller volumes with more specific destinations - thats the root problem with our freight system we go from bulk container ships to trucks - 10,000 of them to move a boat load instead of 36 trains 

 

54 minutes ago, richard said:

1250.pngOK, lets start with the manukau harbour. here's a pic of the entrance. you'll have to use the north channel as the south is to shallow how will you deal with the north channel bar. it's about 10m at low tide and 2.5 km wide. the ships are Triple E class 399m long 59m wide have a draft of 14.5m carry 20000 containers. May as well do the big one if were moving the container terminal.

what sort of health and safety plan would you have in place in the event of a disaster ( they happen just look at the Rena )

 

Dealing with the bar is easier  and cheaper than the current dredging that goes on in the auckland channel which is also only 11m deep naturally.

The same health and safety managment plan you would need anywhere else  

Really - no imagination and no homework - sharpen up guys 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the manukau bar changes on a regular bases you would have to dredge on a weekly / monthly bases. The Waitamata is yearly at the moment.

health and safety would have two different senrioes  east coast has no bar crossing and would be ezyer to manage.     West coast  1). narrow entrance.   2). 4-6 meter swells. . regularly   3).  wind

and your ship is 399m long 59m wide and a draft of 14.5 m

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 3pedals said:

Really - no imagination and no homework - sharpen up guys 

Its not a case of imagination - alternative port options have been extensively explored, and the current setup is the best solution.

About 70 per cent of what goes into Auckland's ports stays within the region. Instead, everything that goes to Auckland would have to go through Whangerei.

And with Northland being so distant from Auckland, Tauranga and Hamilton, population hubs termed the 'Golden Triangle' by economic commentators, meaning shipping companies would likely choose to dock in Tauranga rather than Whangarei if presented with such a choice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/04/2018 at 9:51 PM, 3pedals said:

1) Yes they did and then they built them, we only get the tiddler class container ships, the big mothers have over 20,000 container units on board , which by the way is a 6 metre unit.

Container ships are designed around a maximum draft of 15 m to enable them to use existing ports. Auckland  port  has never measured up at only 11m without constant dredging . Tauranga is deeper does bigger ships up to 9,000 containers that's why their freight volumes are increasing in and out.  Whangarei and the Manukau and Tauranga all have far more future-- the Auckland horse has been flogged and the public suckered into paying for it - time to bury it.

 

The only reason tauranga is deep is because it is dredged all the time.... I believe they recently dredged it even deeper to allow bigger ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2018 at 4:34 AM, richard said:

Option 4)  move the Navy to Whangarei free up Devonport  and turn it in to a car yard for import's.

Oh imagine the Nimby's for that idea.  Lake Road says no.

On another note the closure of Western Springs has bummed a few Americans out too.  Met a bunch of guys from one of the US teams whom have been going for years.
I met them at a Tractor Pull in Maryland.  Of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option 4 is an epic fail because once you have all those shittty imports there  devonport has no transport network connections to get them off the wharf - maybe put them back on aboat and out to Whangarei or Tauranga.

Speedway is such a minority sport and it has bullied other park users out and time has caught up withem - last dinosaur standing time go was a decade ago.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 3pedals said:

Option 4 is an epic fail because once you have all those shittty imports there  devonport has no transport network connections to get them off the wharf - maybe put them back on aboat and out to Whangarei or Tauranga.

Speedway is such a minority sport and it has bullied other park users out and time has caught up withem - last dinosaur standing time go was a decade ago.

We get it, you don't like speedway. Plenty of people do, and I wouldn't say it's that minor at all. It has a huge following. But of course you'll have an explanation why that following is actually small or non existant.

I don't like it so people shouldn't do it. Cool story bro. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, huff3r said:

We get it, you don't like speedway. Plenty of people do, and I wouldn't say it's that minor at all. It has a huge following. But of course you'll have an explanation why that following is actually small or non existant.

I don't like it so people shouldn't do it. Cool story bro. 

Don't react to trolls, your being played with.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×