South D vs central: it’s really no contest
The developer of Dunedin’s Kmart says once it is open South Dunedin’s shopping district will rival the city centre. (ODT 29.1.24)
No contest. Has he taken a walk through the city centre recently? Cafes, fast food, vapes and mid-range clothing.
We, the public, have had time to get used to not knowing if the route we took yesterday will be possible today or blocked with cones, no (extortionate) parking within reasonable distance of destination. Every disincentive the DCC can throw at businesses and customers, and now the promise of even higher rates.
Covid lockdown and the internet, CBD strangulation, business relocations to where customers are prepared to go, we had to change our habits. The addition of Kmart to South Dunedin retail-with-parking is eagerly awaited.
South Dunedin is the place to go for practical necessities. Such a pity our council didn't think about the purpose of a central business district instead of getting starry-eyed over what it looks like.
K Nordal Stene
North East Valley
Simple answer
What does South Dunedin have that the CBD doesn’t? Car parks.
Kate Dempsey
Dunedin
Roads are for people
Complaints about loss of car-parking in the city seem to be based on the false assumption that roads are for cars.
In fact; roads have always been, and remain, for people; including all their many modes of transport. Motor vehicles may be currently the dominant from of transport; but that wasn't always so and is unlikely to remain so forever.
Current dominance certainly does not justify the sense of entitlement displayed by so many motorists. With the exception of a few "drive-through" vendors, people buying things from shops are not drivers; they are pedestrians.
Importantly, those offering drive-through all make provision for this within their own premises. They don't expect the rest of us to subsidise their commercial operation by setting aside public space for it.
The same should apply to anyone wanting to sell to people who have to travel to / around the city by car. They should provide off-street car-parking; not expect part of the public roadway to be dedicated to supporting their business.
Whatever roadside space we have available for parking must be shared between all forms of transport.
With regard to those who repeatedly whinge about difficulty finding parking spots immediately adjacent to each of their destinations, I think the phrase Elspeth McLean (ODT 24.1.24) was looking for is "legs painted on".
As for her suggestion that someone should tell Minister Brown of the value of bike lanes, the problem is that in his case it's the ears that seem to be painted on.
Alec Knewstubb
Port Chalmers
Right of access
It is probably futile expecting a response to the questions raised by correspondent Russell Garbutt (ODT 20.1.24) from the two ODT columnists Metiria Stanton Turei and Anaru Eketone. Mr Garbutt asks whether or not they agree with the need for personal responsibility in order to access health care.
As rural people must travel to access health care and often significant distances with no financial help to do so, it seems to me that both university lecturers see easy access as a new Treaty right.
One of the great thinker of our times,Tom Sowell, puts it so well: “When people get used to (an expectation of) preferential treatment, equal treatment seems like discrimination”
Gerrard Eckhoff
Alexandra
The right to self-defence from terror
In David Jenkins' piece (ODT, 21.1.24), he argued that a moral revolution is needed to obtain peace in Gaza and that Israel suffers from a "moral rot". This is a very simplistic, one-sided, and misleading narrative that lacks historical and geographical context.
The view that "there are oppressed people and those who oppress them" completely ignores the complex history of the conflict, with a glaring omission of Hamas' atrocities on October 7. Does Jenkins think that any other nation (democratic or not) would act differently to defend themselves against such threats and violations of their sovereignty?
The argument that a moral revolution in Israel is the missing magic ingredient to end the conflict is infantile and one-sided. Yes, Israel is a democracy. However, the Palestinians must also take significant and brave steps to advance peace. These include recognising Israel as a Jewish state and giving up the deluded dream to end it. Other Arab nations in the Middle East have shown that it's possible.
The piece ends with a curious analysis of an opinion poll to infer that "the overwhelming majority of Israelis support what others, elsewhere in the world are describing as genocide". What a far-reaching conclusion.
What most Israelis support is the right to defend their country from Hamas' terrorism, described quite accurately as "deranged ideology wedded to terroristic and nihilistic violence".
An organisation whose rule for the past 16 years focused solely on trying to destroy Israel rather than improving Gaza's health, education, welfare, and infrastructure. Defending themselves against these threats is what the vast majority of Israelis support.
Amir Levy
Dunedin
Address Letters to the Editor to: Otago Daily Times, PO Box 517, 52-56 Lower Stuart St, Dunedin. Email: editor@odt.co.nz
