CAPE TOWN - Cape Town Stadium (56,000) - Page 5 - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Forums > Stadiums and Sport Arenas > Completed


Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old April 5th, 2007, 12:34 PM   #81
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

200 000 Fans to hit Cape Town during World Cup

200 000 Fans to hit city during World Cup


By Anél Powell

CAPE TOWN must "brace itself for an influx of at least 200 000 football fans" during the 2010 World Cup, says MEC for Transport and Public Works Marius Fransman - four times the number originally predicted.

But he is confident the city's transport infrastructure will cope. "Funding is on track and the World Cup transport can happen."

The visitor numbers will give an indication of how much investment is needed to upgrade transport and meet accommodation needs.

"We have to make sure the transport action plan is up and running and responds to these numbers," Denis Lillie, project director of World Cup 2010, said.

"This is an exciting prospect and also a major challenge," said Fransman. He said work had already started on several of the transport upgrade plans.

"All key projects are either on stream or the design has been completed."

These include the widening of lanes on the N1 and N2 and the extension of the Khayelitsha rail corridor by 4.5km.

He said R450 million had been allocated for the Koeberg interchange.

Janine Myburgh, president of the Cape Town Regional Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said in a separate statement that the Koeberg interchange would play an important role during 2010 as it connected the city with the Winelands, which would provide both accommodation and attractions for the football tourists.

"The increasing reliance on road transport, the poor state of public transport and the dramatic increase in car ownership combined to make the Koeberg interchange one of the most pressing problems in the city and it deserves urgent attention.

"We are glad that it is to receive priority treatment, but at the same time we are concerned about possible delays to other projects."

Fransman said other critical projects, such as the N1 bus lane, would start even if there was not yet funding for them.

Some R1.9 billion has been allocated by all three spheres of government to improve Cape Town's transport infrastructure.

The long-awaited public transport operating entity, that would allow for the integrated management of road and rail transport, has been endorsed "in principle" by national government, said Fransman.

He said the agreement between the city and province would be signed by the end of May. "We've created the institutional mechanism for cooperation to happen."

The city's transport portfolio committee meets today to discuss 2010 transport projects. Rail, as a high capacity public transport system, has been identified as a critical focus area.

The R60 million upgrade to Athlone, Heideveld and Langa stations is expected to start in August.

The visitors' survey, done by transport specialists Axios Consulting, shows that the 50 000 estimated last year was a gross underestimation of the number of people expected to be in Cape Town during the 2010 event.

Fransman said 40 000 of these visitors would be from other African countries.

During the peak period, between the eighth and 14th day of the World Cup, the city's hotels and registered accommodation facilities will have to handle an average of 125 000 overnight stays. This excludes the 10 000 media representatives expected in the city during that time and the people who will stay with friends or family.

The city will host eight games and a semi-final during the World Cup.

Lillie said the English Football Association had already indicated that it would base its team in Cape Town, a "major economic coup" for the city.

"As a department we want to give the assurance to international teams that we will be able to offer a world-class transport system in a safe environment," Fransman said.

Lillie said the official fan park in the CBD would be on the Grand Parade, while three others have been proposed for Philippi, Athlone and Bellville.

These fan parks would be built to take traffic away from the central city.

Richard Gordge, director of Axios Consulting, said national travel demands during 2010 would depend on the match schedule.

He said the study, which was done in interviews with the supporters' associations of major teams, hoteliers and airport officials and in online surveys, showed strong local support for the hosting of World Cup matches in Cape Town.

"It is sad that a small number of people who are opposed to the tournament have been hogging all the headlines in the Western Cape, even though the majority of local people want Cape Town to be a key World Cup venue," Fransman said of the latest legal challenge against the building of the stadium.

Meanwhile, the city's mayoral committee yesterday approved a recommendation to recognise the Metropolitan Road Traffic Management Co-ordinating Committee as the co-ordinating structure for road traffic management.

Published on the web by Cape Times on April 5, 2007. © Cape Times 2007. All rights reserved.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 5th, 2007, 12:44 PM   #82
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

ENGLAND to use Cape Town as World Cup Base

Athlone, Heideveld and Langa stations is expected to begin in August.

The visitors' survey, carried out by transport specialists Axios Consulting, shows the figure of 50 000 given last year was a gross underestimation of the number of visitors expected to be in Cape Town during the 2010 event.

Fransman said 40 000 of the visitors would be from other African countries.

During the peak period, between the eighth and 14th days of the World Cup, the city's hotels and registered accommodation establishments would have to handle, on average, 125 000 overnight stays a day. These excluded the 10 000 media representatives expected in Cape Town and people who would stay with friends or relatives.

The city is to host eight games and a semi-final.

Lillie said the English Football Association had announced it was to base its team in Cape Town. This was a "major economic coup" for the city.

Fransman said: "As a department we want to give the assurance to international teams that we will be able to offer a world-class transport system in a safe environment."

Lillie said the CBD fan park would be on the Grand Parade. Three others had been proposed, for Philippi, Athlone and Bellville. These would be built to take traffic away from the central city.

More than 80% of people surveyed said they would visit a fan park.

Richard Gordge, director of Axios Consulting, said national travel demands during 2010 would depend on the match schedule.

He said the study, which entailed online surveys and interviewing the supporters' associations of major teams, hoteliers and airport officials, had found strong support in Cape Town for the city's hosting of World Cup matches.

"It is sad that a small number of people who are opposed to the tournament have been hogging all the headlines in the Western Cape (while) the majority of local people want Cape Town to be a key World Cup venue," Fransman said, referring to the court case challenging approvals granted for the stadium.

Meanwhile, the city's mayoral committee yesterday approved a recommendation to recognise the Metropolitan Road Traffic Management Co-ordinating Committee as the co-ordinating structure for road traffic management.

Published on the web by Cape Times on April 5, 2007. © Cape Times 2007. All rights reserved.

Last edited by Mo Rush; April 6th, 2007 at 08:02 PM.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 12:50 PM   #83
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

like YAY!

ENGLAND to use Cape Town as World Cup Base

Athlone, Heideveld and Langa stations is expected to begin in August.

The visitors' survey, carried out by transport specialists Axios Consulting, shows the figure of 50 000 given last year was a gross underestimation of the number of visitors expected to be in Cape Town during the 2010 event.

Fransman said 40 000 of the visitors would be from other African countries.

During the peak period, between the eighth and 14th days of the World Cup, the city's hotels and registered accommodation establishments would have to handle, on average, 125 000 overnight stays a day. These excluded the 10 000 media representatives expected in Cape Town and people who would stay with friends or relatives.

The city is to host eight games and a semi-final.

Lillie said the English Football Association had announced it was to base its team in Cape Town. This was a "major economic coup" for the city.

Fransman said: "As a department we want to give the assurance to international teams that we will be able to offer a world-class transport system in a safe environment."

Lillie said the CBD fan park would be on the Grand Parade. Three others had been proposed, for Philippi, Athlone and Bellville. These would be built to take traffic away from the central city.

More than 80% of people surveyed said they would visit a fan park.

Richard Gordge, director of Axios Consulting, said national travel demands during 2010 would depend on the match schedule.

He said the study, which entailed online surveys and interviewing the supporters' associations of major teams, hoteliers and airport officials, had found strong support in Cape Town for the city's hosting of World Cup matches.

"It is sad that a small number of people who are opposed to the tournament have been hogging all the headlines in the Western Cape (while) the majority of local people want Cape Town to be a key World Cup venue," Fransman said, referring to the court case challenging approvals granted for the stadium.

Meanwhile, the city's mayoral committee yesterday approved a recommendation to recognise the Metropolitan Road Traffic Management Co-ordinating Committee as the co-ordinating structure for road traffic management.

Published on the web by Cape Times on April 5, 2007. © Cape Times 2007. All rights reserved.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old April 5th, 2007, 12:59 PM   #84
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

Stadium site

image hosted on flickr
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 01:55 PM   #85
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Ooooooopppppsssssss er who forgot the EIA

Heritage authority 'rejected stadium'

By John Yeld

The Western Cape's heritage authority rejected plans for the new 2010 World Cup stadium at Green Point, but its negative finding was not contained in the final environmental impact assessment (EIA) report, according to opponents of the stadium.

This is one of the arguments in the 150-page founding affidavit of Kendal Jarvis, a member of the Cape Town Environmental Protection Association (CEPA) that is applying for an urgent Cape High Court order to overturn all the stadium approvals granted by the provincial authorities and the city.

He also points out that the negative heritage assessment was based on a given height of the stadium of approximately 40m above the natural ground level, whereas the planned height is now 48m.

His affidavit states that before deciding whether the stadium development could proceed, the province's environment and planning department had to take into account any comments and recommendations of Heritage Western Cape - the province's statutory heritage authority - regarding the development.

A heritage assessment had been done and submitted to BELCom, the heritage authority's built environment and landscape committee tasked with commenting on the stadium proposal in September.

The committee had met on October 19 to consider the issue, and the minutes of that meeting read: "Based on the conclusions in the HIA (heritage impact assessment) and the VIA (visual impact assessment) and given the impacts on the heritage resources, both of the alternatives having high impacts, the committee does not support either alternative (the existing stadium site or golf course site).

"The reasons for the committee's decision are that the scale of the proposed stadium is too great: it is too tall, it is too space extensive with a very large footprint, and it is too bulky. Further, given the nature of the Common as a heritage resource, given the scale and nature of Fort Wynyard (a provincial heritage site) and given the scale, grain and texture of the immediate environs, the size of the proposed stadium and, therefore, its impact, is excessive."

But, states Jarvis's affidavit, this negative assessment was not captured in the final EIA report.

Neither the director of the provincial Environment and Planning Department, who issued the initial positive Record of Decision (RoD) approving the stadium, nor MEC Tasneem Essop, who subsequently issued a revised RoD after dismissing appeals against that initial decision, appeared to have had the opportunity to view the Heritage Committee's minutes, the affidavit states.

"They also did not have the benefit of a proper summary thereof."

Noting that both the heritage impact assessment report and comments by the heritage committee are based on a 40m-high stadium, the affidavit adds: "One can only assume that BELCom's assessment would have been even more negative had the true height of (currently) 48m been disclosed to BELCom."

The affidavit states that the EIA was based on a stadium height of between 40m and 42m, but that both sets of approvals - by the provincial department and by Essop - authorise a height of up to 50m above natural ground level, which is, in turn, 13m above mean sea-level.

"The director's and the minister's decision (sic) thus effectively authorises a stadium nearly 20% higher than that upon which the EIA and supporting studies were premised.

"It is difficult to resist the conclusion that, in this vitally important respect, the decisions were not rationally connected to the information placed before the respective decision-maker."

The affidavit also argues that other material information relevant to Essop's decision was not placed before her, including the issue of noise pollution from the stadium.

Published on the web by Cape Argus on April 4, 2007
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:16 PM   #86
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

oh dear
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:20 PM   #87
Juanl
ba doom tsh
 
Juanl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 434
Likes (Received): 8

Cape council determined to see stadium built
Melanie Gosling
April 05 2007 at 04:35AM

The city of Cape Town is to contest the urgent application in the Cape High Court to halt the building of the 2010 stadium on Green Point Common and has said it is to continue work on the site.

Spokesperson Pieter Cronje said on Wednesday that the court application was for the reviewing and setting aside of statutory processes undertaken by the city and province that had led to the decision to build the stadium on the common, but it was not an interdict to stop work on the stadium.

"So we will continue the programme to meet the deadline," Cronje said.

The city believed the statutory processes and public participation had been thorough.

The urgent application by the Cape Environmental Protection Association (CEPA) submits, however, that many of the processes failed to comply with the law, that potential impacts of building the stadium were ignored, specialist studies were not included in the report presented to province for a decision and the public was deceived about the stadium's financially viability after 2010.

According to papers, the heritage authorities had rejected the plans for the stadium on the common. Their heritage impact report said the "scale of the proposed stadium is too great: it is too tall... with a very large footprint, and it is too bulky".

Given the nature of the common as a heritage resource and the massive scale of the stadium, "its impact is excessive".

But this view was not incorporated into the final environmental impact assessment, so when the province made its decision, it did so without the benefit of this information.

An acoustic assessment had found that in the absence of design information, "no noise calculations could be conducted". There was no reference to this in the final report.

The consultant who had found that existing sewerage infrastructure would be adequate for the stadium, had given "no rational basis" for this conclusion. Faecal pollution from the Green Point pipeline regularly exceeded permitted levels, and seawater in the area was polluted with faecal matter.

It was "difficult to see upon what rational basis it could be concluded that the sewerage infrastructure was adequate for the purposes of a 68 000-seat stadium". In accepting this finding, the provincial authorities had failed to ensure that the environmental impact report was not compromised by "political pressure by the city" to finish the EIA quickly.

A study by the city had misrepresented the financial viability of the stadium after 2010. It had used the premise that a private operator, and not the city, would run the stadium, and that the profits would go to the private operator, who would lease the stadium at no cost or a nominal fee.

But the information given to the public made no mention of an operator, and anyone would have assumed this money would accrue to the city.

The city has since commissioned a review of this study.

"Apparently, accepting that the stadium will be non-viable as a sporting facility, the city has investigated full commercialisation, including a casino and hotel." If this were true, it "bodes very ill for the common".
Juanl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:44 PM   #88
CharlieP
Tax avoider
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 23,933
Likes (Received): 2099

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
ENGLAND to use Cape Town as World Cup Base
There's a well-known saying I can't quite remember. It's to do with carts, horses and their relative positions...
__________________
This signature is socialist and un-American.
CharlieP no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:45 PM   #89
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Brb - going to take a leak at granger bay in the sea

OOOOOOOOOOOppppppsss

One of my earliest points in this discussion was where would 65 000 people urinate, given the poor sanitation facilities we have already in the Mouille Point Area . Now I understand the diagrams referring to the granger bay prominade ( a pavement, a small car park and small sand with rocks). Now we know - they will go urinate in the sea and that is why it is on the diagram as a focal point, tho its a good 20 minute dash from the stadium to the beach to take a leak during the game. I think the realities of how the decision to place the stadium was reached , and it doesnt include the word planning.
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 02:47 PM   #90
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouille_Point_Guy View Post
OOOOOOOOOOOppppppsss

One of my earliest points in this discussion was where would 65 000 people urinate, given the poor sanitation facilities we have already in the Mouille Point Area . Now I understand the diagrams referring to the granger bay prominade ( a pavement, a small car park and small sand with rocks). Now we know - they will go urinate in the sea and that is why it is on the diagram as a focal point, tho its a good 20 minute dash from the stadium to the beach to take a leak during the game. I think the realities of how the decision to place the stadium was reached , and it doesnt include the word planning.
thats going a bit off the track. but thanks for the humour.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 03:24 PM   #91
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Although my last posting was tongue in cheek , the relaity is the EIA is flawed. New realities are becoming visisble, the Heritage organisations disapproval, inadequate sewerage and noise pollution are only a few begining to surface.

And these are health and safety issues, sewerage goes into the sea due to problems of the local processing plant currently .

Noise polution - not even considered in the EIA

And Mo, you stated about financial viability, now appears the citys analysis was incorrect and need another one. I too will not support a casino and do not recall the rezoning of the area to allow for a casino.

I have always maintained my disagreement with the Grren Point site was based on planning, a lot of this information had not been widely publicised, yet now as they begin building the stadiums the realities of infrastructure issues with this location are being highlighted.

Cape Town has been let down, they deserve better of the government. We need a real solution to our requirement for a stadium, and sadly I dont think what we have been given is an adequate nor appropriate solution that our need.
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 05:14 PM   #92
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouille_Point_Guy View Post
Although my last posting was tongue in cheek , the relaity is the EIA is flawed. New realities are becoming visisble, the Heritage organisations disapproval, inadequate sewerage and noise pollution are only a few begining to surface.

And these are health and safety issues, sewerage goes into the sea due to problems of the local processing plant currently .

Noise polution - not even considered in the EIA

And Mo, you stated about financial viability, now appears the citys analysis was incorrect and need another one. I too will not support a casino and do not recall the rezoning of the area to allow for a casino.

I have always maintained my disagreement with the Grren Point site was based on planning, a lot of this information had not been widely publicised, yet now as they begin building the stadiums the realities of infrastructure issues with this location are being highlighted.

Cape Town has been let down, they deserve better of the government. We need a real solution to our requirement for a stadium, and sadly I dont think what we have been given is an adequate nor appropriate solution that our need.
Noise Pollution

June 2006

SPECIALIST STUDY INTO THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF NOISE RELATING TO THE PROPOSED
2010 STADIUM REDEVELOPMENT AND ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE AT GREEN POINT, CAPE TOWN
Prepared by
A.W.D. Jongens
Jongens Keet Associates
for
The Environmental Partnership

link : www.enviropartnership.co.za see Annexure 10
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 05:57 PM   #93
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Mo - how do you perform accoustic testing without a final design ???? Even the report admits that. Not to mention wind tunnel testing ... The Cape has high winds and a structure that size is going to have serious wind pattern changes ...

Still need to know how to handle the sewerage and how the Heritage report and decision was ignored.
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 07:58 PM   #94
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mouille_Point_Guy View Post
Mo - how do you perform accoustic testing without a final design ???? Even the report admits that. Not to mention wind tunnel testing ... The Cape has high winds and a structure that size is going to have serious wind pattern changes ...

Still need to know how to handle the sewerage and how the Heritage report and decision was ignored.
Your comment said "noise pollution not considered", It certainly was considered.
The report does make it clear that the final design was not available, which is not new to an EIA, especially in complex projects where many assumptions need to be made.

Whether the heritage report was ignored or simply not found to be conclusive enough to include in the final report are two different things. I am no expert when it comes to EIA's, if enviropartnership can prove their independence from the city, and can confirm or prove that their decisions were not rushed or influence by city members then the problem or flaws lie with enviropartnership and all their previous projects need to be investigated. The heritage report was made publicaly available and was left open for comment, the city cannot take responsibility if a reputable organization chose not to include the heritage recommendation in the final EIA report. However if the city played a role in this , then they need to answer for that.

If the CEPA are raising points that the city placed pressure on enviropartnershup and somehow forced them to reach an outcome which favoured the city then all corruption, if any, needs to be exposed. However considering Zille's investigation into all tenders awarded by the downright corrupt previous city gvt i.e. the ANC, I doubt that she herself would involve herself in corruption relating to a process which was so critical.

There certainly will need to be some line drawn which distinguishes the city from enviropartnership s.t that the relevant parties are held responsible.
As far as I know the city commissioned the Alternative site study, and were involved with that along with an outside and independent consultant. So in that regard they face questions relating to the validity of their outcomes and methods of investigation.

We just need to be sure who we are pointing fingers at. If the CEPA intend to criticize or question the credibility of enviropartnership then they would need access to all their previous reports or EIA's and find similar flaws. Enviropartnership I believe did the best with what they were given, if a second noise pollution test needs to be done then so be it. However, R700 million will be spent simply on ensuring the roof is a "double layer" as per the EIA recommendation and that the stadium facade reduce noise as much as possible, which is present in the city's decision to use ETFE membrane on the facade as well. These design enhancements are taken direcly from the noise pollution recommendations at the end of Annexure 10.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 5th, 2007, 10:44 PM   #95
Juanl
ba doom tsh
 
Juanl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Johannesburg
Posts: 434
Likes (Received): 8

Why don't you two meet up somewhere and discuss this and bring us the results? Clearly you're both from Cape Town sooo....
Juanl no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 12:28 AM   #96
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juanl View Post
Why don't you two meet up somewhere and discuss this and bring us the results? Clearly you're both from Cape Town sooo....
SSC is a forum. Its where people discuss things.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 10:43 AM   #97
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Thank you Mo

I for one am very grateful that Mo is debating this issue with me, it is what democracy is about and am very happy to continue discussing this issue in this forum.

I am by no means apposed to cape town having a new stadium, nor the world cup. My complaint is that we deserve better than government gives us. We pay taxes yet we do not receive a world class service.

For example, who could approve ahtlone, a 40 000 seater stadium, with all the costs incurred, when it didnt meet FIFA requirements. That is almost bordering on criminal misuse of public funds - refer do we need two 40 000 seat stadiums.

I fail to see how a new stadium could not include the athletics track, another example of poor planning, if we are going to build a stadium lets not cut corners, costs or even the legal requirements. Cape Town needs a proper stadium for its citizens, which allows for residents needs and to encourage overseas events not some rushed half baked stadium in a location unsuitable for this purpose. FIFA is not a legal requirement in South Africa, it has no legal basis to prescribe how South African tax payers money should be spent nor does it have the right at the late stage in the game to say - build a stadium in Greenpoint because we say so. Had they taken that attitude in Germany I am positive the Germans would have told FIFA where to go, however somehow we must bend to FIFAs will as we are in africa.

I dont understand how people who voice legitimate concerns about how the public have been mislead, about how improper procedures have been followed, are painted with the brush that we are about to have the world cup taken from Cape Town or South Africa. When we were awarded the CUP no mention was ever made of Green Point, FIFA changed the rules not South Africa. Green Point wasnt even an option presented to FIFA, FIFA said they wanted it here. Yet People somehow forget the facts.

The politicians started this nonsense about how it was Green Point or nothing, the politicans and FIFA had years to sort out stadiums and at a second to midnight they say Greenpoint. So government bends over backwards, bending rules to keep some other non governmental organisation happy. Yet this is all twisted to say that some concerned tax payers are now to blame for pointing out irregularities in the whole process.

So far Mo is one of very few people who is prepared to discuss this issue and I am am very grateful to him / her for this fact. Mo has very relevant opinions and facts to share and I am very appreciative. I do not have the exclusive ownership on being correct in my views nor opinions and I welcome each and every post Mo provides. This is how a democracy is supposed to work, yet I see less and less evidence of this concept in how our government has handled and manipulated the facts on this issue.

I have worked on multi billion rand projects and government projects, I have seen first hand how rushed decisions have major implications later on. I have engineering expertise and understand many of the processes that are involved. I also fail to see how common wisdom of following a sequential set of steps in such projects, an excepted industry and international standard, can be brushed under the carpet, in order to run the process in parallel, introducing all sorts of dangers which only now have been highlighted.

I welcome anyones opinion, humour included, as this is how a society is supposed to function. Thank you Mo for the time you have taken to post often lengthy detailed responses, I for one do read, consider and value your contribution.
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 05:45 PM   #98
dysan1
More development
 
dysan1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Durban, based London
Posts: 22,391
Likes (Received): 2558

Mouille point guy....Welcome

for as long as i can remember i have been the lone critic of this stadium in the south african forum. Not because i dont want a new stadium in ct or that i want to damage the wc, but because i, like you, feel that greenpoint is a pathetic place for a new stadium. I have always stated that i really felt sorry for the people in greenpoint, but more specifically mouille point, due to the fact that this new stadium will be so damn imposing on the area and hence will totally alter the character of the area, in my opinion for the worse. yes there will be a big park which is great but that is icing that could occur without the stadium.

Besides this, with an uncomplete foreshore freeway, getting there will be near impossible, for traffic in that area is already harrowing. Mo believes that transport and people walking will alleviate this. but then explain how people will walk on roads, disrupting traffic and their own safety (considering many will be way over the limit. And there are only 2 ways from the cbd thru to bantry bay and camps...will they block these roads off on match days? And yes, it is not a short walk from there to town! seems a planning disaster.

With all the new problems surfacing, one wonders who was trying to fool who. Just for comparisson. The Durban stadium has been in the planning stages for 5 years as part of the kings park sports precinct. It has a clearly defined position in the cities growth strategy focussed on sport. In cape town this stadium is a recent element that was not actively campaigned for by the city, but throw at them. They never planned for a new stadium over the last few years, with major development taking place in the greenpoint vicinity and cbd. Hence a stadium there now will be rushed at best, hardly integrated into major city plans and in no defined sporting district.

This haste is what has lead to stupid decisions being made and passed. Decisions like the stadium not being able to ever have an athletics track, no all weather facility to help during the cape winters and hence only limited exhibition venue capability.

I want this world cup to be a success for my south africa, and cape town is a vital cog in that success. having said that, this stadium is not vital to the world cups success, newlands could quite happily be used.

Legal process needs to be followed now and i hope the best outcome for the city takes place. I hardly think the loss of this stadium will have any effect on the V&A for it has gone from strength to strength without it up to now, and the international investors in it were hardly thinking of a nearby stadium being crucial to their plans. In my opinion the stadium could impede on their plans.

We have to be patient now and just see what the courts bring. Mouille point guy...thanx for joining the forum for it is very good to hear from someone that will be living on top of this stadium and not just people that will ocassionally visit
__________________
Have your own opinion

Last edited by dysan1; April 6th, 2007 at 06:10 PM.
dysan1 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 08:07 PM   #99
Mo Rush
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 28,982
Likes (Received): 97

http://www.greenpointstadium2010.co.za/

The Green Point Stadium Consultant team has established this website in order to capture relevant information within the Construction Industry.

The Tender Documents for the construction of the Green Point Stadium has a number of provisional sums for specialised items and sub-contracts. Throughout the construction period there will be several Tenders for these provisional sums. These Tenders will be conducted by invitation only.

Who should register?

If your company can deliver the necessary service required it will be of great benefit to you to register on this site so that we are properly informed.

Why register?

The Green Point Stadium Consultant team together with the chosen main contractor will be perusing the registered entries on this site prior to the issuing of Invitations to Tender.

Our consultants and the main contractor need to be aware of your capacity, availability and willingness to complete the sub-contract.

We hereby call on all interested parties to register your business on this website. Once the closing date for registering a particular trade or material has lapsed, unfortunately no further entries can be accepted.
Mo Rush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 6th, 2007, 11:59 PM   #100
Mouille_Point_Guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 37
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mo Rush View Post
http://www.greenpointstadium2010.co.za/

The Green Point Stadium Consultant team has established this website in order to capture relevant information within the Construction Industry.

The Tender Documents for the construction of the Green Point Stadium has a number of provisional sums for specialised items and sub-contracts. Throughout the construction period there will be several Tenders for these provisional sums. These Tenders will be conducted by invitation only.

Who should register?

If your company can deliver the necessary service required it will be of great benefit to you to register on this site so that we are properly informed.

Why register?

The Green Point Stadium Consultant team together with the chosen main contractor will be perusing the registered entries on this site prior to the issuing of Invitations to Tender.

Our consultants and the main contractor need to be aware of your capacity, availability and willingness to complete the sub-contract.

We hereby call on all interested parties to register your business on this website. Once the closing date for registering a particular trade or material has lapsed, unfortunately no further entries can be accepted.

Mo - you think I should put a tender in to fill the whole they dug so far and return the golf course to its former status ?

:P
Mouille_Point_Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


Reply

Tags
cape town, greenpoint, soccer, south africa, stadium

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
#Cape Royale - 9F - Mixed Use - Green Point | Complete thryve Projects 62 October 8th, 2009 01:37 AM
# Green Point Stadium - 68,000 seats - Cape Town [ARCHIVED END JULY 2007] Mosi-oa-Tunya Sporting Infrastructure and Events 695 July 28th, 2007 07:08 AM
Cape Town 2010 Mo Rush The Touchline 8 December 9th, 2006 04:32 PM
#Helderberg Stadium - CBD hsark Projects 24 April 16th, 2006 08:41 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us