Wellington City Council has come out against the Wellywood sign, even though it was its officers who gave it resource consent.
Mayor Celia Wade-Brown successfully moved a motion at last night's full council meeting asking Wellington International Airport to reconsider its decision to put up the sign. It passed by 10-4.
Councillors claimed it was tacky, would be continually tagged, and would damage the city's image as being creative and cutting edge.
The point made in the last paragraph is the essence of the issue as far as we are concerned. Some wonderful films have been produced in Wellington, or have used the visual effects perfected by those involved in Wellington's film industry.
Those films have been highly creative and cutting edge. Wellington's reputation in the global film industry now is one of innovation, originality and excellence.
The proposed Wellywood sign is none of the above. It's a direct steal of an idea from Hollywood; the signwriter's equivalent of a pirated movie. Unless it's guarded 24/7, it's bound to meet some sort of unsightly fate.
So we add our voices to the chorus of those calling on Wellington International Airport Limited to reconsider this decision. The Wellington City Council doesn't want your sign; the public of Wellington doesn't want your sign. Think again, before Wellington becomes a laughing stock.
3 comments:
The WCC issued resource consent for the 'Wellywood' sign.
Cut & Paste from the WCC website:
WCC Doc # 1803758
Resource Consents
1. Non-notified - if you have all written approvals required or the effects of your proposal are
‘less than minor’
2. Limited notification - if the effects are ‘more than minor’ and localised
3. Public notification - if the effects are ‘more than minor’ and not localised
Perhaps a few questions need to be asked of how a 60 metre X 8 metre eyesore can be classed as 'less than minor'.
@Nasska, if you've quoted the rules correctly it says "or" not "and" so maybe it was authorised under the first criterion. I've used non-notified resource consents in the past to fast-track projects, and provided all council conditions are met there's no problem. They usually require the consent of immediate neighbours and often throw in some betterment of city amenities (eg planting). As an Aucklander I don't really care what Wellington does although I agree it seems tacky and unoriginal, but if it's on private land and abides by the rules it's really no-one else's business.
Jonno... I see where you're coming from in your interpretation. I'm no legal expert but my understanding was that the RMA prevented the applicant from exporting a nuisance to other property owners. In this case the sign could easily be classed as visual pollution. I don't live in Wellington but I know the area & it is hard not to feel for the residents who will be subject to this cringe making monstrosity.
Post a Comment