Riccarton AWT

[Freda]

Think its a stockpile area....but deciphering plans is not a strong point of mine.

I like the notion that run-off will 'percolate into groundwater '  or something like that.

I wonder if the fact that CHCH was built on a swamp and, in places, groundwater will come up to meet you if you are digging a posthole, might be relevant? 

[curious]

7 hours ago, Rusty said:

What is this monstrosity?

Looks quite large. Would probably be a good spot for a public grandstand. 

if you are not taking the piss, it IS the public grandstand! Now unused.

Edited November 7, 2020 by curious

[curious]

1 hour ago, Freda said:

Think its a stockpile area....but deciphering plans is not a strong point of mine.

I like the notion that run-off will 'percolate into groundwater '  or something like that.

I wonder if the fact that CHCH was built on a swamp and, in places, groundwater will come up to meet you if you are digging a posthole, might be relevant? 

You'd think they'd have run it to the stream?

[Freda]

41 minutes ago, curious said:

You'd think they'd have run it to the stream?

What stream?

[Freda]

48 minutes ago, curious said:

if you are not taking the piss, it IS the public grandstand! Now unused.

Yeah..on a second look, quite right..soon to be demolished, we believe..so will be a stockpile indeed!

[curious]

Is there evidence for these claims in the proposal?

The proposed synthetic surface is advantageous, when compared to the current grass training
surface, for many reasons including:
• reduced horse injuries (through superior cushioning);
• reduced on-going maintenance costs;
• no requirement for irrigation; and
• the elimination of dust (being a dust-free surface).

[curious]

14 hours ago, curious said:

What are the two chutes? 1200 and 1400?

Oh I see now it's the 1400 and 1600. The 1600 looks a bit questionable with that turn so soon after?

[curious]

29 minutes ago, Freda said:

What stream?

Is it the Paparua stream that runs through the back carpark area? Or has that disappeared? They may not be allowed to run the water into that.

[Chief Stipe]

4 hours ago, Freda said:

Think its a stockpile area....but deciphering plans is not a strong point of mine.

I like the notion that run-off will 'percolate into groundwater '  or something like that.

I wonder if the fact that CHCH was built on a swamp and, in places, groundwater will come up to meet you if you are digging a posthole, might be relevant? 

How are synthetic polymers e.g. polyester benign to the environment and groundwater?  Aren't they microplastics that persist in the environment?  

Just asking.

As for the silica sand - I hope they check it for snakes, spiders and other OZ nasties before spreading it around.

[nomates]

2 hours ago, curious said:

Is there evidence for these claims in the proposal?

The proposed synthetic surface is advantageous, when compared to the current grass training
surface, for many reasons including:
• reduced horse injuries (through superior cushioning);
• reduced on-going maintenance costs;
• no requirement for irrigation; and
• the elimination of dust (being a dust-free surface).

It sounds like they are trying to sell the dream .

[Huey]

4 hours ago, nomates said:

It sounds like they are trying to sell the dream .

Heard it all before, sit back and watch it all unfold!

[Joe Bloggs]

It'll be a nightmare scenario, a Toowoomba trainer told me he couldn't believe they didn't get feedback from the committee.....it'll go tits up, and the lunatics will sail off into the sunset......unbelievable. A training aid? for who exactly?

[mikeynz]

1 minute ago, Huey said:

NZ Racings approach - Build it and they will come! -  Won't necessarily work.

Does it make sense Riccarton building another stand that mostly is unemployed,a lot of racing now is for the tv product,the watch from homes.

[nomates]

15 minutes ago, Huey said:

Part of the problem is that racing won't take a fair an un bias view of itself and put something together to better utilise its existing assets , instead it has extreme bias (as seen in the M report) and decisions being made that make no operational or financial sense for the future of the sport, particularly in the CD. i.e. if one venue doesn't work the idea is just to keep doing what youre doing at that venue or build an AWT that solves everyones problems apparently.

This is exactly my point , all of us in fact have been saying for ages , why spend $15mil at Palmy on an A/W or Riccarton . Do what they are doing up north , close them and put in a  Strathayr , it's a no brainer for mine . But that doesn't give the trainers what they have all been banging on about and praising the A/W's for , TRAINING and TRIALING , they don't really give a shit about the racing aspect , they might say they do but deep down they know that all that matters for them is training and trialing . Putting in Strathayr's doesn't give them that all year round top quality training track . And i get that , but for all round betterment of NZ racing , putting in Strathayr's is the winning option .

[Running Man]

47 minutes ago, Huey said:

Wouldn't the SI be better to try to put a deal together to get a Strathyr in rather than an AWT, like is being done in Auckland? Certainly sounds like the resources are there to at least take a look at it.

100% but they wont

[Freda]

1 hour ago, Huey said:

Wouldn't the SI be better to try to put a deal together to get a Strathyr in rather than an AWT, like is being done in Auckland? Certainly sounds like the resources are there to at least take a look at it.

A Strathayr would be fantastic, to replace the existing turf course.   But, as far as I am aware, the resources AREN'T there to look at that.  The AWT is mostly funded by the PGF, with the cost over-runs met by some capital from the housing development.   That PGF funding is not available for anything else.

[curious]

44 minutes ago, Freda said:

  That PGF funding is not available for anything else.

But surely it could be or have been if that's what had been applied for?

[curious]

Interesting that Auckland which missed out on the AWT funding have gone for the Strathayr. And it looks like all 3 clubs will be involved.

Edited November 9, 2020 by curious

[Freda]

1 hour ago, curious said:

But surely it could be or have been if that's what had been applied for?

My understanding is that the AWT funding is Winston's baby, probably payback for the NZFirst support from the Waikato.

It wasn't 'applied ' for in the general sense,  it was for the AWT or nothing.  

How funding from the PGF arrived in Christchurch City is another head scratcher.

[Pitman]

5 hours ago, Freda said:  

How funding from the PGF arrived in Christchurch City is another head scratcher.

Please explain why it is

[nomates]

12 minutes ago, Pitman said:

Please explain why it is

Ha , if you don't know what the PGF is and what it's purpose is would be the only explanation as to why you don't know why it is a head scratcher . 

But then if you don't look too far past how the A/W will serve yourself then you wouldn't want to know what the PGF is for and why it has been used erroneously in this and Palmerston North's instance .

But perhaps if you don't understand why it is a head scratcher it is because you know the reasons why two cities were given this funding that the rest of us don't , please enlighten us . 

[curious]

1 hour ago, Pitman said:

Please explain why it is

"All regions of New Zealand are eligible for funding under the PGF, excluding the metropolitan areas of Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch."

[curious]

Presumably  Riccarton is not considered part of the metropolitan area of Christchurch?

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/423144/how-a-christchurch-city-race-track-bagged-provincial-growth-fund-money

Edited November 9, 2020 by curious

[Chief Stipe]

Apparently there hasn't been a lot of progress yet on the Riccarton AWT apart from the enforcement of all track work being completed by 8:30am.

The latest decision in the ECAN consent process is attached.

 

CRC211852DecisionDocuments.PDF

[Chief Stipe]

Do any locals know if the "Grass Swale's" have been built yet?

Operational-Phase Stormwater

The operational stormwater system provides for shallow soakage for treatment and even dispersal prior to direct discharge into deeper soils.

A grassed swale is proposed which will have a primary function to convey stormwater but will also provide a level of soakage and treatment prior to discharging to the soakage devices.

Stormwater from the track is to be collected through kerb outlets into the swale before flowing into soakage devices, which will be located at approximately 100 metre intervals and constructed from perforated concrete well liners (900mm diameter, 1-3 metres deep), with a low profile ‘scruffy dome’ lid.

Small 400mm high check dams will be constructed in the swale at approximately 100 metre intervals adjacent to each soakage device. The dams serve to maintain smaller catchments around the track, which will mean the volume of water will be distributed evenly around the track during rain events, rather than all flowing to the low point at ‘Back Turn 1’ and flooding it.

The design has been validated against a six hour 1 in 10 year event (48.8mm total rainfall) and a six hour 1 in 100 year (83mm total rainfall), during which the applicant states stormwater can be fully stored in the swale on the inside of the track. Soakage calculations submitted with the application show that it will take 39 hours to dispose of the 1 in 10 year event and 66 hours to dispose of the 1 in 100 year event.

The check dams hold the water in the swale for storage and disposal. Rapid soak holes/porous well liners allow the stormwater to disperse into the deep, well-draining soils beneath the site.

Stormwater runoff in excess of the stormwater system will be diverted to the centre of the racetracks. The application seeks a duration of 35 years for the operational stormwater discharges.