Before the building is even finished, we are hearing that the proponents of the said establishment may be risking the attention of the Human Rights Commission. Why, because the plan is to only have residents who are over 50 (younger partners and pets are welcome though). To those seeing a quiet, possibly more genteel place to live, why is this a problem? Many older residents do not want the sound of booming music or noisy parties and the hangers on that these parties attract. There is of course no guarantee that the older residents would not cause their own list of 'grievances,' but that could be handled b y an energetic managing body. So this proposal is against the rights of those younger who wish to live in such a building. Poppycock. Why should a group not be 'choosy' in whom they have as neighbours? Am I being a snob? Well, I can't afford the fees, so I wouldn't be moving in anytime soon. There are other examples of 'living rules' that already exists in Auckland so why should this be so off the planet? If it was based on race, I would be more concerned, but this proposal is a good idea and I hope that it goes ahead. Go for it 'prospective oldies. I'd join you if it wasn't for the $7000 body corporate fees. So, moaners---Shut TFU!---oops=====such language would not be welcome, I'm sure.
Post a Comment