Barry Rae: Stadium plan is a shortsighted goal

Auckland has embarked on the important process of opening up the downtown waterfront for the enjoyment of the public. Key moves include generating activities for a wide range of people.

That includes turning the waterfront into a public open space and creating and enhancing pedestrian and visual links between the city and the harbour.

In particular, the barriers between the city and its harbour are being broken down. The location of the World Cup rugby stadium on the waterfront will be contrary to these moves. It will be like replacing a container terminal with a terminal container.

A stadium for 60,000 people is a huge structure. It will have a footprint measuring 200m x 250m, an area of five rugby fields.

This is equivalent to four city blocks such as those bounded by Quay, Gore, Fort and Queen Sts, without any access through.

It is also equivalent to the whole of Victoria Park east of the Viaduct. Its width is equal to that of Albert Park. The stadium will have a height of about 35m, equivalent to a 10-storey building.

If located on Bledisloe Wharf the stadium will occupy its full width.

If located over Captain Cook and Marsden Wharves, it will occupy the full length of Captain Cook Wharf and displace water space, not only between Captain Cook and Marsden Wharves, but also between Marsden and Bledisloe Wharves. This would effectively remove 200m of potential waterfront environment abutting Quay Street.

A stadium located between Bledisloe Wharf and Captain Cook Wharf, would block off connections to the waterfront from Gore St and Britomart Place which are key elements of the competition-winning Britomart redevelopment scheme.

The stadium in this location would also block off views of the harbour from development along the northern face of the Britomart area as well as from Quay St, and cause significant shading for 200m.

As viewed from the harbour, the stadium would be totally out of scale with the Auckland waterfront and obscure 10 existing buildings fronting Quay St.

While these waterfront sites are close to existing bus and rail transport and carparking buildings, these alone will be insufficient to cope with 60,000 spectators all wanting to arrive and leave at much the same time.

Assuming spectator travel is divided equally among car, bus and train, the stadium will generate some 7,000 cars, 400 buses and 40 trains.

After-match and emergency crowd dispersal is a key consideration. From a waterfront location 60,000 people can disperse in one direction only and that is to Quay St, or into the harbour.

The footprint size does not include crowd dispersal and public open space in front of, and around, the stadium. This will occupy more water space.

A stadium is, by definition, an inward-looking facility.

Except for VIPs, whose boxes would no doubt overlook the harbour as well as the playing field, no one will see the harbour.

There is no relationship between watching a rugby game and the waterfront environment.

Stadia typically present inactive, dead facades to their exterior. Even the much acclaimed Suncorp stadium in Brisbane does this. Their exteriors should be sleeved with other supporting activities that operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week to integrate the stadium both visually and functionally with its surrounding environment. On the waterfront this will take even more water space.

Large single-purpose, facilities like this one generate dysfunctional and disconnected urban environments. On the waterfront this is more of a concern, perhaps, than anywhere else in the city.

The problem with deadline projects is that they must be focused on their core objective and all other considerations, which require on-going collaboration, are in danger of dropping off the radar.

Key locational criteria for the stadium include:

* Efficient accessibility from the Auckland/Waikato/Bay of Plenty region by all transport modes.

* Safe egress and emergency dispersal of all spectators.

* Compatibility, synergy and integration with the surrounding environment.

The waterfront locations fail to meet these criteria.

If the stadium were to be located within the western reclamation (tank farm) as has also been suggested (highly unlikely given the numerous existing uses and long-term leases), it would occupy more than 25 per cent of the reclamation between Fanshawe and Jellicoe Sts.

Its adverse impact on views, diversity of activities, multiplicity of access and scale of development would be significant.

This location is also a cul-de-sac with severe access constraints.

The relationship of the stadium with the central commercial area must also be questioned.

The proportion of spectators actually using central area hotels,restaurants and the like is likely to be very low.

Finally, the Rugby World Cup 2011 is a one-off event. The America's Cup facilities were directly associated with the harbour and were designed to be dismantled or removed.

A sports stadium, however, will be there for generations, without a continuing international role, stuffing up the Auckland waterfront simply for the glory of 2011.

* Barry Rae is a director of Transurban, consultants on urban development, and Adjunct Professor of urban design at the University of Auckland.