- Jeff
Stadium New Zealand Looks Awesome. I hope come November 24th this is the option the Councils support. For those who said it will look like a big white tyre, I remind them that was a computer animation of the German stadium, not the actual design.
I can't see how people would say the Actual Design would ruin the Skyline. After all there are still cranes & equipment in the ports which are far higher & more of an eyesore.
Stadium New Zealand is a better design than Eden Park. Regardless of designs the issue with Eden Park is and will forever be getting to and from the ground, and not being able to have Concerts there.
Well done Trevor Mallard, Bring on Stadium NZ!!
- Chris
Go the Waterfront - should be further over on Bledisloe. Let the ports reclaim more land.
Eden Park has had it's day - who thinks traffic and parking will be any better in 20-30years. We need proper cbd multi-sport/multi-entertainment. - how else can it pay for itself?
- Mark
What is this rubbish about a new stadium increasing tourism numbers??? How many Kiwis have decided to go to Munich for their holidays based upon the fact that they have a nice, shiny stadium there? Kiwis need to wake up and realise that we're a country of 4 million people. We don't need and can't afford things like this. Leave them to London and Munich. Why are we always trying to compete with much larger and richer Western nations?
- Andrew Stevenson
Why on earth put that monstrosity on pristine commercial land. I have major reservations that the "toilet bowl" would be completed on time prior to World Cup kickoff.
Furthermore, Auckland should be renamed the "city of dunnies". After all we already have the Vero centre version of a toilet seat.
Talk about re-branding!!!
- K E Oldham
Eden Park is a hopeless location for a major stadium, its in the middle of a residential area which places too many restrictions on its future use.
Waterfront best option, bus terminal, train station and ferry right at doorstep. Car parks, Hotels and cafes could not ask for better location. The port is the third biggest serving the biggest city why? because its cheaper not to try and freight goods through the most congested city and the slowest port in the country. The largest shipping company serving NZ was about to stop serving Auckland in favour of Tauranga because its a better port.
- Mark
Where is Ludo Campbell-Reid when you need him?
Seven months ago, Auckland City Council was proud to announce the appointment of Ludo Campbell-Reid to safeguard the design of our future Auckland. What does Ludo have to say to this foolhardy waterfront stadium proposal?
Introducing him via City Scene, Council said Campbell-Reid was "a British urban design expert who helped transform Cape Town's world-class waterfront and London's Canary Wharf will help initiate a "design-led" approach to the future development of Auckland city."
In the same article, Mayor Dick Hubbard said the appointment "shows that we're serious about raising the quality of the city's urban design. Ludo's experience with high-density developments and transport nodes will be particularly valuable to the city. The role has a strong leadership component and he will become a mentor for all of the council's urban design staff."
So let's hear some sense from Ludo! This is exactly when we need the benefit of your international experience. I thought you were appointed to be a sane and visionary voice; there to do battle against senseless development and to safeguard the aesthetics of our city. What's the point in having someone like you working for the future of our city if you keep mum on (long term) designs foisted on us by (temporary) politicians?
Come on Ludo! Lead the way back to sanity. Please!
- D Henderson
I don't really care what they do (do we have a choice?)
I just don't want to pay for it. It will just be another white elephant. It wont bring class to Auckland. Class is built by the people.
- Kanny Young
Loads of good and varied arguments here - but no-one seems to be overly concerned by the risk of sea level rises over time from Climate Change or random Tsunami threats. I agree Eden park has it's deficiencies but so does the waterfront. Where next then and how long the haggle? Christchurch must be rubbing its hands in anticipation.
- Terry Creighton
The government has again managed to create a huge controversy where none was required. The bid was won using Eden Park as the venue. Yes there are problems there, but these problems are at least measurable. There need not have been a huge controversy created by Helen and Trevor (each for their own reasons) coming in out of left field to promote something else.
The harbour front problems are simply and totally unknown at this time. There are NO solid engineering reports of what might be found, or what a rise in water (by climate or by tsunami) might do. Who has looked at what happened in New Orleans? Surely SOMEONE in government has looked at the risks involved in a waterfront development? The engineers doing our motorways haven't been able to properly estimate the work required to support a small overpass on May Road, what are the chances of getting it right with 1900(!) piles into reclaimed land Auckland Harbour's edge.
I'd love a new stadium, possibly even on the waterfront, but designed and built when there is not the huge time risk built in of a World Cup five years away. Something that can be done when ten years can be used to properly investigate the issues.
Fletcher Construction says they can do it. OK, they are a great construction company. But look what has happened at Wembley! And who says Fletcher will get the contract? Will the contract end up in court as happens so often in mega-projects?
People are saying use the money from selling Eden Park to pay for this. Sorry people, get real - Eden Park is NOT publicly owned: the Eden Park Trust Board is not about to go against their charter.
Now we will have every point of view screaming one way or another, we will have NO consensus, and the Labour government will be long gone and claiming that the project was sabotaged by their successors.
Seldom have I seen such a complete and total and totally unnecessary planning disaster.
- Patrick Rossiter
Let's get on with the new Waterfront Stadium. Eden Park should not be in contention, it has major access problems , is in a residential area, has resource consent problems and may never get the required consents.
It would become a 60,000 seat white elephant after the World Cup.
Let's go for the Waterfront with North Harbour or Mt. Smart as back up options.
- Dennis Oliver
The waterfront stadium is a fantastic idea. To all those Aucklanders complaining about parking etc - please use public transport to get to the ground as they do in most other large cities around the world. As for a multi use stadium, I ask one thing please do not make it able to be used for cricket, this will considerably reduce the atmosphere for all other events (see Wellington, Telstra Dome in Melbourne as examples). Closeness to the action will make the atmosphere considerably better and more likely for it to be filled more regularly. As someone said - lets just get on with it.
- Jason
Locals and visitors, to Auckland, who travel along the waterfront, currently get a great view across to North Shore and out to the Islands. Now its suggested that we swap part of that view for a massive grey wall costing millions of dollars, for something that will be used to its potential just a few times a year. That sounds like a very expensive wall to me.
- Peter Barnett
Why on the waterfront? It does not use any of the features of the water front - especially the views. Why site an inward looking stadium (regardless of architectural merit) in such a position? The sports fans are there for the sport, so the stadium's function is not dependant on its site. Eden Park seems to be doing a fine job as a rugby stadium; spend the $1 billion (which now seems to be available) on addressing Auckland infrastructure woes.
- Rosemary
Having discussed this matter with my colleagues we are all in agreement that the waterfront option is not the best, no one wants it and everyone prefers either Eden Park or North Harbour stadium as these are the most logical (and therefore not what the govt want) options. It seems pointless to have a a send us your views option on your latest report that merely sends you in a circle back to the main article!! Obviously you don't want our views. The government will not truly seek consultation on this matter merely pay lip service consultation and spend our money however they see fit. Once again on things that don't truly matter when we have far more pressing issues that require funding such as the old chestnuts of health, roading, police and education.
- Fleur Goodyear
Go the Waterfront Stadium, why spend $350 million on Eden Park when it can only be used for rugby and cricket and only 14 times a year because of the neighbours. Most people want to party after a game or concert and the city is the best place for that, and as for destroying public access and the scenery of the harbour at the moment the public can't access the site as it for storing containers and imported cars, very beautiful. The designers will be well aware of the impact of the stadium on the harbour and water level rising so have some faith that they know what they are doing. Nobody wanted the Sky tower in the beginning, now it is an icon. Let's get it done Auckland.
- Nathan Donald
A waterfront stadium is 'pie in the sky' and cannot be ready in time for the 2011 Rugby World Cup. It also fails to recognize the huge community investment in the existing facility, namely Eden Park, and is nothing less than pandering to the bleating of local residents who moved in long after Eden Park was established. The inability to recognize that an upgraded and expanded Eden Park would be an asset for all New Zealand is yet another example of rampant anti-Auckland feeling south of the Bombay hills. Don't put the Rugby World Cup at risk; the choice must be Eden Park!
- R Taylor
The Stadium looks fantastic and we need to start right away. How people can say it will ruin our waterfront is beyond me. Have people actually looked at what is currently there? Whilst the sight of rusty containers and imported cars is very appealing, I'll take the stadium thanks. Eden Park is a pig of a stadium. It's not multi-purpose, it's in the middle of a residential area. You almost have to park in the CBD just to get to it. And I like watching cricket played in an oval, not a triangle. So long Eden Park, you've had your day. One suggestion I have for the new stadium is that they leave room for a running track. Bring on the Commonwealth Games!!!
- Matt Atkinson
No to a waterfront stadium. You have enough trouble getting across town as it is.
It would be mayhem. And as for the expense...With Eden park maybe you could FIX your roads with the change.
- Anne Smith
It seems that Helen has requested her Jesters conjure up an eternal grand monument to her leadership come hell or high water or indeed common sense. To that Gentleman with severe varicose veins - I dismiss you to the bottom of the surgery list for evermore, enjoy watching the Rugby World Cup at the venue of your national sacrifice and Helens folly. Enjoy the real spoils of MMP - A Labour Government with the security and freedom to spend the nations' spoils as it pleases without consequence, particularly if that spending is in the centre that these days determines the Governance of the entire nation. This is not a Government with the interests of its people at heart it is a Government intoxicated with its power to control and act on every whim.
- Geoff
We are an island, pretty much in the middle of nowhere and we're looking at reducing wharf space at one of our largest cities, rather than increasing it. Where on earth are ships like the Emma Maersk (397 m long) completed in August 2006 going to dock? The company has 8 of those on order and it's obvious this is the structure of future cargo transport. Where are we going to put 11000 containers from one ship if we take away the wharf space? I believe the crew required to sail the Emma Maersk is around 13 - all of this will reduce freight costs to and from New Zealand, not to mention the 'food miles' issue raised last month. If we don't get in on the loop to be able to accommodate ships like this, we're going to miss out and pay much higher costs for smaller ships. Surely our economy is far more important than a white elephant taking up valuable space which may or may get used two or three times a year. Don't even get me started about terrorism - has everyone forgot where the Rainbow Warrior was docked? How on earth are we going to guarantee the security of patrons when we are only able to secure one side of a stadium? Flooding this week? Where was that again - oh yes, just across the road - reclaimed land isn't it? Power supply - Not that long ago we looked like fools because we couldn't supply power to the CBD for weeks due to worn out supply networks. Keep an eye on the D shackles ;)Waste - Let's just pump that into the sea and worry about it later. It's been said time and time again our old sewer structure in the CBD just isn't up to it. Am I seriously alone in my concern about the practicalities of sticking 60000 people on a floating pontoon that only has one direction of escape should any of the above problems arise? I just hope all of the patrons can swim.
- Diane
Regarding Waterfront Stadium: Wake up N.Z!. It's 2007 and N.Z needs a modern showcase Stadium for the RWC 2011 and beyond. Stop your pathetic whinging, or go and live in England where they are famous for it. If you require a positive perspective on projects like this, then travel to other cities around the world that have premier Stadiums on the waterfront. See how it has benefited the local economy and brought cash from tourists into local businesses. Otherwise go and join goodnight Kiwi and hibernate for the rest of your life, while the rest of us enjoy life at the stadium.
- Blair
I support the $380M upgrade of Eden Park. The proposed transport arrangements both bus and train are great. Eden Park does have restaurant and bars in close proximity in Kingsland and Dominion Rd and is a 10 minute cab ride from Newmarket and Parnell. A stadium as described would be an eye sore on the waterfront. Let's be sensible and leave the Rugby World Cup where it belongs EDEN PARK
- Ian McKenzie
Auckland now has the possibility to do something with the harbour and the city waterfront which will benefit the entire population. Hopefully it will be the start of doing away with the eyesore of the container terminal which should never have been constructed in that location in the first place.
- Michael Barcham
There is no question that the Auckland waterfront needs to be developed so that the people of Auckland and the tourists can enjoy this jewel. Putting a huge stadium on it just seems to extend the legacy of an inaccessible, industrial waterfront for another 100 years. Putting a stadium into the Manukau harbour or extending the North Harbour stadium seem a not to be missed opportunity to really give Auckland a much needed internationally acclaimed public transport system. Clearly this would contribute to getting more Aucklanders to use the public transport system and so reduce green house gases, and turn our clean green tourist brochure image into a reality.
- Muni Dubrau
This is possibly the most ludicrous idea I've heard since the implementation of the NCEA. We have a MAJOR traffic problem in Auckland City and are being discouraged from bringing cars into the city. So what does the Council propose? Bring 60,000 extra people into the city - and knowing how most of population behaves, that will be one person per car too! We don't even know the full impact that Vector stadium will have on the traffic yet as that hasn't even been finished yet - months and months overdue.
- Kim Paykel
The real problem is our political supremos thinking we should host the RWC. Since then, it's been all downhill. Why don't we let someone else host it and we can ALL watch it on TV, which most of us would need to do anyway. No costly white elephant, no traffic disruptions, no accommodation shortages, no further bickering, no more political grandstanding.
- Terry Pullen
You guys are crazy.
Are you even listening to the people of Auckland let alone the rest of the country?? Eden park would be the better option by far, with the rest of the money left over (500 mil proposed for the new one) could go on upgrading Auckland's transport.
If that stadium was built there traffic problems would be worse than it already gets in rush hour, I mean it's bad enough just trying to get out of the city and you guys want to make it worse. Eden Park is somewhere I have been going since I was a kid and take my kids there now, why build new when Eden park is already to go.
- Logan Poole
Great news and I support the waterfront stadium. They should just get on with it now and everyone get behind it. Wishful thinking as this country has so many wingers & negative moaners.
- Murray Lamont
The government should be more responsible and calculate the rate of return and the years required to break even on this project instead of happily burping out hyped-jargon such as 'national icon', 'benefit to auckland', blah blah blah. There has been way too many pet projects lately, and not all of them essential to the betterment of the country in the long run. Investments on essential items such as electricity and roading are easier to justify compared to a white elephant such as a new rugby stadium, which is hoping to cash in on a one off event. Unless there is a guarantee that the stadium would be packed full on all events and many events are lined up at the venue (we have to remember that this stadium would have to compete with the ones we currently have), I would not support it. I just about had it being a cash cow to some silly politician's whim. As a parting shot, why not fast track building a new electricity generator, why not put more money (ie $500 million more) into! roads? There's more urgent priorities out there, and you don't have to look hard for it.
- Thomas Tham
We think the building of a new staduim is a total waste of money. Surely there are many other stadiums that could be upgraded. At the end of the day it is only going to become another white elephant that us, the Auckland Ratepayers are going to have to support. Remember, not all of us are Rugby fans.
- Trish & Colin Black
Locals and visitors, to Auckland, who travel along the waterfront, currently get a great view across to North Shore and out to the Islands. Now its suggested that we swap part of that view for a massive grey wall costing millions of dollars, for something that will be used to its potential just a few times a year. That sounds like a very expensive wall to me.
- Peter Barnett
The vision for a national stadium is great, and the location superb. As long as it can be completed in time and will have more uses than a single rugby match in 2011 (particularly non-sporting events as well), then it has my support.However, we are yet to see any sort of plan to replace the lost port capacity. This is highly worrying, considering that the site would need to be cleared immediately for work to start on the stadium.
- Robbie Ellis
Please, not on the waterfront, not now, not in the future, not ever. Once the waterfront is saddled with a monstrosity like this, it's there forever. Gone are the chances for us and future generations to have a beautiful waterfront accessible to all. Where's the RMA when you really need it?
- Elaine Bell
The waterfront stadium is a brilliant suggestion to move New Zealand forward. We should embrace this exciting opportunity rather than exercise our traditional tall poppy instincts. A modern stadium can grow the economy of the city by enabling Auckland to attract and host the events to become a world class city.
- Brynley Price
Waterfront definitely. To pay for it sell Eden Park to developers so they can build high density living apartments there. The Eden Park residents have only complained about the stadium, yet they bought into the area. Bowl it, put up council flats, that'll learn them.
- Danny Wells
Eden Park is plainly past it's use by date as there is no realistic way of getting patrons to the venue at it's current capacity much less an increased one.That said the waterfront wouldn't be my first pick for an alternative venue. The logical choice for that would be somewhere out by the airport because transportation to and from that area is already being upgraded. So swap the land that eden park is on for a chunk of residential land out by the airport. Most of the residents would be happy to get away from the aircraft noise which wouldn't greatly effect patrons or players at the stadium.A win win as they used to say!However since everyone has a better idea and this project needs to be resolved quickly may as well whack it on the waterfront.People shouldn't get too hung up on the telephone number price because figures that large aren't real, they are notional, although spending them creates a net benefit which swirls through the economy probably about the time of the next election (isn't that a coincidence!) in a way that a plethora of smaller expenditures never seem to do.There is a great deal of entertainment still to be had watching the doyens of the Eden Park Trust board recant the line they dutifully stuck to when they had been led to believe the new stadium proposal was a 'straw man' ploy designed to be cast asunder by public pressure, leaving the hugely expensive and universally (by the residents) opposed Eden Park refurbishment requiring fast track legislation, with at least two years of nimby's waving placards and lying in front of bulldozers. Still it would be smart to put the trustees out of their misery by transferring the Eden Park Trust structure across to waterfront stadium. Trouble is there will be a long list of people who have been promised favour by the current govt and somehow one doubts if many from the Eden Park Trust Board are close to the top of that list.We need a grandstand to watch the venerable old sport of creating huge projects and awarding contracts, favours and perks from. Hmm. . . sounds like another great idea to bring to fruition in 2008.
- Phil Sinclair
I think waterfront is good idea given that it will give Auckland with good architectural milestone & will be better than revamping Eden Park.Eden Park is small compared to most of the stadiums in Australia and it is not proper location to handle more masses.I would personally think if moving ports and other issues relating to the environment are taken care of,then Waterfront is better idea.
- Sarah
Its the 21st century and NZ needs a 21st century stadium. I don't care how much they spend on Eden Park, its always going to look like a hotch-potch quilt knitted by someones grandmother. The waterfront is the perfect location because of its proximity to Britomart. No matter where you live in Auckland there will be no excuse for you to drive your car.Whats more it will be able to host world class bands and who knows - a FIFA World Cup co-hosted by NZ and Australia?
-Brad
I say upgrade North Harbour Stadium.There are more than enough roads linked to the stadium to prevent traffic woes, noise is not a factor, neither is parking. Are traffic problems in the Auckland CBD not bad enough, the government wants to compound it with a wasteful stadium.
- cindy
Most of the comments here are just politicking; no one is even thinking about the future of NZ; its place in the world and putting a grand show for the 2011 rugby world cup. Just because someone dislikes the government, does not mean any future development of Auckland's identity should be quashed by going against what the government thinks. By the way Helen lives in Wellington probably about 6days a week.I can't believe Aucklanders have become such moaners and wingers.If you develop a stadium which is close to the transport hub and hotels, don't you think we have a potential to host many more events in the future. Eden park is in the middle of a suburb, where parking can be a pain in the neck, the railway and roads could never be developed, because the houses are built so close to the existing infrastructure. Buying land around kingsland and Eden park will not come cheap, if the govt had to do this to develop the infrastructure. Anyhow, redeveloping Eden park is only going to make Linday Crocker and his mates sit in VIP lounge and sip champagne while we all try to get to Eden park.As an engineering consultant, the waterfront stadium can be developed on time and in less than 800M.By the way if you listened to NZRFU executives on how they won the rights to the world cup - very impressive - but then they went on to say that everyone to start saving for the tickets now! Its highly likely that most of us won't even be at the games!
I say get on with it!
- Mel
I think that the waterfront idea is good BUT NOT NECESSARY!!!!!! When we were awarded the world cup it was based on what we had - Eden Park - not what we think we might have. I can see no logical reason for this to be done!!! All it will do is make all the other stadiums in Auckland a waste of space!! Do up Eden park. Not necessarily to the extent originally proposed, or add more to North Harbour. Just don't waste time and OUR tax payers money on something that is not necessary. There will be even less parking in town than at Eden Park!. How spending this much money on a stadium can't honestly be justified when there are so many more parts of NZ's 'operation' that could use that money - and we would all benefit from, eg health, education etc. I am personally not happy to be told that we will have to pay EXTRA taxes to cover this!!!
- Linda
No matter how politicians spin it, a waterfront stadium sounds more like a pretty concept that is going to be hugely overspent and so a complete waste of taxpayers' money. It's still an Auckland thing, and no amount of talk is going to persuade the rest of us. Eden Park is already there so why waste it? I personally don't care where the rugby world cup is held, unless my taxes are going to be spent on it.
- Shirley Goodwin
It says that government is prepared to change some laws in order for the new development to be fast tracked; yet they are not prepared to change the laws to allow sunday night games and concerts at Eden park. Lets hope they can also change the treaty of Waitangi if it means completion on time!
- Dave Worthington
I am strongly opposed to the waterfront stadium proposal. A sports stadium in the most congested part of Auckland is bad enough, and one that is designed to divide the harbour from the city is even worse. Vector Arena and Eden park will have been wasted, Auckland's suburbs will have been ignored, and huge amounts of money will have been squandered when we are screaming out for investment in better infrastructure and urban design. Please - no bread and circuses, we deserve better!
- Thomas Rabone
I believe that the best for long term growth of Auckland as a major city is to proceed with the water-front option. This is a Stadium for NZ, and NZ to be put on the Map Internationally, with this being a major attraction for tourism, you have to think big to achieve the best results.
- Paul Rinke
In the rush to have something built the effect of climate change has not been considered. Will this $500 million stadium on the waterfront become a large paddling pool should sea levels raise, as the media have all been telling us, they will.
- Andrew B
Ditch the waterfront idea... the MPs who are behind it are just electioneering. It will balloon to an extremely high cost and turn into a white elephant. It will severely disrupt our import/export facilities in our main port and probably be uncompleted when it is needed... People talk about it putting Auckland on the world map? We are already there and a stadium is not going to make much, if any, difference.... Can many people say what the stadiums used for prior Olympics or World Cups have really been what has attracted them to that city??? I doubt it... Let's stop being silly and look back to the temporary stands at a far smaller cost and less negative impact to the country. We have numerous stadiums in Auckland already.
- Steve
As usual this incompetent government and short sighted City Council has over looked the best option - North Harbour Stadium. The bigest problem with Auckland is that everything is in the city centre. It's time to front up on the public transport issue - having the stadium at North Harbour would be the perfect driver for this. It's the more economical option and the difference could be spent on a light rail link that would last longer than the view weeks of a Rugby World Cup and be beneficial to more people.
- Gene B
I do not support a waterfront stadium because of ;- Cost. A possible $1 billion price tag. There are better things to spend this money on - Aklds delapidated infrastructure. A sports stadium does not make us a world class city.- Location. A 35m high industrial sturcture, no matter how well designed, is still not appropriate for our waterfront space. It shows a lack of imagination and is an example of "us too" thinking.- Delivery. I have concerns if a project of this magnitude can be completed in time. I am not an ardent Rugby supporter but I have no wish for our country to forfeit the World Cup. Duplication. Auckland is already home to 3 stadiums. Do we need another one ( Helenstaad ? )- Consultation. The Labour goverment seems to have already made up it's mind regarding the stadium. Auckland already suffers from an almost total lack of centralised planning and this is yet another example.I live next to Eden Park and I would rather deal with 3 years of construction related disruption than have a waterfront stadium.
- Darren Cuiffe
Mallards billion dollar folly should be bowled for a duck!
- Colin
Come on Auckland - wake up and smell the coffee. The 2011 Rugby World Cup provides a reason to develop a world class sporting venue that this city truly needs. If we don't do it now - it will never happen. Eden Park has done it's dash, pouring more money into that would be like buying dial up internet when a broadband option is available.The extra revenue that will be generated from having such a venue so close to the CBD and bars/restaraunts will benefit the city.Look at what the cake Tin has done for Wellington. It is time we claimed back some of the lost ground
- Kevin A
I am frankly mystified at the support for Eden Park re-development, an excellent venue originally but now very innaccessible, and therefore inn appropriate as a venue for International usage. The Wellington Stadium has clearly demonstrated it's value, and Government are now offering Auckland the same opportunity - cannot fathom anyone opposing such a wonderful chance to secure a world class venue - with stadia such as this we have a platform for further world stage events.
- Paul Weir
Well the plot has clearly been lost. We will now be the laughing stock of the world when the stadium isn't finished and if it is complete,
