115 replies to this topic

[stevie]

I know. Auckland has such a spectacular skyline especially at night. But the waterfront really lets the city down, I mean it’s a hell of a lot better now with the Viaduct Basin but there are still large areas of it like Tank farm and Bledsoe Wharf. Just picture a brand new stadium, all lit up, right on the waterfront with the sky tower and the city sparkling in the back ground. It would just be spectacular and could really put Auckland on the map.

[Rafa]

cape town took its loss making waterfront and turned it into the most visited place in south africa on average 23 million tourists a year, and the most valuable land asset in south africa..auckland can do the same. All this took place within a matter of years.

ooh...im thinking a waterfront olympic park...how much space at the waterfront from those images above could be opened up or used as space for a waterfront

[stevie]

Mo Rush, on Sep 16 2006, 01:38 PM, said:

cape town took its loss making waterfront and turned it into the most visited place in south africa on average 23 million tourists a year, and the most valuable land asset in south africa..auckland can do the same. All this took place within a matter of years.

ooh...im thinking a waterfront olympic park...how much space at the waterfront from those images above could be opened up or used as space for a waterfront

Practically all of it. The Auckland city council is looking at relocating the ports of Auckland away from the waterfront opening up all of it to development. It’s just what to put there is the process they are going through now. This is the website of the project on Tankfarm Design Concept

[Rafa]

Essentially, any waterfront project or redevelopment is going to be a success, and auckland has the potential to create something spectacular.

[mattygs]

Change of plan, the NZ Herald today reports that Prime Minister Helen Clark and Sports/Rugby World Cup 2011 Minister Trevor Mallard are seriously considering a *stadium over the water* concept.
It is thought that Bledisloe Wharf is abit too valuable to the port, and an alternate site between Captain Cook and Marsden Wharf's is being looked into.

Quote

Stadium over water latest plan

Monday September 18, 2006
By Bernard Orsman




A second proposal for a national stadium built over water near the bottom of Queen St is under serious Government consideration for the 2011 Rugby World Cup.

The Herald understands architects and engineers are working on plans for a 60,000-seat stadium between Captain Cook and Marsden wharves. It would be built on hundreds of piles driven into the seabed to carry the weight of a stadium.

The proposal is separate from the suggested $350 million stadium flagged last week for nearby Bledisloe Wharf. That option looks unlikely because the wharf is the country's third-busiest container terminal.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Helen Clark and a spokeswoman for Rugby World Cup Minister Trevor Mallard did not deny the latest plan when it was put to them by the Herald yesterday.

They remained tight-lipped about whether they are evaluating potential downtown waterfront sites as an alternative to upgrading Eden Park at a cost of $320 million. A report will go to the Cabinet next month.

The Herald understands that Helen Clark and Mr Mallard strongly favour a waterfront stadium, if a site can be secured and the project developed in time for the 2011 tournament.

Mr Mallard's submission on the Eden Park upgrade stressed the regional and national significance, the economic, social and cultural benefits from a "world-class stadium".

"A piece of world-class infrastructure has the potential to add to the urban form of Auckland and act as a source of regional and national pride," Mr Mallard said.

Captain Cook and Marsden wharves are used by Ports of Auckland for importing used cars as they are old and cannot take the weight of cranes.

It is understood the wharves could be handed over for the stadium by the Auckland Regional Council, which owns the port company through its investment arm, Auckland Regional Holdings. The ARC would have to compensate the port company for the wharves but would get the money back in a dividend.

It is not known how much the Captain Cook/Marsden stadium would cost or how much wharf and water space would be needed.

The roofed, 56,500-seat Telstra Dome in Melbourne Docklands was built on a 2ha site 170m by 140m in 2000 at a cost of $530 million.

Structural engineer Murray Jacobs, who has designed some of the biggest buildings in Auckland, said there was no reason why a stadium could not be built over water using hundreds of piles with bracing to take lateral loads.

"With engineering most things can be done. It is just a matter of money," he said.

Mr Jacobs said a concrete structure over water would have a "small premium" over building on firm ground, adding it was surprising how clever design could reduce costs.

The idea for a waterfront stadium has captured the public imagination, with more than two-thirds of nearly 200 people who sent emails to the Herald last week on the Bledisloe Wharf option saying a new purpose-built stadium would be a showcase for the city and the nation.

It's great to see there is enthusiasm from the government in at least looking into this option, how more appropriate than making an icon on the Auckland harbourfront - paying tribute to our most love game.

On the same issue, IRB Chief Mike Millar seems all positive about the progress made so far about the RWC, saying that the NZRU has shown it is probably the most organised rugby union in the world, and that the planning is further along compared to any other previous host nation at the same time.

[stevie]

It was interesting to see the Head of the Eden Park redevelopment project ocme out yesterday saying that becasue we don't know where the final is going to be held that we risk the Australian union trying to take the hosting right away from us. Sounds to me like someone is just trying to gain more support for Eden Park.

Edited by nzolympic, 17 September 2006 - 09:49 PM.

[mattygs]

nzolympic, on Sep 18 2006, 08:12 PM, said:

I was interesting to see the Head of the Eden Park redevelopment project ocme out yesterday saying that becasue we don't know where the final is going to be held that we risk the Australian union trying to take the hosting right away from us. Sounds to me like someone is just trying to gain more support for Eden Park.

He just knows how the minds of a Kiwi works, get everyone edgy by saying the Aussies are wanting to take it away, absolute bullshit.
The Eden Park plan is all ready to go, the plans are drawn up, resource consent is all underway - it's just that people (in very very high places) are looking at all the options.
In other words, it's a pretty good fallback plan (having it at a redeveloped Eden Park)

[Rafa]

fantastic...a waterfront stadium like YAY. 2010 south africa 2011 new zealand and in 2012 ill be londoning.

[Rafa]

[arwebb]

A stadium over the water? Doesn't that sound a bit risky?