Eden Park
-
@no-quarter I either drive and have a 15 minute walk back to the car or if I intend to make a night of it catch the free bus to and from Takapuna.
I have always had a drink in my hand well within an hour of the final whistle.
I caught a train to the (notorious) Opening Ceremony in 2011. I honestly think part of the problem is Kiwi crowds think they can turn up 5 minutes before kick off.
A CBD site on railway land would be OK but as Duluth points out there would be space constraints and a site there would still be a good 20-30 minute walk to the entertainment zone.
The one thing I do not want is a waterfront stadium as proposed for the RWC.
Way to totally ruin the waterfront.
@dogmeat said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@no-quarter I either drive and have a 15 minute walk back to the car or if I intend to make a night of it catch the free bus to and from Takapuna.
I have always had a drink in my hand well within an hour of the final whistle.
I caught a train to the (notorious) Opening Ceremony in 2011. I honestly think part of the problem is Kiwi crowds think they can turn up 5 minutes before kick off.
A CBD site on railway land would be OK but as Duluth points out there would be space constraints and a site there would still be a good 20-30 minute walk to the entertainment zone.
The one thing I do not want is a waterfront stadium as proposed for the RWC.
Way to totally ruin the waterfront.
why would it ruin the waterfront - if it was done right it would enhance it - like opera house in sydney.
it can't make it any farking worse!
-
If rugby left Eden Park, the stadium would be too expensive to maintain (I imagine). Cricket would want to leave and the land would be used for housing. You get the feeling that a new stadium will be built at some point but it won't be for a while.
The other point no one has addressed is if you want to built a $1.5 billion stadium why would you spend lots on a stadium in Christchurch? Why would you bother playing tests at Waikato Stadium? If there is a new state of the art stadium in Auckland, Eden Park will probably get four tests a year, one in Wellington and one in Dunedin. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.Maori land too - so you'll be getting slapped with the same few $$$ charge you get added when you go to stuff at Spark Arena.
which is bullshit - don't understand how you can lease the land but still charge punters on top for a ticket..
-
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.Maori land too - so you'll be getting slapped with the same few $$$ charge you get added when you go to stuff at Spark Arena.
which is bullshit - don't understand how you can lease the land but still charge punters on top for a ticket..
@williethewaiter said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.Maori land too - so you'll be getting slapped with the same few $$$ charge you get added when you go to stuff at Spark Arena.
which is bullshit - don't understand how you can lease the land but still charge punters on top for a ticket..
It's good business though. I'm assuming it was part of the lease negotiation so no one can moan about it post lease signing if it was known.
-
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.Maori land too - so you'll be getting slapped with the same few $$$ charge you get added when you go to stuff at Spark Arena.
which is bullshit - don't understand how you can lease the land but still charge punters on top for a ticket..
@williethewaiter Because a stadium would effectively be a 13 story blank wall right on the waterfront with no street activation at all.
Sports stadia are buzzing for a couple of hours either side of a major event. Otherwise they are monolithic prison like structures that dominate their immediate environment.
There's a reason why any images always show a night scene with lots of pretty coloured lights shining up into the black sky. Its because during the day they look like a bunker/prison/warehouse.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the above but does anyone really expect this is what would be delivered in Akl. There is also a reason why most modern developments are in industrial wastelands
-
@williethewaiter said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.Maori land too - so you'll be getting slapped with the same few $$$ charge you get added when you go to stuff at Spark Arena.
which is bullshit - don't understand how you can lease the land but still charge punters on top for a ticket..
It's good business though. I'm assuming it was part of the lease negotiation so no one can moan about it post lease signing if it was known.
@hooroo said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
It's good business though. I'm assuming it was part of the lease negotiation so no one can moan about it post lease signing if it was known.
The lease is set at a % of land value, renewed at certain intervals. The land value isn't the undeveloped value though - it's what it could be worth if you built a massive carpark on it. Therefore, once the rent got reviewed, a whole shedload of tenants found they got smashed with massive leasehold bills.
Moral of the story: be very very careful taking leasehold land. Can be super expensive
link
http://conveyancingshop.co.nz/the-risky-business-of-investing-in-leasehold-land/apartments at Scene Three on Beach Rd in Auckland City facing an increasing of ground rent of 470%. This means that owners of a small one bedroom apartment who were paying $1400 per annum could now be paying $8000
-
If rugby left Eden Park, the stadium would be too expensive to maintain (I imagine). Cricket would want to leave and the land would be used for housing. You get the feeling that a new stadium will be built at some point but it won't be for a while.
The other point no one has addressed is if you want to built a $1.5 billion stadium why would you spend lots on a stadium in Christchurch? Why would you bother playing tests at Waikato Stadium? If there is a new state of the art stadium in Auckland, Eden Park will probably get four tests a year, one in Wellington and one in Dunedin. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
If rugby left Eden Park, the stadium would be too expensive to maintain (I imagine). Cricket would want to leave and the land would be used for housing. You get the feeling that a new stadium will be built at some point but it won't be for a while.
The other point no one has addressed is if you want to built a $1.5 billion stadium why would you spend lots on a stadium in Christchurch? Why would you bother playing tests at Waikato Stadium? If there is a new state of the art stadium in Auckland, Eden Park will probably get four tests a year, one in Wellington and one in Dunedin. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.
I'm all for a National Stadium, IF it hosts ALL the big tests. But if the NZRU policy remains that 35,000+ seat stadiums can bid for big tests, then Christchurch MUST be in that mix, which will be an argument to come once the feasibility report gets done on a MUA here.
I'm happy to travel for a test against Australia, SA or the Lions if there was to be a true national stadium in Auckland, and in that case all we need in Chch is something with 25,000 - 35,000 seats.
Excuse the pun, but it's all about level playing fields and if Wellington can host big tests then Chch also needs a stadium of 35,000+ seats.
Or build a 50,000+ seat national stadium in Auckland, give them all the games against the big three sides and then let the rest of the country bid for games against the NH sides, PI teams and Argentina etc.
-
@williethewaiter Because a stadium would effectively be a 13 story blank wall right on the waterfront with no street activation at all.
Sports stadia are buzzing for a couple of hours either side of a major event. Otherwise they are monolithic prison like structures that dominate their immediate environment.
There's a reason why any images always show a night scene with lots of pretty coloured lights shining up into the black sky. Its because during the day they look like a bunker/prison/warehouse.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the above but does anyone really expect this is what would be delivered in Akl. There is also a reason why most modern developments are in industrial wastelands
@dogmeat said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@williethewaiter Because a stadium would effectively be a 13 story blank wall right on the waterfront with no street activation at all.
Sports stadia are buzzing for a couple of hours either side of a major event. Otherwise they are monolithic prison like structures that dominate their immediate environment.
There's a reason why any images always show a night scene with lots of pretty coloured lights shining up into the black sky. Its because during the day they look like a bunker/prison/warehouse.
I'm sure there are exceptions to the above but does anyone really expect this is what would be delivered in Akl. There is also a reason why most modern developments are in industrial wastelands
I agree. And the issue will be, there would be no room for aesthetic niceties when trying to build the maximum capacity stadia for minimal cost. Like Forsyth Barr, which is practical, comfortable, unique in NZ and highly functional, but ain't no architectural marvel. The arches on the roof look ok from Pine Hill on the way into Dunners, but that's as flash as it gets. The plastic wrap they chucked around the outside of Eden Park for the RWC to make it look more like an arena and a little more pleasing to the eye, is the kind of look you'd need to go for on a permanent basis if you had a waterfront stadium in Auckland.
-
@hydro11 said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
If rugby left Eden Park, the stadium would be too expensive to maintain (I imagine). Cricket would want to leave and the land would be used for housing. You get the feeling that a new stadium will be built at some point but it won't be for a while.
The other point no one has addressed is if you want to built a $1.5 billion stadium why would you spend lots on a stadium in Christchurch? Why would you bother playing tests at Waikato Stadium? If there is a new state of the art stadium in Auckland, Eden Park will probably get four tests a year, one in Wellington and one in Dunedin. Also tickets will have to be more expensive.
I'm all for a National Stadium, IF it hosts ALL the big tests. But if the NZRU policy remains that 35,000+ seat stadiums can bid for big tests, then Christchurch MUST be in that mix, which will be an argument to come once the feasibility report gets done on a MUA here.
I'm happy to travel for a test against Australia, SA or the Lions if there was to be a true national stadium in Auckland, and in that case all we need in Chch is something with 25,000 - 35,000 seats.
Excuse the pun, but it's all about level playing fields and if Wellington can host big tests then Chch also needs a stadium of 35,000+ seats.
Or build a 50,000+ seat national stadium in Auckland, give them all the games against the big three sides and then let the rest of the country bid for games against the NH sides, PI teams and Argentina etc.
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
-
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
@chris-b said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
If all the big games are in Auckland people will travel from around the country to attend
-
@chris-b said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
If all the big games are in Auckland people will travel from around the country to attend
@canefan Maybe.
To be honest, it's years since I've been to an ABs test and more years since I traveled specifically to go to one.
I don't really know anyone in Nelson who regularly travels to test matches or, in fact, is keen on driving as far as Blenheim to watch the Mako.
The novelty of traveling wears off - especially once you're adding flight and accommodation costs.
-
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
@chris-b said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
I think @shark mentioned the top three being in AKL and the rest by allocation/bid throughout the rest which in my eyes means France would play in Wellington/Christchurch/Dunedin.
-
@chris-b said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@shark I'm not sure that the Auckland market can actually sustain the attendance numbers for a national stadium if you play every big test there.
Sure, you could sell out three Lions tests no problem - but, would you sell out three French tests? And then Oz and SA as well? And the equivalent year after year?
I reckon the market would rapidly be saturated once the novelty of a new stadium wore off.
I think @shark mentioned the top three being in AKL and the rest by allocation/bid throughout the rest which in my eyes means France would play in Wellington/Christchurch/Dunedin.
-
I go to at least one AB Test p.a. usually at EP but in my dotage I am looking at travelling to overseas tests or other NZ venues more and more. The issue when looking at elsewhere in NZ is infrastructure. I looked at a Dunedin test two years ago. Nearest I could get accommodation was Oamaru.
This year I can meet up with some people in Sydney for a weekend far cheaper than I could do Dunedin
-
The ship has sailed as far as I'm concerned - can't justify spending what it would cost, and then leaving eden park to rot.
Having said that, the national stadium argument isn't a bad one, but it would to be dotting the i's and crossing the t's to bring EP up to that. It's 50% away from being a true world class stadium, as both the north and south stands are excellent, but the ends are rubbish.
-
The ship has sailed as far as I'm concerned - can't justify spending what it would cost, and then leaving eden park to rot.
Having said that, the national stadium argument isn't a bad one, but it would to be dotting the i's and crossing the t's to bring EP up to that. It's 50% away from being a true world class stadium, as both the north and south stands are excellent, but the ends are rubbish.
@majorrage said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
The ship has sailed as far as I'm concerned - can't justify spending what it would cost, and then leaving eden park to rot.
Having said that, the national stadium argument isn't a bad one, but it would to be dotting the i's and crossing the t's to bring EP up to that. It's 50% away from being a true world class stadium, as both the north and south stands are excellent, but the ends are rubbish.
Kind of needs to be one or the other (ie rugby/soccer sized) or cricket sized. It's neither.
-
Yeah, I totally agree. Reality his that Auckland simply isnt' big enough to have multiple stadiums for multiple sports.
Mt Smart should have been ditched years ago, with the warriors also playing (and funding) Eden Park.
Beautiful stadium that Albany is, what does it add to the equation?
for really big cricket matches requiring the capacity ... play them in wellington.
Why can't Auckland be the "home of NZ rugby" and Wellington the "home of NZ cricket? Wellington arguably already is with the Basin Reserve anyway. The travelling distances aren't THAT inhibitive. Both cities have plentiful hotel accomodation, and to put on additional flights (or even some more trains) for travel between isn't going to present any more logistical challenges than it already does.
-
Yeah, I totally agree. Reality his that Auckland simply isnt' big enough to have multiple stadiums for multiple sports.
Mt Smart should have been ditched years ago, with the warriors also playing (and funding) Eden Park.
Beautiful stadium that Albany is, what does it add to the equation?
for really big cricket matches requiring the capacity ... play them in wellington.
Why can't Auckland be the "home of NZ rugby" and Wellington the "home of NZ cricket? Wellington arguably already is with the Basin Reserve anyway. The travelling distances aren't THAT inhibitive. Both cities have plentiful hotel accomodation, and to put on additional flights (or even some more trains) for travel between isn't going to present any more logistical challenges than it already does.
@majorrage said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
Why can't Auckland be the "home of NZ rugby" and Wellington the "home of NZ cricket? Wellington arguably already is with the Basin Reserve anyway. The travelling distances aren't THAT inhibitive. Both cities have plentiful hotel accomodation, and to put on additional flights (or even some more trains) for travel between isn't going to present any more logistical challenges than it already does.
Probably because cricket is more weather dependent and Wellington has worse weather?
-
@hooroo That's one of his options - but, I'm responding to the first option he's suggesting for if we have a "National" stadium in Auckland.
@chris-b said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
@hooroo That's one of his options - but, I'm responding to the first option he's suggesting for if we have a "National" stadium in Auckland.
A national stadium doesn't mean playing every test in Auckland. I said it would be the big games (Tier 1?) which is Au, SA and the Lions. Maybe the occasional test VS England or France depending on who's likely to draw a crowd. So we're talking two to three tests a year most years. Then the rest of the centres around the country would bid for the balance.
-
Yeah, I totally agree. Reality his that Auckland simply isnt' big enough to have multiple stadiums for multiple sports.
Mt Smart should have been ditched years ago, with the warriors also playing (and funding) Eden Park.
Beautiful stadium that Albany is, what does it add to the equation?
for really big cricket matches requiring the capacity ... play them in wellington.
Why can't Auckland be the "home of NZ rugby" and Wellington the "home of NZ cricket? Wellington arguably already is with the Basin Reserve anyway. The travelling distances aren't THAT inhibitive. Both cities have plentiful hotel accomodation, and to put on additional flights (or even some more trains) for travel between isn't going to present any more logistical challenges than it already does.
@majorrage said in Eden Park - the fortress no one wants:
Why can't Auckland be the "home of NZ rugby" and Wellington the "home of NZ cricket?
I agree - but Eden Park is half owned by a Trust to promote cricket - and they compromise the shit out of designs and facilities toa ccommodate both.
I said before 2011 that we had just missed the boat in terms of the opportunity to develop a dual purpose venue. How good would Eden Park be if there was a dedicated rectangular stadium on one side, and an expanded No 2 ground on the other. Shared facilities, etc. Still has issues with consent conditions on operation and access, but you'd have a viable stadium for about the same amount of $$$ you have spent already.
