| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 72460 | 2006-09-13 21:15:00 | National Stadium Auckland Waterfront | Utopia (7787) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 484566 | 2006-11-04 01:06:00 | If Wellington has the 'caketin', Auckland will have the 'Auckland Potty' TM :lol: Wellington has the "Caketin" :p Auckland will have the "Pavlova" :cool: I can just hear women saying......'We're off to the Pav darling'! ;) |
Utopia (7787) | ||
| 484567 | 2006-11-04 03:28:00 | Wellington has the "Caketin" :p Auckland will have the "Pavlova" :cool: I can just hear women saying . . . . . . 'We're off to the Pav darling'! ;) LOL :D |
stu161204 (123) | ||
| 484568 | 2006-11-04 11:11:00 | Wellington has the "Caketin" :p Auckland will have the "Pavlova" :cool: I can just hear women saying . . . . . . 'We're off to the Pav darling'! ;) The picture that they are using, it looks far more like a potty or bed pan . However I doubt it would look like that, I just hope they hire a good architect to design something unique, rather than a boring internalised blob . |
rogerp (6864) | ||
| 484569 | 2006-11-05 09:25:00 | Why don't they built the Stadium where North Harbour stadium is. Plenty of land zoned for that use. Bus systems mostly in place. Just need a few Hotels etc. Anyway imagine if it was built on the waterfront and a giant tidal wave hit the harbour.....Bugger. |
wmoore (6009) | ||
| 484570 | 2006-11-05 09:44:00 | Anyway imagine if it was built on the waterfront and a giant tidal wave hit the harbour.....Bugger. aucklands waterfront is protected from such large waves by great barrier island, little barrier island, devonport, the coromandel pininsula, and rangitoto island... although a significant rise in sea level, by global warming or whatever is left of a tidal wave/tsunami after running the above gauntlet (which would serve to lessen the amplitude of the wavefront while disrupting it into smaller interfering waves:nerd:) would still flood the lower floors at worst i suppose:rolleyes: but north harbour sounds like a more reasonable place for a stadium... why dont they bulldoze the cake tin and build it there? |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 484571 | 2006-11-05 11:40:00 | but north harbour sounds like a more reasonable place for a stadium... why dont they bulldoze the cake tin and build it there? They possibly could had a second teir of seating onto westpac stadium, to bring it up to 60000, but it would cost heaps and it wasn't designed for that. Plus small population concentration. |
rogerp (6864) | ||
| 484572 | 2006-11-06 11:01:00 | aucklands waterfront is protected from such large waves by great barrier island, little barrier island, devonport, the coromandel pininsula, and rangitoto island... although a significant rise in sea level, by global warming or whatever is left of a tidal wave/tsunami after running the above gauntlet (which would serve to lessen the amplitude of the wavefront while disrupting it into smaller interfering waves:nerd:) would still flood the lower floors at worst i suppose:rolleyes: but north harbour sounds like a more reasonable place for a stadium... why dont they bulldoze the cake tin and build it there? See www.nzherald.co.nz |
wmoore (6009) | ||
| 484573 | 2006-11-06 11:27:00 | would still flood the lower floors at worst i suppose:rolleyes: "2.9m tsunami waves every 50 years on average" "destroyed by a tsunami if any part of it is built over the sea instead of entirely on reclaimed land." meaning it would be fine if they did it right, not that they should put it there anyway... the fact remains that the waterfront is relatively very well protected resulting in lesser intensity of a tsunami, but i do accept (and did) that the lower floors may get wet. "A stadium is a much more fragile thing - it would be shaken to pieces if that happened." i didnt, however, realise how fragile yet to be designed stadium may infact be. |
motorbyclist (188) | ||
| 484574 | 2006-11-07 01:49:00 | I like the idea of a new stadium with all the bells and whistles, and initially i was in favour of the waterfront position, but now I am not so sure . I hate the idea that I would walk along QUay street from the Ferry building and not be able to see Rangitoto . Rangitoto is the symbol of Auckland and its selling point . I would seem crazy to build something that blocked the view of Rangitoto from the most prominent part of downtown Auckland . Imagine New Yorkers building a giant building right in front of the Statue of liberty so that you couldnt see it from important parts of the city . Or Parisians building something 50 stories tall right in front of the Eiffel tower . Carlaw park and the MAnukau option seem better options to me . . although Carlaw park is my preference . It has all the benefits of an inner city position, people can take trains and buses more easily . You can walk from the hotels and bars in the city to the stadium and back . Dick Hubbard said that Carlaw park is too far from the city, but surely we are not that lazy that we cannot walk all of 200m . As an Aucklander who used to walk past CArlaw park every day to go to uni, I can tell you it would be a similar distance from Carlaw park to the centre of Queen street as a waterfront stadium would be . I think the best aspect of Carlaw park would be that if it is not used for 11 months out of the year, then it is not blocking anyones view of anything, or cutting people off from the waterfront . Its tucked away at the bottom of the Domain, surrounded by hills on 2 and a half sides, and a rather old and not overly inviting area of Auckland that could be revitalized by the world cup, look what the Americas cup did for the viaduct area . The stadium is simply there for when we need to host a big event, but it is in a position where, for the other 11 months of the year people will hardly notice it . |
saljens (11135) | ||
| 484575 | 2006-11-07 02:27:00 | I like the idea of a new stadium with all the bells and whistles, and initially i was in favour of the waterfront position, but now I am not so sure . I hate the idea that I would walk along QUay street from the Ferry building and not be able to see Rangitoto . Rangitoto is the symbol of Auckland and its selling point . I would seem crazy to build something that blocked the view of Rangitoto from the most prominent part of downtown Auckland . Imagine New Yorkers building a giant building right in front of the Statue of liberty so that you couldnt see it from important parts of the city . Or Parisians building something 50 stories tall right in front of the Eiffel tower . Carlaw park and the MAnukau option seem better options to me . . although Carlaw park is my preference . It has all the benefits of an inner city position, people can take trains and buses more easily . You can walk from the hotels and bars in the city to the stadium and back . Dick Hubbard said that Carlaw park is too far from the city, but surely we are not that lazy that we cannot walk all of 200m . As an Aucklander who used to walk past CArlaw park every day to go to uni, I can tell you it would be a similar distance from Carlaw park to the centre of Queen street as a waterfront stadium would be . I think the best aspect of Carlaw park would be that if it is not used for 11 months out of the year, then it is not blocking anyones view of anything, or cutting people off from the waterfront . Its tucked away at the bottom of the Domain, surrounded by hills on 2 and a half sides, and a rather old and not overly inviting area of Auckland that could be revitalized by the world cup, look what the Americas cup did for the viaduct area . The stadium is simply there for when we need to host a big event, but it is in a position where, for the other 11 months of the year people will hardly notice it . I don't know how big the carlaw park area is, however the stadium will be a multipurpose stadium, so it must be large enough for a cricket ground . The waterfront position in Auckland is now out as the ports aren't going to move in time . I think they should base the design around the telstra dome stadium in melbourne, which is a multipurpose stadium with a roof which is what we need . That cost $AUS 250 million so they should be able to build something slightly larger for less than $500 million I don't know where the cost of $750 million came from, as even the Olympic stadium in Australia didn't cost that much, and that had a 110000 capacity too . |
rogerp (6864) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 | |||||