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
484596	2006-11-10 03:36:00	Waterfront Stadium revealed: www.nzherald.co.nz :thumbs:	Utopia (7787)
484597	2006-11-11 09:45:00	It's a lot of piles for Auckland's Stadium (1900). Wellington would get hemorrhoids at the very least. Either way, it's a pain in the proverbial	R2x1 (4628)
484598	2006-11-11 11:18:00	It's a lot of piles for Auckland's Stadium (1900). Wellington would get hemorrhoids at the very least. Either way, it's a pain in the proverbial Interesting survey results in a Aucklander November 8th edition Manukau option 41% North Harbour 33% Eden Park 13% Mt Smart 8% Waterfront 5% Notice hoe Fletchers have got the job, what happened to the tender process ? I thought that where public money was involved this was a required step. An interesting point that a friend pointed out to me tonight given that the stadium will not have a roof as this apparently costs to much money, sound travels extremely well over water. You can imagine how the residents in Devenport etc are going to have to put up with on a concert night. It still annoys me that the government has in effect chosen the site for the city without asking our opinion on how they spend public funds. My personal view is that the Manukau option is in fact the best, the disadvantage of North Harbour is that A/ people do not like traveling over the bridge as at times it is a hell trip, and B/ No rail link.	gommerkrinkle (11137)
484599	2006-11-11 11:27:00	Interesting survey results in a Aucklander November 8th edition Manukau option 41% North Harbour 33% Eden Park 13% Mt Smart 8% Waterfront 5% Notice hoe Fletchers have got the job, what happened to the tender process ? I thought that where public money was involved this was a required step. An interesting point that a friend pointed out to me tonight given that the stadium will not have a roof as this apparently costs to much money, sound travels extremely well over water. You can imagine how the residents in Devenport etc are going to have to put up with on a concert night. It still annoys me that the government has in effect chosen the site for the city without asking our opinion on how they spend public funds. My personal view is that the Manukau option is in fact the best, the disadvantage of North Harbour is that A/ people do not like traveling over the bridge as at times it is a hell trip, and B/ No rail link. i agree entirely, plus it becomes aparrent that these politicians have no idea what auckland is like when they plan to build a national stadium without a roof in auckland... auckland is infamous for ****ty and unpredictable weather lol it sounded to me from the start like they'd already made up their minds about it though i hear they actually intend to repeal laws to allow this to be built in time/at all... sounds like one law for the govt and another for us :yuck: - funny how quickly things happen when it will directly benefit them:annoyed:	motorbyclist (188)
484600	2006-11-11 19:32:00	When do they ever listen to the people, this smacks of vested interests, mind you the radio people havn't helped as they keep banging on that there are only two options and thats all they are prepared to discuss. Mallard said it's up to Aucklanders and has given us two weeks almost as an after thought. How do we make our opinion heard, who is the government actually listening too ??	gommerkrinkle (11137)
484601	2006-11-11 23:38:00	I live in Christchurch and don't really care what is done about it but don't you think that we should be upgrading what we have and not spending all of our money on building a new one. Are they not thinking of Global Warming anymore? ~Matt :)	matty3 (5363)
484602	2006-11-12 04:49:00	Are they not thinking of Global Warming anymore? ~Matt :) No no... they can get carbon credits for all the hot air and toxic gas the politicians spout. As for a stadium for the World Cup... the NZRFU stuck their greedy hands up to host it, let 'em pay for it out of the money they make... and make no mistake- rugby is a business now days- not sport.	Shortcircuit (1666)
484603	2006-11-12 06:30:00	No no... they can get carbon credits for all the hot air and toxic gas the politicians spout. As for a stadium for the World Cup... the NZRFU stuck their greedy hands up to host it, let 'em pay for it out of the money they make... and make no mistake- rugby is a business now days- not sport. Attually we don't need any new stadium in time for the world cup, as all we had to provide was a 50000 seat stadium for it. Eden park is therefore large enough in it's present form, or with a few temporary stands. The Eden park board however ot greedy and the costs went up from 100 million to 300 million, which is the price you can build a brand new stadium for, and is why the government decided to look at other options. The number went up to 60000 seats verbally and wasn't a condition of hosting the world cup, the only condition was that it had to be hosted in auckland. Source Deaker on Newstalk ZB.	rogerp (6864)
484604	2006-11-12 08:05:00	I think the problem with Eden Park was that it is not a "blank slate" in terms of infrastructure development around the site, also i understand that the plan signed off by residents at the time of the world cup bid is not the plan proposed now so consent will need to be sought from locals again. Also the government concern was that it had limitations in terms of usage for concerts etc, hense if public money was pumped in they wanted a multi purpose construct. As one of the residents stated on Deakers show, there is nothing for people to do within walking distance of the stadium except 3 small bars and heaps of chinese noodle establishments.	gommerkrinkle (11137)
484605	2006-11-12 08:18:00	I heard today that 9 out of the 20 auckland council members are voting for Carlaw park. 7 wanted the waterfront stadium, 2 were undecided and another two couldnt be contacted. I think Carlaw is the best option too. Mallard said that a unanimous decision must be made by auckland in two weeks but it doesnt look likely. Someone asked just before how to make your voice heard, well, they have the email addresses of the 20 council members on the council website so you can just email them personally, even Dick Hubbard's is there. they probably wont read them but they have two weeks so you never know,	saljens (11135)
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