Reaction to the latest proposal from the Auckland Sea Stadium

Auckland's leaders have begun to express strong views on the proposal to build a new stadium on the city's waterfront, at Auckland's ports.

The Chamber of Commerce called the plan "exciting", while a senior advisor spoke out against the ploy.

An engineer specializing in submarine developments described the project as an unrealistic, unrealistic and "incredibly expensive" dream.

The proposal is to build a $ 1.8 billion stadium alongside Bledisloe Wharf. Its summit would be at the same level as St Quay, about 4.5 m above the high tide level, and its base would be 28 m below sea level.

"Fucking the stadium in the seabed eliminates most of the controversial, expensive and complex aesthetic and engineering problems of a stadium on the surface and is very convenient from a technical point of view "said Dave Wigmore, chairman of the consortium behind the project. .

The consortium said the stadium would be built at no cost to taxpayers and taxpayers.

It would be funded by the consortium, which would have the right to build housing on 9 ha at Eden Park and develop Bledisloe Wharf with apartments, commercial buildings and public spaces.

Auckland Board Planning Committee Chair Chris Darby opposes the new project.

Darby, the North Shore advisor, said that Auckland did not need a new stadium or an entirely refurbished stadium so early. It will probably take a completely renovated stadium in the 2030s.

Bledisloe Wharf's proposal is a distraction, he said on social media. The "real contenders" were a new downtown stadium located east of Spark Arena or a refurbished Eden Park. Additional work was needed to evaluate these options.

He stated that he "had not been seduced by the promise of a free and gifted stage on the waterfront … There will always be a connection with the suggestion of" free stadium ", the transfer of value of the departure of Eden Park being the first conditional access ".

Darby himself is not enthusiastic about the possibility of "hiding the bright edge of Waitematā with the huge footprint of a stadium".

Auckland Chamber of Commerce General Manager Michael Barnett said the idea of ​​the stadium was "exciting" and that it was time to celebrate the creative minds and "dreamers" behind design.

"I think anyone with a vision that looks at Auckland and is looking to improve what we do and where we go is a good thing."

"When you have a good idea, you have to put a good visual in front of people, and then everything is open to debate."

Later will come tough questions about the actual cost of operating and paying for the facility.

"The other discussion you want to have, is that you do not want to build the stadium before looking to organize events; we need a range of events that can easily be transferred to the site. "

Although initial plans provided that there would be no funding from taxpayers and taxpayers, it would be "inevitable" that they would end up paying out money.

"It's inevitable, we need a compelling story.

"There will be operational costs and, unless the inhabitants of Auckland want a large bill, we need a sequence of events."

"On the other hand, there will be employment and excellent income for the city.It takes 10 years, what about Ports of Auckland "They have nowhere to go."

Engineer Mike Murphy, who specializes in designing and building large public aquaria and other underwater structures, said, "It's nice to dream."

"However, in the real world, building a huge submerged stadium at 28 m below sea level is a practical and incredibly expensive way," he added.

The project posed enormous problems of waterproofing and anchoring sure.

"… how long will the rock anchors last before they corrode? Very skeptical, they will last 50 years."

Murphy asked how such a still-cracked concrete stretch with many construction joints could be waterproofed to withstand 28 m of water pressure.

"Sorry to pour water on the fire, but seriously, I think these guys are dreamers, Realize, build it on the earth for a third of the price."