SkyscraperCity Forum banner
1 - 20 of 317 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,846 Posts
Hello Auckland look what Perth has got its something you will never have...



PS enjoy your 3rd world embarrassment of a stadium called Eden Park
Third world was Subiaco. Eden Park was space age compared to that dinosaur. Its about time....

And "never" is a pretty strong word - they are already talking about a replacement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Third world was Subiaco. Eden Park was space age compared to that dinosaur. Its about time....

And "never" is a pretty strong word - they are already talking about a replacement.
ouuw Eden park has history and surround by character wooden houses it is pretty cool. And yeah will be replace by a flashy dashy when that is a priority (how many people go these days) and will be built at Mt Smart the smart location for one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
Hello Auckland look what Perth has got its something you will never have...



PS enjoy your 3rd world embarrassment of a stadium called Eden Park



Apart from being the wrong shape that's anice looking stadium. Auckland could have had something similar on the waterfront butthe council and a whole bunch of negative people killed it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
940 Posts


Apart from being the wrong shape that's anice looking stadium. Auckland could have had something similar on the waterfront butthe council and a whole bunch of negative people killed it.
Because stadiums are the worst buildings possible for on the waterfront. Large and generally monolithic, and the biggest crime: inwardly focussing. Carlaw park would have been the best, but thats now uni accomodation, so somewhere on the railway land next to Spark Arena would be the next best thing. A CBD stadium would be great, but not at the expense of our waterfront.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,627 Posts
Right size stadium with entertainment area on water front

Because stadiums are the worst buildings possible for on the waterfront. Large and generally monolithic, and the biggest crime: inwardly focussing. Carlaw park would have been the best, but thats now uni accomodation, so somewhere on the railway land next to Spark Arena would be the next best thing. A CBD stadium would be great, but not at the expense of our waterfront.
if done correctly would be fantastic. There is room on and around the Harbour for every one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
Because stadiums are the worst buildings possible for on the waterfront. Large and generally monolithic, and the biggest crime: inwardly focussing. Carlaw park would have been the best, but thats now uni accomodation, so somewhere on the railway land next to Spark Arena would be the next best thing. A CBD stadium would be great, but not at the expense of our waterfront.
Not if it’s sunk into the ground like the last proposal, that was a pretty impressive bit of lateral thinking and it removes the big wall which you’re complaining about.

It’s hard to have a stadium which isn’t inward focusing, you’re going to watch a game not the building.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
Why the fixation with being smack, bang on the water front - blocking views and taking up what could be public space - as opposed to a few blocks back, or Quay Park even?
But it could be smack bang on the water front if it was sunk into the ground, with most of it underground what’s the problem. Sydney’s Oprah House is also a large building smack bang on the waterfront which is inward focusing, would you suggest he waterfront around this building would be better off without it? there’s no reason why a stadium can’t be attractive, there are plenty of good looking stadiums.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,846 Posts
But it could be smack bang on the water front if it was sunk into the ground, with most of it underground what’s the problem. Sydney’s Oprah House is also a large building smack bang on the waterfront which is inward focusing, would you suggest he waterfront around this building would be better off without it? there’s no reason why a stadium can’t be attractive, there are plenty of good looking stadiums.
Sunk into the ground on the foreshore at a time of rising sea levels?

The Opera House has a small footprint compared to that of a stadium and the surrounding area it requires. Tiny. I am OK if you want to put an iconic stadium there like that. But not what is, in effect, a big blank wall.

There is no real need for a stadium on the waterfront when it can perform the same function at a place like Quay Park. Can you tell me why it should be there other than it would look pretty in pictues? I agree as close to downtown as possible, but not there.

Much of the waterfront is already blocked from public use, so I dont see why that mistake needs to be repeated. The design of the stadium is irrelevnt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
940 Posts
Not if it’s sunk into the ground like the last proposal, that was a pretty impressive bit of lateral thinking and it removes the big wall which you’re complaining about.

It’s hard to have a stadium which isn’t inward focusing, you’re going to watch a game not the building.
I don't think its impressive lateral thinking, in a lot of ways it makes sense. But think of the additional costs involved with digging down and removing water, plus rising sea levels, and that idea, IMO, would be dead in the water (pun intended).

I think KLK is right, whats the harm in having it a few blocks back from the waters edge to allow for public space/ developments that are more human in scale?

The argument about Sydney's opera house is a little redundant also. As KLK mentioned, the footprint is far smaller than a stadiums. Yes its inwardly focusing, but I would argue that if it wasn't for its architectural merit, the public space around it would be largely vacant, much like many of the Viaducts promenades.

I think developments that activate areas around them at all times, not just game days, would be better use of our limited waterfront land.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,624 Posts
You really think they would sink a stadium into the ground without taking into account rising sea levels?? Auckland has plenty of waterfront, especially if the port is moved. From a lot of what I have read the land behind the old railway station isn’t big enough for a stadium plus there is the issue of ownership, since it was handed over to the Ngati Whatua.
 

·
Just like Sister Ray said
Joined
·
1,388 Posts
How are Auckland residents finding their local centres these days?

Having just spent time back in Birkenhead, the residential area, down on the point at least, is looking amazing with highly manicured designer gardens etc. reflecting the wealth in the area. However, Highbury shopping centre, not just the mall but the little cluster of shops on Birkenhead Ave. and Mokoia Rd. seemed very depressed, with several vacancies. The whole area also seemed fairly rundown, in contrast with the immaculate properties down and off Hinemoa St.

Is this a common situation in the smaller local centres around Auckland?

On a more positive note, great to see a tower crane in Highbury and I hope this substantial new cluster of apartments forming on Rawene Rd. can give a shot of vibrancy to the ailing Highbury Business District (HBD.)
 
1 - 20 of 317 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top