Quay Park stadium for Auckland?
-
@Kiwiwomble
The Eden Park 2.0 concept includes a new North Stand, upgraded East and West stands, a retractable roof, a field able to be used for both rectangle and oval sporting codes, and variable seating capacities.
-
@Rapido said in Quay Park stadium for Auckland?:
Crowd would have been about 1/3rd full for an ODI in those days. Lounge maybe half full.
Yeah that would be fine
Just to be clear the the conversation around the North stand getting replaced started not long after it was built. When the South stand was approved the plan was to replace the North stand a few years later.. the claim even back then was they'd made mistakes with the design
Not sure if people have the same view of the lounge as me but I'll expand on my criticisms. A lot of these issues are probably caused by the North stand having a lot of office space and the public areas fit around that.
The entry gates are very narrow compared to the other side. At certain times the choke point is really bad. When anyone decides to use the lift take up the whole processing area. The South stand entry is a lot wider and processes people quickly
The narrow gate then goes into a narrow staircase. This is more of an issue when exiting. The staircase for the Balcony bar on the other side would be 2.5-3 times as wide. I've seen people pushed over from behind multiple times.. I would hate to be there if there was a fire alarm or other incident
As much as possible I used to arrive early and bolt out the door on full time
I spent more times towards the western end of that lounge. There's toilets at the end, an area to order food, then a bar before opening into the large area. When it's busy the queue for the food goes back to the tables by the windows. Anyone going for a piss has to push throw those food queues to get to the bathroom. During a Test match the bathroom queue can reach the food queue. It's chaos. Sure, this could possibly be fixed by knocking down some walls etc
The last point is more of a preference but I think the lounge should be set up more like the Balcony bar with an outdoor concourse behind the members stadium seats. People use the tables there, mingle etc but it adds to ground atmosphere. The North lounge has thousands of people behind glass that do not interact with whats happening the the field. It's sterile and kills the atmosphere (compared to the other side)
Ideally the North side would have something like the Balcony bar but at least twice as long
Of course the lounge criticisms are the not the main reason you'd replace a stand. I was just commenting on how shit a lot of that stand is compared to the South
-
@dogmeat said in Quay Park stadium for Auckland?:
@Kiwiwomble
The Eden Park 2.0 concept includes a new North Stand, upgraded East and West stands, a retractable roof, a field able to be used for both rectangle and oval sporting codes, and variable seating capacities.I used to sit by some engineers that worked on some EP designs. It sounded like that had multiple different plans depending on the budget etc. Hopefully they have some other designs for if the cricket moved
A lot of the 2.0 plans seem over the top. A roof..
Interestingly they kept talking about doing a quick build for FIFA ladies world cup. Claimed they had a promise of gov funding to do the West stand at least. The thinking was that the East and West stand get done first to prevent sound leakage and they'll have more concerts. They were also trying to get money to for the North stand rebuild
I presume covid ended that possibility and some of this stuff made its way into the 2.0 plan
-
-
@gt12 said in Quay Park stadium for Auckland?:
especially if it is a financial albatross.
usage is critical. Ignoring playoffs:
Blues 8 home games a year
Warriors 12
NPC 6ish
Soccer side ...???So unless you can base more teams there, you're getting basically weekly usage for half the year. What do you do with a rectangular stadium in summer? Concerts?
Remember the finance - say you can find free money to 'only' leave $500M to borrow. You need a return of 10% to cover finance and upkeep (minimum! Probably an underestimate) ... so $50M/year.
With a 50k stadium, that is $1000/seat, or $40 per event (assuming 25 events/year) ON TOP OF the ticket price.The assumptions start to become Christchurch Cathedral level of heroic.
Edit: and that assumes every seat sells for every game...
-
the horse has bolted so this is pretty pointless post....but that would be the benefit of a proper national stadium....you accept it is a loss making machine used for AB's tests, concerts...maybe the odd time the All whites have a big game...
but then the super teams all have smaller more appropriate sized stadiums for the majority of their games, so build some big show piece on the waterfront....but the blues/auckland play at a nice compact 15-20k stadium at eden park, they get to keep their spiritual home and all the history associated with it...wont look empty and so give the illusion of being more popular and move the big annoying event away from the annoyed neighbours
-
short of making it a national stadium, i can't see the numbers stacking up for a big shiny stadium in Auckland.
The Blues get what, 7 home games a season? And what do they draw? 20,000?
You could move the Warriors, but will that make more or less people go? Their base is South Auckland
Fat chance Auckland NPC games are even worth opening the bars of a big stadium.
So every seat you are building you are hoping to fill and pay for on test match days. Auckland gets what, two a year? So unless you are hoping to move all tests to Auckland, and use the big stadium to generate revenue like England do, it doesn't make sense.Contrast with Suncorp. Brisbane is about 600k people bigger than Auckland. Their big shiny stadium holds 52,000. It hosts the Broncos, the Reds, half the Dolphins, and the Roar (nicely, over summer).
Their big events are:
At least two Wallaby tests a year
Magic Round
State of Origin.The Broncos will play there 13 times, and average 30,000. Throw in half a dozen Dolphins games. 7 Reds games. 13 Roar games. And any finals those teams play. That's a lot of football (though shit Roar crowds are awful). That's 40 regular season football games a year. Throw in finals, and the crowds they bring, and that stadium gets worked.
It's also a concert venue of good size (too small for Taylor Swift though). -
@mariner4life we need to come up with designs/layouts that allow teams to only open one stand (opposite the camera) for crowds, have everything thats needed on one side too try and make operating these things ( if we're going to insist every town has a biggish stadium) cheaper/easier
-
@mariner4life Auckland FC would be another tennant. 13 odd games.
-
@KiwiMurph thats the new A-League team? i wonder what their crowd expectations are
-
@Kiwiwomble Yep. They start playing end of this year
-
forgot about them, that does change the equation a little.
-
@mariner4life Little would be right
Across 8 seasons the Kingz /Knights best ever crowd was 9,000 and the average as far as I can work out was about 3.
Given the Phoenix will have hoovered up some of AFC's potential fanbase the idea that they would be in a position to meaningfully support any ground seems optimistic.
-
The Roar aren't much better, but they fill in the year
-
The phoenix draw 15-20k when they play but that's a one off event rather than a whole season. Their average attendance in Wellington has been about 8k, with 3-5k when things are bleak and 10-12 when things are good. I'd guess Auckland will have similar goals, and maybe the popularity of recent phoenix games will help them succeed where the previous attempts failed.
-
@Cyclops said in Quay Park stadium for Auckland?:
The phoenix draw 15-20k when they play but that's a one off event rather than a whole season. Their average attendance in Wellington has been about 8k, with 3-5k when things are bleak and 10-12 when things are good. I'd guess Auckland will have similar goals, and maybe the popularity of recent phoenix games will help them succeed where the previous attempts failed.
The Auckland franchise will be wise to learn from how the Phoenix has been able to develop a hard core following, because you need that during the ups and downs
-
If Eden park 2.0 gets approved, it really needs to be given the money for the full 2.0 plans.
It will be cheaper than a completely new stadium and still provide a world class facility.
Make a decision now because in 12 months time it will have cost them 10’s of millions more in increased costs.
