Stadium group seeks costs

Percy Shelley wrote many years ago of the follies of monument building by ego-ridden rulers. It is wise to reflect on his observations and remind ourselves of history.

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

I think you'll find that the gyratory is gone from the SH88 design (according to comments by Richard Walls on the What If? stadium blog) and that the Caversham Bypass is also funded under National Land Transport Programme 2009-12. I'm sure the University would take issue with your assertion that the realignment is only to do with the Stadium.

Remember where that 65% from the NZTA comes from - helicopters from the Reserve Bank don't just magically drop money on the NZTA - it comes from our taxes - it's our share of what's also spent on motorways in Auckland. It could equally be being put to other uses like fixing up the Southern Motorway mess through Caversham. Without the stadium there's no reason to close Anzac Avenue and therefore no reason for moving SH88 and building that silly expensive roundabout-in-the-sky over the railway tracks.
Of course there are going to be unexpected consequences - heaven help you if you're child is at LPHS - that road is going to become a real problem - north bound traffic from the port will start taking it and we parents will no longer be able to pick our kids up and drive straight on through down Anzac Ave to town, instead all traffic will be turning in front of the school - the small roundabout in front of the school that people park in when picking up kids will have to be widened and moved.

I've just returned from Montreal where the covered stadium there is indeed a noteworthy tourist attraction. It was built in 1974 for the Olympics, and was only just recently paid off at a cost of some one billion Canadian dollars. Unfortunately, nothing much happens in the stadium at all except for the guided tours, which cost Canadian $18. Otherwise, the stadium stands pretty much empty for most of the time, much to the chagrin of the people of Montreal. There is an occasional soccer exhibition match, and school children can play indoors there in the winter. There is a strange fascination in viewing a huge empty structure, monument to some primitive tribe's vanished gods....

No one would class the stadium to be as a tourist attraction. Those who suggest that are indeed deluded. The fact is it's the city as a 'whole' that is and having a decent stadium won't mean the cruise ships all have tours to it but it can't hurt to have it and the surrounding new walkways and alike that will be near it. Certainly a lot better than the run down under used harbour side location that it was. You could argue that the extension to the mall was a waste of someone's dollars but again it's all adding to the city in some small part of a jigsaw. As does the Chinese gardens etc. As for the we all get old and most have children so let's spend it all on that well heck theres an idea. Develop the hospital buy new everything, upgrade all the schools educate everyone and then watch them leave asap for another city that has more to offer.

'We' have now bought into all the Carisbrook debts. Cost - well over $7m, so, clearly, 'we' have definitely spent money on Carisbrook. Correction - squandered.

The NZTA will be paying 65% of the SH88 diversion cost. God knows why they pay anything because the change will make things much worst for traffic.

Costs and Benefits:- Some will benefit from The Chin Rugby Stadium - businesses like Air NZ and some hotels and motels and restaurants. This is expected to happen about one weekend every two years. Half a game per year is the difference between Carisbrook and the new class B stadium. Rugby is the only sport to benefit because the other sports have adequate facilities already and would not want to pay extra to hire Chin's Stadium. The important things to remember are that-
- The construction cost is enormous
- The yearly operating losses will be relentless and perpetual
- The idea of squeezing Dunedin ratepayers even more in order to benefit Air NZ and a few local businesses amounts to a subsidy of the few by the many. The average ratepayer will receive no benefits only costs.

The DCC calls this Economic Development and the stadium is only one of many hare-brained EDU projects. Just ask them how many of their Upstart businesses went bankrupt this year. You could say that Chin's Stadium is already insolvent because we know it will always make losses. The sooner we demolish it, the less it will cost us in the end.

So you're saying that the stadium's economic success depends on how well a rugby team does? I hope our council has bought some insurance in case they continue to suck ...

Stadiums are not roller coasters - there aren't groups of stadium fans who travel the world to visit the great stadiums - and this one will be a minor, quite boring looking one at that. We will not be getting hoards of people coming to look at our stadium - maybe one or two deluded souls - at $100m a pop.

At least we all use schools/hospitals etc. We mostly have children and we all grow old. We all don't play or are interested in subsidising the NZRU.

So you saying us ratepayers are topping up the roading for the tune off $29 million are you? It gets worse every day. Didn't the council say it was only paying for half of what the council itself said is $45 million the cost of re-alignment? Another $7mill on top of last week's revised figure, sorry.

"We" never spent money on Carisbrook. The ORFU paid for it all by selling corporate boxes.

Punchy, you really are seriously misinformed. Funding for the SH88 realignment, costing some $16m, has been provisionally approved by the New Zealand Transport Authority (formerly Transit NZ and the Land Transport Safety Authority) within the National Land Transport Programme 2009-12, which was released in August this year. You can read the documentation yourself on the NZTA website - no conspiracies from Council necessary. Likewise the cycleway $7m govt funding is to extend the existing cycleway from Maia/Ravensbourne to Port Chalmers - why pertinent? Cycleway curtailment along with the Tahuna stage 2 wastewater treatment plant have both been raised in the past as projects likely to be stopped by the stadium going ahead, i.e alleged 'opportunity costs'.
I can only assume that the $15m you are referring to is the govt's contribution to the stadium construction, which has been done through the Ministry of Economic Development as a grant provisional on the completion of the stadium by Rugby World Cup 2011.

Super 14 is expanding to Super 15 in 2011 - there was more than 10 applicants for the new franchise. NZRFU are making a healthy profit - they have almost 100 million in reserve. Yes, some smaller provinces, like Tasman and Manawatu have been struggling. Yes, the Highlanders have money troubles, but that is related to on field performances and not getting the crowd numbers. It's also part of being the smallest Super 14 franchise. Until the mid 2000s, the Highlanders were getting crowds in the mid 30,000s on a regular basis. If the form returns, so do the crowds.
The problem with the road, and the reason it needs to be moved, is that it runs through the campus area where there are a lot of students. It is dangerous to have logging trucks and the volume of traffic running through here. A number of students walk along Anzac Ave, park here, or cross over to the UNIPOL. The long term goal has always been to move the road.
A further goal is to create a cycleway. Yes, there is one that goes over the hill, but I don't think many people would like to cycle that track to get to work every day.

Now class I have had it up to here with this fruitless negativity. The decision to build our wonderful new playground has been made and whether you or your parents agree with it is now irrelevant. Look outside the window and you can see construction has already begun. I remind you that regardless of how trivial you think it may be, every decent school has playground facilities and yes they do unfortunately cost money. Sure, the nurses quarters are a little out of date and could use some investment. Heck the drainage in the bathroom has only just been upgraded after however long. The simple fact of the matter is the old playground was undoubtedly in need of replacement. I understand you may personally prefer to sit inside during the lunch break but that has no bearing on the value this unique and wonderful structure adds to the school as a whole. Of course Dunedin Intermediate would not close if we had decided to persevere with the tired and old but what future does that hold? We have always been a proud and forward looking bunch and recognised by the wider community as such. This is how we will stay. Day will follow night, night follow day and who knows, one day too you may come out and play. I know you are constantly worried that it may rain, however this new facility has a roof.

Of course the problem is that it was the same people who told us that $9m to fix up Carisbrook was the way to go are the ones in favour of the second stadium - so I agree with you, good money after bad is not a good idea, we shouldn't be spending $340m over 20 years to build it.

And not get over the 20 year thing? My rates are going to be high for 20 years, every year Mr Farry's minions will reach into my wallet and take some more of my hard earned cash so that you can do the equivalent of going to the pictures. We don't subsidise Hoyts, we shouldn't do the same to professional rugby - it's a business and should act like one, not like a small child with its hand out begging, and then getting the mob to rifle our pockets when it doesn't get its own way.

Stadium v health, stadium v childcare, stadium v old folks homes, stadium v schools, stadium v space travel and so on and on and on..
What if we spent the money on this or that.... and on and on.
Hells bells we could talk till the cows come home on what is good for the town and the 'children' dont forget the children please remember the children... LOL.
The stadium is worth the money and even if empty as said before can only help the town's image as a place to visit. Can we truly afford to be the only south island city that dosnt have one? I say no.

if that were really true - then Dunedin's motel and restaurant owners would have forked out the $340m years ago - or when Mr Farry told us he was going to build a stadium and finance it completely privately, they would have come running ... but they didn't.

Equally we haven't seen the Chamber of Commerce or Business Round Table calling for higher rates on local businesses to pay for a stadium.

Why? Because it's not in their interest to do so - they know they're not going to make the $340m back over 20 years (plus the profit one would normally expect on such a private deal).

What is in their interest is to get some other mug to pay for it so that they can profit without making the larger investment themselves. That's why we're paying for a stadium and not private investors - we're too much of a soft touch - no more.

Flights in and out of Dunedin are not going to increase - do you think Air NZ has a bunch of planes sitting idle somewhere waiting for rugby games to happen in Dunedin? They've been cutting back flights - try and get a direct flight to or from Auckland in the afternoon/evening - you're going to be stuck in Chch for an hour or so whether you like it or not - all that a game in Dunedin will do will be to fill empty seats on existing flights which recently seem to be running pretty full - there might only be 1-200 empty seats into Dunedin a day (that's about enough for your two teams, no spectators). Even over a few days it's certainly not enough to make a dent in the 30,000 seats at Carisbrook (or fewer seats in the new stadium). The ORFU has been giving precedence to locals for tickets to games recently - I think they understand that that's the way to fill Carisbrook - it also means fewer people in hotels/etc etc.

You are correct. The highway realignment for SH88 has been on the books for a number of years now, pre-dating the choosing of Logan Park as a site for a new stadium. From memory part of the reasoning was to allow for continued growth of the University campus area which now takes in most of the land in and around Anzac Ave, Union St, Albany St.
The government won't be paying the total cost of the roading project, they never do. It is a subsidised project as is most of the roading work undertaken by Councils around the country.

Say the council buys and covers the running costs of say 4 extra mri scanners and a suite of xray machines in Dnedin Hospital and covers all the running costs of hospice in NEV. Who would get the greater benefit ? My kids and the entire population of Dunedin. I went for a xray a few weeks ago. They had a 3 month waiting list because I was told half their machines had broken down. This I dare say would cost only about half the interest bill the council is wasting on stadium each year.

If I am mistaken then why do we have on the news and in the papers the financial mess that the NZRU are in and that Super 12/14 going to be cut to 9 teams, regional rugby unions going bankrupt and there is even reports that our Highlanders are in dire need? I live at Sawyers Bay and travel into the city each day. I travel on a perfectly good road with no hassle even with logging trucks etc along Anzac ave to the one-way. Perfect. So there was no need for this 45 million plus roadwork to be undertaken.

That's where you are wrong "punchy". Numbers for the NPC are way up on the last few years. Club rugby spectators are at some of the highest levels seen for decades. And with regards to the realignment of SH88, this is being paid for the govt has agreed to fund the SH88 realignment in the recently announced National Land Transport Programme.

Oh dear it seems that some on here are putting a price on the stadium in order to prove succsess or not. That isn't what it's about. Carisbrook is old and well out of date and as the $9million band aid didn't work why throw more money at it? It's time it was replaced and the new stadium is the way to go. So what if it remains empty for months on end?
I still say it gives the town an advantage to have it more than to not. What do all you moaners banging on about the cost reccomend - we let the old stadium crumble and then leave ourselves without any stadium at all? Some things that are built can't have a price for success label on them and this is one of them. Not having the stadium would condem us to getting left behind and all the town would have then is a university and little else. Get over the 20 year debt thing (sigh) it's old hat. Stuff will always cost us poor old tax payers whether we want it or not. What is sad is that the likes of the moaners won't suppourt the stadium when it's built. Instead I think boycotting it to prove a point. Still I bet their kids when they grow up will go to see events there.

Sadly, wingy1234 et al, the occasional flash-in-the-pan, which a rugby event may cause, will not compensate for the out-pouring of operating expenses for your favourite over-rated attraction. For all the glowing optimism of you and others, you mustn't forget the many highly respected voices raised in criticism and condemnation, including at the town hall meeting - notably Michael Stedman whose business acumen is undeniable. The numbers don't lie, though there are some who would manipulate them.

Can't see over the high fence they put round the site. I can see tips of cranes etc, can't see the sence of ???

Look around your rugby local club, empty seats, half the membership as 5 years ago still declining. Going out to speak to the public may get another opinion I suggest

Two times every four years for, say six weeks every hotel/motel is completly full in Dunedin. Good investment for $45 million in interest alone. Oh yeah.

Is this another half truth put out by council? I read the paper every day and as far as I read maybe goverment will pay half of roading costs but that takes in the $15 million they already gave and that has already been diverted. Give me some of this hot air and I will go and live the life of luxury in riviera (France)
cycleway? That's already built and being used from Logan Park to Ravie isn't it? So why bring that up? Stick to the question.

Roller, it's pretty obvious to all including the STS that more will benefit from the stadium than just rugby. What about how every motel is full that weekend, buses come from all around to come to the rugby. Restaurants are packed to the rafters for a couple of days, taxis are full, retail shops throughout town have said they record large increases in sales. Flights in and out of Dunedin increase. The NZRU pay local firms to market the games around town, posters are printed, tickets are printed. There will be a spin off for Dunedin tourism being projected around the world, especially for a French/South Africa test. I think if you actually thought about your comment before posting it, you will see others are benefiting, not just rugby. I for one don't play rugby, never have and I am benefiting because I enjoy watching live rugby.

Punchy, I think you'll find that the govt has agreed to fund the SH88 realignment in the recently announced National Land Transport Programme. Also included is the Maia to Port Chalmers cycleway so no one can claim that project is an 'opportunity cost' of the stadium. Like so many anti-stadium claims it's just hot air. Stop the Stadium has lost its case and lost the plot; like anyone bringing a Court case, they should pay costs if the Court awards them.