What I did was point out the wide range of the cost estimates and draw attention to the quantum of costs and their impact on ratepayers.
The possibility that the costs may be taken from other projects does not diminish the overall cost to ratepayers and would no doubt meet opposition from proponents of the projects affected.
It should also be noted that the Board advocated to Auckland Council for funding to be included in the 2015-2025 Long Term Plan.
I also called on the board to provide cost estimates for the aquatic centre if they were available so that an accurate evaluation could be made of the redevelopment options being considered.
Dr Haynes refers to master planning as ‘‘an aspirational planning exercise’’.
But board member Graham Easte has been quoted as saying ‘‘We are going to redevelop Chamberlain Park’’ and ‘‘The status quo is not an option’’ and on April 22 the board resolved (on a majority vote) to approve, in principle, a redesign of Chamberlain Park and to approve four scenarios for consultation.
An amendment to include the status quo in consultation was lost.
This strongly suggests that Chamberlain Park redevelopment is an intention, not an aspiration, in spite of there being a ‘‘None of the above’’ option in the phase two consultation.