How Ponsonby beat debt, decline and the doubters Let’s talk about that stadium in Christchurch
A multi-purpose indoor stadium should be on the priority list for the Garden City’s council.
Building an indoor stadium, after the earthquake that devastated the city in 2011, seems to be the dream that dare not speak its name in Christchurch.
Work is proceeding on restoring the town hall, completing the refurbishment of the arts centre, and building a central library.
So it should. A council should always, as then mayor Vicki Buck told me in a 1992 interview, provide more than just sewage and rubbish collections. Making people feel good about life, she believed, was also important.
A Christchurch councillor, Jamie Gough, made a similar point to me this week, when he said a problem was that those against the whole idea of a stadium seemed to be looking at the cost, not the value. To explain: If the council sold Hagley Park for housing they could pay for every project on their books. It will, of course, never happen, because the value of Hagley Park to the people who live in the city is beyond cost.
But while other entirely worthwhile projects have started, the debate on a decent multi-purpose stadium for sport, mainly rugby, and concerts, similar to the Forsyth Barr stadium in Dunedin, seems to remain on a distant back-burner.
Are rugby fans in Christchurch being selfish and boorish when they feel that in the rebuild they’re being largely bypassed by the council?
Let’s consider know them.
Who decided what projects were most important in the rebuild after the 2011 earthquake?
In June, 2013 an agreement was signed between the government and Christchurch City Council that named 14 anchor projects. Along with the central library and the town hall, one was a ‘‘rectangular’’ stadium for 35,000 people.
Who was going to pay stadium?
Central government would provide the land, the council $253 million for the buildings.
How much would rugby contribute?
Nothing at first. When the stadium was built rugby would pay a rental fee. At the temporary AMI stadium at Addington, that’s $1 million a year.
But didn’t rugby get a big insurance payout for Lancaster Park?
No. Rugby didn’t own it. The council did. Lancaster Park was included in a global settlement of $635 million for all the council’s insurance claims for earthquake damage. We don’t know how much would have been for Lancaster Park.
Is there a risk the the facts for council as we the could if be in for more than $253 million there are cost over-runs?
No. The 2013 agreement caps the council’s share. Central government would be up for over-runs.
Do we know how Christchurch ratepayers feel about a new stadium?
In February 2016 a survey of 770 people conducted by the Research First company for Canterbury rugby found 94 per cent favoured a new multi-purpose stadium, and 88 per cent of those people accepted it could mean a rates increase.
That survey is pretty startling. Can we trust it?
Yes. Remember that the people surveyed weren’t being asked about a rugby stadium, but a multipurpose stadium. Research First is a well regarded company.
So does that mean politically the smart thing would be to back a new stadium, especially a multi-purpose indoor one?
Bizarrely enough, apparently not. In a debate before the 2016 council election, mayor Lianne Dalziel was reported as saying a new stadium would be ‘‘a waste of time’’. Dalziel retained her mayoralty in a landslide.
So when is work on the stadium planned for?
At the moment it’s on the council’s agenda to start construction in 2022, although Dalziel has said that could be brought forward. It’d take four to five years to build.
Why should work start 2022 anyway?
AMI stadium at Addington was only designed to be used until this year. Last year it cost $1 million to keep it functioning.
What would a new like?
The best concept I’ve seen has been suggested by the MultiPurpose Arena Trust, a group led by Olympic hockey gold medal winner Barry Maister. Their plan would be for a multi-use arena with public facilities ranging from cafes to gym. Comments in The Press included calling it ‘‘a joke’’, ‘‘ugly’’, and an ‘‘over-priced monstrosity likely to be used about 10 times a year.’’
Hang on. Didn’t we hear similar comments before they built an indoor stadium in Dunedin?
Yep. As just one example, in 2008 former Otago council chief executive, Jolyon Manning, called it ‘‘an extraordinary extravagance. Let those who are so keen on rugby pay the bill.’’
So how is the Dunedin stadium going since it opened in 2011?
Mayor Dave Cull, originally opposed, now says that ‘‘despite reservations some of us had about the debt this would leave us with, it is gratifying the economic benefit is strong.’’ What economic benefit? The company managing the stadium estimates about $165 million has been injected into the local economy from spending on accommodation, hospitality, and tourist activities.
I’m not a ratepayer in Christchurch any more. We moved north before the earthquakes hit.
But I’ve never stopped loving Christchurch and I feel for rugby followers there who are still stuck with a temporary stadium. I’m sorry for music fans who have to travel to see the biggest stars live.
How wonderful it would be if the Christchurch stadium moved from the back of the council projects’ queue to join the A list, as was planned in 2013. before stadium be