Downtown stadium remains on table

Two horse race predicted for 2024: Eden Park and another city venue

Haven’t ruled out going with multiple options. Working group chairman Shane Henderson

A downtown stadium for Auckland remains on the cards, as the decisionmaking process moved a step closer this week.

Despite recent speculation that Eden Park would be anointed as the preferred alternative, the Weekend Herald understands the situation is not clear-cut.

Instead, it is believed multiple options — including Eden Park and at least one other city centre venue — will move to the next stage, pending a vote of the wider council on May 30.

The most likely scenario will see two alternatives given a fixed period (perhaps around six months) to come up with a detailed business case and financial plan for investment, given there will be little to no ratepayer funds available, particularly in the short to medium term.

From there, there will be a chance for a direct “apples with apples” comparison of costs, benefits and longterm impact, before a final decision can be made by council towards the end of the year, with one option to be given the green light.

The council working group, set up last September by Mayor Wayne Brown, has completed their information gathering and analysis, with the final workshop last Monday.

Their brief was to find a definitive solution for Auckland’s main stadium in an arena where debate has raged for decades.

The process attracted four pitches. They are a refurbishment of Eden Park (with the project name of Eden Park 2.1), two waterfront options at Bledisloe Wharf (the “sunken stadium”) and Wynyard Quarter (a multi-stadia concept) and a downtown option as part of a wider precinct at Quay Park, also known as Te Toangaroa and backed by New Zealand Rugby.

The working group includes five councillors along with Tataki Auckland Unlimited chief executive Nick Hill, Sport New Zealand chief executive Raelene Castle and Tau Henare, as a member of the Independent Ma¯ori Statutory Board.

They received 75-minute presentations from each consortium in December and have met regularly since. They also engaged independent consultants to “kick the tyres” and conduct further due diligence, described as invaluable by working group chairman Shane Henderson.

As well as qualitative assessments, they have also given quantitative scores across different categories.

Henderson is completing briefing papers, summarising the findings of the working group, which will be presented to councillors in the week leading up to the formal vote by the wider council at the end of May.

Henderson didn’t want to discuss details of their conclusions, saying it remains a confidential process, though there may be some public dissemination later this month.

He wouldn’t comment on the likely recommendation, saying only that they “haven’t ruled out going with multiple options”, adding that some proposals appeared “more feasible” than others. The process had gone “better than expected”, with a lot of common ground, despite vigorous debate among individuals.

Though there are various hurdles, the sticking point for each proposal — including the Eden Park revamp — will be financial. Consortiums will have to demonstrate their ability to raise huge of sums of money.

The retrofit of Eden Park 2.1 has been conservatively costed at between $700 million-$800m, while the three city centre options all have price tags of more than $1 billion.

Quay Park representatives have already said — privately and publicly — they could build a stadium “at no cost” to ratepayers, given the private investment they believe will be attracted to their 15-hectare precinct, scoped to include up to four hotels, commercial buildings, apartments and hospitality venues on the eastern edge of the waterfront.

Wynyard Pt has a similar precinctled model — albeit on a smaller scale — while backers of the Bledisloe Wharf option have previously suggested that funds from a potential sale of Eden Park would form part of their bid.

According to sources, Eden Park has also told the working group they would require minimal public input, although they appear to have less concurrent development to leverage off in their proposed plan.

While the overall process is likely to be elongated — with an expected two-option race continuing for most of 2024 — that is seen as the best way forward for the city.

As one industry observer told the Weekend Herald: “This is the last chance to make a big decision with a few options on the table before they commit.

“If the council want to explore downtown options in the future, there won’t be any because the land will be used for something else by then.”