We have expired our Stadium survey. Thank you for your votes - all 727 of them. The main reason we ran the survey was to provide for a range of perspectives and views but especially those of urban designers and architects who we felt should have a voice on this issue. The Manukau Harbour option (left) proposed by Bossley Copeland Architects led our survey at every point and came through with 26.41% of the vote.
We have expired our Stadium survey. Thank you for your votes - all 727 of them. The main reason we ran the survey was to provide for a range of perspectives and views but especially those of urban designers and architects who we felt should have a voice on this issue. The Manukau Harbour option (left) proposed by Bossley Copeland Architects led our survey at every point and came through with 26.41% of the vote.
Check out how the others fared below:

Manukau Harbour 26.41 % (192)
Carlaw Park 5.50 % (40)
Eden Park revamp 22.01 % (160)
CBD waterfront option 18.43 % (134)
None of above /below - invest in public transport 18.84 % (137)
North Harbour Stadium 8.80 % (64)

The Manukau Harbour option was very popular in the early days of our survey up to around 55%. Infact it has managed to lead the survey throughout the 13 days we had it live though its margin considerably reduced. This could reflect the fact that the mainstream media seemed to sustain a two-horse race - either Eden Park or the Waterfront - and voters tended towards those 2 options also on our site over time. I personally think it's part of our cultural sporting mentality - just as the mainstream media has a problem serving the diversity of an MMP parliamentary system and reverts to a 2-party dialogue, they have reduced this issue to two options. However what has now occurred over the 2 week period that we ran the survey has been an upward trend towards the more modest Eden Park revamp coming in second at 22.01%.

What became interesting to our voters and to us was the impact of publishing Dr Dushko Bugonovich's Four conditions for Success which took the notion of a waterfront stadium and rearranged the location, the scale, the design imperative, infact the entire kaupapa of the approach. It's hard to know whether people started voting for the waterfront option then because they were seeing Dushko's waterfront option rather than the Warren & Mahoney version - or not. Who knows? Surveys are imperfect beasts.

One of the more interesting statistics on the survey are those 137 people who voted for an investment in public transport. Dropping to third place once the Eden Park revamp option took off and always only a whisper ahead of the CDB option. We thought it was only right to identity those people who are not stadium fanatics and whose personal priority is to not be in queues of traffic but moving freely and sustainably across Auckland terrain.

We had the waterfront option come in at fourth place at 18.43% percent and North Harbour Stadium and Carlaw Park respectively in 5th and 6th place.

The worrying aspect of this urban design issue has been to see how partisan the mainstream media has been and how much they have controlled the perceptions and options around the issue. During the last two weeks I was in Wellington and the stadium issue came up in an interview with Mark Amery on Radio Active's Caffeine and Aspirin - apparently no-one in Wellington even knew that a Manukau Harbour option or a North Harbour stadium existed. Not that they may have cared... except the potential for overspend does potentially affect everybody. Perhaps our government is suffering from 'prudence fatigue' and a good budget blowout will deal to that. Perhaps also the Labour Ministers in Wellington who were sent information on the Manukau Stadium option just didn't feel like talking about it.

Anyway it has been a great survey and we really appreciate the commentary. Thanks again to all those who participated.

Jacquie Clarke
Producer
The Big Idea

PS If you are agin the waterfront option you may be interested in the below information...

******************************************************
Stop the Waterfront Stadium

Please come to a Rally in Aotea Square at lunchtime

Thursday 23 November, 12.30 pm

We need hundreds of people to show our Councillors what we think of the proposal to destroy our precious waterfront.

YOU CAN ALSO HELP BY DOING THE FOLLOWING:

1. Send this email to everyone you know.

2. Phone the Auckland City Council 379 2020 press 1 and give your opinion

3. Go to the Auckland City council website www.aucklandcity.govt.nz In the middle there is "Decision Time for Auckland City on the Stadium". Click on "find out more".

4. Record your opinion on the Auckland Regional Council website

5. Contact the Auckland City councillors who are undecided and urge them to say no to the waterfront option. Use the letter below or write your own:

Glenda Fryer cr.fryer@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Penny Sefuiva cr.sefuiva@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Faye Storer cr.storer@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Bill Christian cr.christian@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Toni Millar cr.millar@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Leila Boyle cr.boyle@aucklandcity.govt.nz

John Hinchcliff cr.hinchcliff@aucklandcity.govt.nz

Bruce Hucker cr.hucker@aucklandcity.govt.nz

6. Contact the Auckland Regional councillors directly

7. Contact your local MP or send the following email/letter directly to Helen Clark and Trevor Mallard

SUBJECT:

The waterfront stadium should NOT go ahead

TEXT:

I wish to register my opposition to the proposal by the Government and the Auckland City Council to build a stadium onAuckland's waterfront. The proposal should not go ahead because:

1. It will ruin the aesthetic appeal of Auckland's waterfront.

2. The possibility of opening a significant proportion of the waterfront to public access will be lost forever.

3. The cost estimates are higher than for Eden Park or other options. Further, experience with public projects is that the eventual costs always far exceed the initial estimates.

4. The Resource Management Act will have to be overridden for this project, setting a precedent for ignoring the standards set by the Act for any public project in the future.

******************************************************

Wake Up Auckland - The Stadium Debacle
Wednesday, 15 November 2006, 4:52 pm
Press Release: Wake Up Auckland
Re: The Stadium Debacle,.

We the rate-paying citizens of Auckland wish to make it clear to the Auckland City Council, the ARC and Central Government, that any loans made available to the Rugby Union for
the construction of stands is by way of a loan and will be looked on as an investment.

We the people of Auckland expect a return on that investments. Our collective rates are not to be used as a slush fund for corporate welfare.

If we are to invest in Eden Park we see ourselves (the citizens of Auckland) as investors and stakeholders in a business and like the airport shares we expect a healthy return on this investment, other wise why spend our collective capital in that way.

Regards
Lisa Prager
Spokesperson for Wake Up Auckland