Auckland stadium question raised by Eke Panuku's $300m Wynyard Quarter plan

NZ Herald

30-04-2025

After a recent column decrying the lameness of Auckland Council electing to proceed with Eden Park as the national stadium but having no money to do so (and with government also keeping their hands out of their pockets), new information came to hand. It concerned the plans of Eke Panuku, the council-controlled development organisation, to build a big park alongside private sector development on unsightly Tank Farm, bordering on the Wynyard Quarter.
It seems a good idea until you read the small print, which can be found in Eke Panuku's own designs for the area, called Te Ara Tukutuku. They would like $300m of ratepayers' money, please, about half of it to be spent over a 10-year period.
How's that again? About $100m is for the park itself. The rest is for developing infrastructure to enable private development – and thus profits for developers – on Wynyard Point, bordering the park.
How's that again? What private development? Housing was said to be part of the mix, but it turns out Eke Panuku are planning to build up to 600 apartments on Wynyard Point. I have seen a confidential document sent out by Eke Panuku to ask for expressions of interest in a development which will sell off the land or lease it out long-term, presumably to help pay for Te Ara Tukutuku. The document refers to 600-plus homes and 133,000 sq/m floorspace potential with over 50% for housing. The proposed stadium on Wynyard Point.
If there has been any public discussion or consultation on this, I can't find it – and that raises some questions:
Firstly was Wynyard Point – the 55,000-person stadium planned for the water's edge at Tank Farm (including plans for a similar park and public spaces surrounding it) – quietly slipped into a desk drawer because of this?
The plans for Te Ara Tukutuku cover the same land as that earmarked for the Wynyard Point stadium – the proposal which seemed to me to make the most sense and was, in theory, the least expensive for ratepayers and/or taxpayers.
However, it mysteriously missed making it to the short list presented to council. Eden Park and the Quay Park (which to me seems wholly over-ambitious) were. The latter was judged to be commercially, technically and financially infeasible by the committee overseeing the decision – making the Eden Park decision easy and Te Ara Tukutuku free to proceed.
Secondly, do we really need another big park close to Victoria Park? Sure, Victoria Park is not exactly London's 170 ha Regent's Park and there will be support for bigger 'green lungs' in Auckland's centre. But two parks?
Thirdly, do we really need up to 600 apartments on the waterfront? These will not be 'affordable housing'. So do we need housing for a few – available only after $300m is spent first – at the expense of a stadium and entertainment precinct for everyone?
Access and egress have been mentioned as one reason for cooling on the idea of a stadium at Wynyard Point. However, consortium head Richard Dellabarca has previously told media of Auckland Transport figures which show that 76,000 people could be moved in an hour with the City Rail Link up and running, plus the North, East and Western busways, plus ferries and plenty of private car parks in the area.
It's difficult not to wonder if a perfectly viable and potentially iconic stadium and entertainment proposal might have fallen foul of the bureaucracy's own plans – and has subsequently been quietly buried. The Wynyard Point proposal was not just a stadium build – it was focused on rationalising Auckland's over-supply of stadiums (North Harbour, Mt Smart, Eden Park and Western Springs). Albany and Eden Park would go, sold off for development, financed by Wynyard Point consortium backer and giant investment bank JP Morgan, the money channelled into the waterfront stadium. A bridseye view of plans for the end of Wynyard Quarter.
The council has talked for years of the expense and redundancy of having four stadiums, yet this solution didn't even make it to the full debating chamber. In July, Eke Panuku is technically being subsumed into the greater council but there is no indication yet of any changes to the Te Ara Tukutuku plan to spend $300m of ratepayers' money.
To that, add $150m that the council has said will be needed to maintain and operate the four stadiums. Eden Park wants $110m of public money to build its first stage. So we are already up to $560m, for what? Establishing infrastructure so developers can build apartments, the Te Ara Tukutuku park and shoring up existing stadium facilities.
Better, surely, for the council to follow its own advice, rationalise at least some of the stadiums and build something iconic and visionary on the waterfront.
It all calls to mind the old British TV comedy Yes, Minister – a cynically funny exploration of politicians manipulated by the civil service. In one episode, Prime Minister Jim Hacker was set on a course of action cutting across the advice and self-interest of the civil service.
The head of the civil service demands to know why this is happening. One of his staff says: 'I think the Prime Minister wants to govern Britain.' To which the response was: 'Well, don't let him!'
Paul Lewis writes about rugby, cricket, league, football, yachting, golf, the Olympics and Commonwealth Games.