Meg Davidson was doing HOK Sport Architects, the Carisbrook Stadium Trust and the public of Dunedin a massive disservice in her letter to the editor, ‘Architecture rethink best for stadium’ (ODT 22.8.08).
She claimed that the options for redevelopment of the old Carisbrook were passed over as in her words, ‘asking HOK if you need a new stadium is like asking a barber if you need a haircut’.
Several points; despite what has falsely been claimed by the opponents of the new stadium, several upgrade options for the old stadium were considered. This included partial and full upgrades. These were considered and dismissed as not meeting the full needs of the city in the future. If they were to go ahead Architects would still have been employed.
Second, despite the somewhat ‘awestruck’ view the STS thinks the Carisbrook Stadium Trust has of HOK Sport, they are paid to do whatever job they choose to take on. If the CST asked them to add a dunny out the back of the terraces, if they were inclined that is what they would have produced. The client, with the dollars, has the final say.
Funny this so-called ‘increase in plan B’ seems actually only to be coming from certain quarters of the community with the badge STS pinned on.
But then like elections I can see the blur and smudge campaign swinging iron to full effect. Two negative opinion pieces in two days, and not one of them based on the facts as they stand.
I wonder what’s in tomorrow’s paper ‘Otago won’t play in new stadium’?
Posted by Paul Le Comte
Filed under Architecture, Business, Carisbrook, Construction, DCC, Design, Economics, Inspiration, Media, Name, ORFU, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Site, Sport, Stadiums, Town planning, Urban design
Tagged as Architects, Carisbrook, Carisbrook Stadium Charitable Trust, CSCT, CST, Dunedin, HOK Sport, Letter to the editor, New Zealand, Otago Stadium, Rugby, Stadiums