Stadium site purchases

### ODT Online Sat, 29 May 2010
$15m site deal for Fonterra
By David Loughrey
Dairy giant Fonterra received the lion’s share of money paid to buy land for the Forsyth Barr Stadium site in Dunedin, it has been revealed. Of the $35.6 million gross cost of land bought by the Dunedin City Council for the stadium, the University of Otago and State Highway 88, Fonterra received almost $15 million.

Figures for the land sales were released following an Otago Daily Times’ Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act request, a request that was held up while the council negotiated land sales for the nearby State Highway 88 realignment.

Read more

****

### ODT Online Sat, 29 May 2010
Valuer says time pressure hit stadium land purchase
By Chris Morris
A Dunedin valuer involved in land sale negotiations for the Forsyth Barr Stadium says time constraints worked against the Dunedin City Council. Barlow Justice director and registered valuer Ah-Lek Tay said he was advising Scenic Circles Hotel chairman Earl Hagaman and his partners.
Read more

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

10 Comments

Filed under CST, Economics, Geography, Project management, Site, Stadiums

10 responses to “Stadium site purchases

  1. Russell Garbutt

    An interesting question that could or should have been asked in this story was when the major landholders that benefitted so handsomely from these purchases bought their packets of land, and whether they, or their advisers, were ever in a position of knowing or expecting that the land was to be required for the new rugby stadium.

    Bearing in mind that the original budgeted gross price for purchase was $20m, it doesn’t exactly engender confidence in any of the other budgeted items does it?

    Reminds me of the meteoric rise in “value” of Carisbrook.

  2. anon

    I very much doubt Fonterra located to Awatea Street with a view to land speculation.

  3. Russell Garbutt

    I agree about Fonterra – but the story as it stands isn’t really complete is it?

  4. Calvin Oaten

    The details of the land purchases as published only confirm what was generally known. What it does show is just what a pile of sand the whole stadium construct is.
    Right from the get go it has been a tale of obfuscation, lying and misrepresentation, generally by all parties concerned, not least the DCC. What other unpleasant surprises still to come out of the woodwork, we must just wait and see.
    In fact it is the standard plan employed and copied by almost all projects of a similar ilk around the planet. Underestimate costs, overvalue revenues and economic benefits, get the show on the road, and full steam ahead.
    To do otherwise would ensure that these farces would never get off the ground.

  5. James

    An interesting question that could or should have been asked in this story was when the major landholders that benefitted so handsomely from these purchases bought their packets of land, and whether they, or their advisers, were ever in a position of knowing or expecting that the land was to be required for the new rugby stadium.

    It would only be newsworthy if the answer was interesting, and has already been covered here. I’m not sure when the idea for the stadium there was first conceived, but at first blush 2004/5 looks to be too early. I suspect that Fonterra was probably considered to be a good tenant.

    • Elizabeth

      It’s well known how the proposed harbour arterial (long in incubation) affected ‘property’; and before that disposal of OHB lands provided opportunity. For those in property investment, let in on the bigger picture as indeed they have been (if they didn’t invent it, rhetorical), this stuff is a mere sneeze.

  6. wirehunt

    No point worrying about it or even asking about it. The answer is the usual, we’re getting a big fat one were we don’t want it. Again.

    Have we even paid for the upgrade to the real rugby ground yet?

  7. Russell Garbutt

    James, I don’t think that these dates are too early at all for some of the landowners.

    By mid-2006 the plans for the new rugby stadium were already well advanced with the CST. Arrow were on board at that time, and you shouldn’t forget that preceding the CST we had the Carisbrook Working Party which comprised all of the bodies identified by the ORFU as being able to spring millions of public money. That unelected body was informal but hugely influential in determining what was really going to happen. Can you or anyone else really say that the deliberations and “visions” during those years were not known outside the CWP?

    Certainly by mid 2006 some of the key players were already declaring in private that the $2m debt owed by the ORFU to the DCC would disappear. And so it was.

  8. James

    Can you or anyone else really say that the deliberations and “visions” during those years were not known outside the CWP?

    As someone with no interest in rugby, I’m not sure that I’m the kind of person you should be asking. I was merely providing some dates for when the land was purchased.

  9. Anon

    It occurred to me, weren’t the former Fonterra coolstores on the Awatea Street site taken down to be re-erected in Marlborough? Does that mean that Council would have recovered some of the purchase cost through the sale of the structures to the new owner, or did Council purchase of the leasehold and relocation costs to Fonterra not include the buildings themselves? More a little mystery to me than anything else.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s