NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —meeting tomorrow

“You can’t be too confident, but if we’re all reasonable I think an agreement is definitely within reach.” –Russell Lund

Farra Engineering chief executive John Whitaker agreed yesterday when contacted there had been “good work” during mediation.

### ODT Online Thu, 6 Aug 2015
Extra conditions may rescue project
By Chris Morris
Plans to breathe new life into Dunedin’s historic Loan and Mercantile building could be about to take a significant step forward. Building owner Russell Lund will meet a group of neighbouring harbourside businesses, as well as Dunedin City Council and Otago Chamber of Commerce representatives, tomorrow to discuss the stalled project.
Read more

—

Related Posts and Comments:
13.3.15 Making heritage work | Dunedin New Zealand
28.11.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —Resource Consent granted (pics)
26.11.14 Retraction (see comment on ‘Heritage Counts’)
26.9.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building —what ESCO said!
30.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building: Looking round at potential
18.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building #randomsmartphonepix (interiors)
17.8.14 Public Notices: NZ Loan and Mercantile Building… (site tour, hearing)
13.8.14 Chamber’s Own Goals —Heritage (letters)
11.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Building (audio)
8.8.14 NZ Loan and Mercantile Agency Co Ltd Building…
18.3.14 Dunedin Harbourside: English Heritage on portside development
21.10.13 Harbourside: Access to a revamped Steamer Basin has public backing
24.10.09 Rodney Wilson: Dunedin as national heritage city

█ For more, enter the terms *harbourside*, *heritage* or *lund* in the search box at right.

[click image to enlarge]

—

Post/image by Elizabeth Kerr

Stadium Review: LGOIMA request and 2009 Town Hall speeches

████ Download: Stadium Review Nov v 15 (585 KB, DOC)

Copy received from Bev Butler
Sun, 30 Nov at 12:17 p.m.

Message: A while back I was told there was Rugby pressure happening behind the scenes to exclude the mothballing option.
Cheers, Bev

From: Bev Butler
To: Sandy Graham [DCC]; Grace Ockwell [DCC]
Subject: LGOIMA REQUEST: Stadium Review/Mothballing
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2014 12:10:47 +1300

Sunday 30 November 2014

Dear Sandy and Grace

Earlier in the year it was announced that the stadium was to be reviewed and that all options would be considered, including mothballing.
Now with the recent release of the Stadium Review only two options are presented, namely, the status quo and the most extreme option of demolition.
1. Why were the options of sale and mothballing not reported on?
2. Did the Stadium Review committee look at the sale and mothballing options? If so, I request a copy of the findings. If not, why not?
3. Whose decision (names) was it to not include mothballing as an option?
4. Did the NZRU and/or ORFU have any input into the Review? If so, I request a copy of all documentation.
5. Who (names) from the NZRU/ORFU was consulted/involved in the Review?
6. Did any member of NZRU and/or ORFU influence/pressure/request that the mothballing option be removed/excluded from the Review? If so, who (names)?
7. Mayor Cull has publicly stated that the demolition option was included in the Review to show the “lunatic fringe” that demolition is not a realistic option.
a) Who (names) are the “lunatic fringe”?
b) If Mayor Cull is unable to name members of the “lunatic fringe” then why was the demolition option considered?
c) Why were the mothballing options not considered when well informed stadium critics had publicly called for this option? ie. Why was the extreme option from an unidentified “lunatic fringe” considered over the mothballing option proposed by identifiable well informed stadium critics, like myself, who have been proven correct in their predictions?
8. What part did Sir John Hansen play in stifling the mothballing option?
9. Will the mothballing options now be reviewed?

Yours sincerely
Bev Butler

___________________________________

REFRESH
Speeches made to Stop The Stadium public meeting held at Dunedin Town Hall on 29 March 2009:

● Alistair Broad
● Dave Cull
● Gerry Eckhoff
● Michael Stedman
● Sukhi Turner

Speeches to Otago Regional Council (ORC) public forums for stadium:

● Public Forum Speech to ORC by Bev Butler 11.2.09 – stadium meeting
● Public Forum Speech to ORC by Bev Butler 3.3.09

___________________________________

On behalf of ratepayers and residents Dunedin City Council decided on and publicly listed ten conditions (10 lines in the sand) to be met for the stadium project. Unfortunately, this summary table shows the extent of departure!

Received from Bev Butler – Summary of Conditions
Sat, 29 Nov 2014 at 7.44 a.m.

[click to enlarge]

Recent Posts and Comments:
26.11.14 Cr Hilary Calvert, an embarrassment
22.11.14 ODT puffery for stadium rousing ?
21.11.14 Stadium Review: Mayor Cull exposed
19.11.14 Forsyth Barr Stadium Review
15.11.14 Stadium #TotalFail

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Electioneering by straws

### ODT Online Tue, 31 Aug 2010
Opponents scrap over stadium vote
By David Loughrey
Dunedin’s election campaign ignited yesterday, with mayoral candidate Cr Dave Cull fending off accusations he and fellow Greater Dunedin candidate Kate Wilson voted for the Forsyth Barr Stadium in 2008.
Read more

****

My notes when in attendance at the Finance and Strategy Committee meeting and the Extraordinary Council meeting held on 17 March 2008 show:

That at the finance and strategy meeting, Crs Dave Cull, Kate Wilson, Fliss Butcher and Teresa Stevenson voted against the stadium project. In accordance with the minutes received I agree that the meeting ended with a 10-4 vote to commit to the stadium, subject to conditions.

That at the Extraordinary Council meeting there was a procedural vote to confirm the resolutions taken from the finance and strategy meeting. Crs Cull and Wilson voted in the affirmative. The motion was won, 12-4.

At the time and since I did not infer a vote for the stadium by Crs Cull and Wilson.

It may have been ‘politically naive’ to vote the resolutions through given the events in the finance and strategy meeting where conditions were agreed – or perhaps it was sound procedurally.

Either way, the matter of how Crs Cull and Wilson voted on the motion to confirm the resolutions was not going to change the outcome.

The ‘opponents’ cited in the ODT are clutching at straws.

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

Cr Michael Deaker on stadium

Crs Michael Deaker, Gerry Eckhoff, Bryan Scott re-confirm their opposition…

### ODT Online Sat, 27 Jun 2009
Stadium ‘most unnecessary project’
By Rebecca Fox

Otago regional councillor Michael Deaker has described Forsyth Barr Stadium as the most “unnecessary” project he has seen in 14 years of local government…”Worse still, it is irrelevant to our purposes.”
Read more

DCC on stadium

UPDATED

“A comprehensive response to all those who submitted on the Stadium, whether for or against, during the 2009/10 Community Plan process”

Response to LTCCP Stadium submitters 2009/10 (PDF, 88.3 kb)

****

### ODT Online Sat, 27 Jun 2009
Council posts letter to submitters on stadium
By David Loughrey

The much debated letter to residents who presented submissions to the Dunedin City Council on the Forsyth Barr Stadium was sent yesterday.
Read more

More coverage in Monday’s ODT.

****

Wait for the splash, and further insult to ratepayers…

• The Carisbrook Stadium Trust is launching its new brand for the stadium at a function on Thursday 2 July.

20 April Extraordinary Meeting of Council: Agenda and Report

Agenda – Council – 20/04/2009 (PDF, 13.5 kb, new window)

Report – Council – 20/4/2009 (PDF, 472.5 kb, new window)
This report identifies progress made in meeting the terms and conditions the Council has set down for construction of the Awatea Street Stadium to be known as the Forsyth Barr Stadium at the University Plaza.

—

The recommendations in the Report are:

1 That this report is received.

2 That the GMP, including escalation, from Hawkins Construct Ltd of $130,414,595 be accepted noting that the total project cost, including professional fees and adjusted sums is $164,012,035 and that there is an unallocated construction contingency of $1,387,865 for a total construction project cost of $165,400,000.

3 That progress in meeting the Dunedin City Council’s resolution 7 passed at a meeting held on 9 February 2009 which committed the Council to the Awatea Street Stadium project on the following terms and conditions be noted:

7a) Confirmation of Otago Regional Council funding of not less than $37.5 million – This has been confirmed by the Otago Regional Council.

7b) Satisfactory conclusion to the planning process and approval of a Plan Change by the Courts – The appellants have withdrawn their appeals to the Environment Court and the Council has declared the Plan Change operative.

7c) i) The Rates and Funding Working Party continues to identify ways in which the ratepayers contributions to the capital cost of the stadium can be reduced by $20 million providing it comes from sources other than the Holding Company – This is not a requirement to be completed before the signing of the contract.

ii) Discussion and agreement with the ORC occurs on the sharing of any external funding which reduces ratepayer costs – Discussions are underway between the Council’s General Manager Finance and Corporate Support and the Otago Regional Council’s Director Corporate Services.

7d) That Council retains the funding line in the draft LTCCP for the project – The Council has retained the funding line in the draft LTCCP for the project which is consistent with last year when the substantive consultation took place with the community of Dunedin.

7e) That a funding source to meet the $15 million shortfall in private sector funding be confirmed – The Government has agreed to underwrite the $15 million shortfall in private sector funding and discussions are underway to confirm the detail of this arrangement. The Hon Murray McCully is meeting with the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, representatives from CST and officials on Wednesday 15 April 2009 to further progress this.

7f) That the DCC instructs the CST to continue to investigate ways be either:
i) savings on the GMP budget
ii) additional funding over and above the target of $45.5 million
iii) to address the $3 million shortfall of funding from the target of $10 million, from the Otago Community Trust.
The Carisbrook Stadium Trust and its project delivery team are aware of the need to investigate ways to find the $3 million shortfall in funding from the Community Trust of Otago which has been confirmed at $7 million rather than the targeted $10 million and also continuing to raise funding over and above the $45.5 million private sector target.

Attachments
1 Hawkins Construction Ltd letter of 15 April 2009
2 Layman’s Guide to the Construction Contract from the City Solicitor

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr