The discussion has been framed in terms of buildability, expenditure, heritage, public transport, democratic participation (or lack thereof), but as he says:
What does it say about architecture’s place in New Zealand’s society when the extent of design discussion is, in the end, reduced to some 3D renderings?And as Robin notes of that ninety-second 3d rendering:
Up until the unveiling of Warren and Mahoney’s proposal in the weekend papers, the graphics guy at the New Zealand Herald had done more with photoshop to describe the possibilities of a waterfront stadium than any commentary offered by our profession...
All the flashy Weta effects can’t hide the bulk of Mallards Stadium New Zealand. Sitting on the waterfront like a giant turdthat’s washed up in a spring tide, making it translucent doesn’t hide the size. Interesting it’s only shown at dusk and never from Quay Street which is how it will be seen by most and where the impact of it’s bulk will be the worst.Mathew concludes:
The architecture profession in New Zealand needs to provide the public with the skills to participate in a design discussion. That way, when a situation like this presents itself, we might expect the public to seek a good architectural response.Does it?
Instead we find ourselves in a position where “Auckland” has two weeks to decide which option they want. That’s right, design by public opinion. Now that the ratepayers have heard what the builder, quantity surveyor, minister for sports (and economic development) and prominent rugby players have said, we’ll turn around and ask them what they think. Does that sound like a successful design process?
UPDATE 1: We've now been treated by waterfront stadium architects Warren and Mahoney to a brief view of their proposal from Quay St (right, courtesy of the Herald), and a more informative one by that stalwart Herald graphic artist.
UPDATE 2: Meanwhile, Sports Minister Trevor Mallard, fresh from claiming Fletcher Building had been talking down the Eden Park foundations (a claim denied by Fletchers) has come out accusing Eden Park supporters mounting a "viral" campaign against his baby, of pushing "unscientific" polls, of "a lack of vision," and of peddling misinformation. Minister Mallard is now undergoing treatment for an overdose of irony.
LINK: Ahem...what about architecture? - Mathew Brown, Auckland Architecture Association
Mallard's translucent turd by the harbour - Stadium NZ - RobiNZ Personal Blog
Mallard accuses waterfront opponents of 'viral' campaign - NZ Herald
RELATED: Stadium, Architecture, Sport, Politics-NZ, Auckland