Agenda of Governing Body - Thursday, 1 May 2025

No.	Title	Page
a	CCO Transition Update
b	St James Theatre project update

Governing Body

01 May 2025

Presentation from Eden Park Trust Board

File No.: CP2025/08012

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To receive the regular six-monthly presentation from Eden Park Trust Board (the Trust) on its performance, in accordance with the Finance and Performance Committee’s resolutions relating its funding and loan arrangements (FIN/2019/26 and FIN/2019/27).

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

2. This report accompanies the Trust’s six-monthly presentation. Since the last presentation, the Trust released its annual report for the year ended 31 October 2024 (available online).

3. Eden Park continues to be a significant venue for Auckland and New Zealand, hosting a range of major sporting, cultural and community events. Key updates include:

i) Financial performance (official results): Revenue fell to $29.7m in 2024 (from $44.3m in 2023); and the net operating profit to $3.67m (2023: $12.15m). This variance reflects the higher than usual number of major events in 2023. The net deficit (after depreciation and impairment) for 2024 was $4.8m

ii) Loan facility: The balance of the loan facility the Trust has with the council remains at $48.75 million, with repayment due on 30 September 2029. The Trust continues to pay interest.

iii) Utilisation and impact: Major event attendance declined from 881k in 2023 to 540k in 2024, but is above 2022 levels. Rugby (international and domestic) generated the highest attendance (281k), followed by concerts (130k) and international cricket (639k).

iv) Development plans: The Governing Body endorsed the Trust’s “Eden Park 2.1” staged redevelopment plans in principle, subject to several conditions including obtaining government support (GB/2025/34). Work is underway to address these resolutions.

v) Consents: The Trust secured consent to increase the number of concerts it can host annually to 12, which is expected to improve financial performance and impact.

vi) Governance: The Trust’s governance structure is unchanged, comprising five Crown appointees and two appointees each from Auckland Rugby Union and Auckland Cricket Association. The Trust’s annual report notes it needs to review its structure to ensure it is fit for the future, including in relation to legacy rights for Auckland Cricket and Rugby.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) whakamihi / thank the representatives of the Eden Park Trust Board for their attendance and the information provided on their performance and financial projections.

Horopaki

Context

4. In 2019, the council agreed to assume Eden Park Trust’s $40 million loan from ASB Bank, consolidate it with existing council facilities into a $54 million secured revolving facility, provide a $9.8 million capital grant, and initiate governance discussions. Six-monthly reporting was expected.

5. The full resolutions of the Finance and Performance Committee (FIN/2019/26 and FIN/2019/27) were:

a) authorise and delegate all necessary powers to the chief executive to:

i) reach an agreement with Eden Park Trust and ASB Bank for Auckland Council to take over the $40 million loan from ASB Bank to Eden Park Trust together with other facilities provided by ASB Bank to Eden Park Trust before 30 September 2019.

ii) reach an agreement with Eden Park Trust to consolidate the loans acquired from ASB Bank and Auckland Council loans into one or more new facilities on commercial terms including:

A) first-ranking security over Eden Park Trust’s assets

B) a term of up to ten years

C) an interest rate set at council’s cost of funds plus a margin.

b) authorise the chief executive to agree a grant to fund capital expenditure of up to $9.8 million over a three-year period from 1 July 2019 under a Development Funding Agreement.

c) agree that the chief executives of Auckland Council, Eden Park Trust and Regional Facilities Auckland jointly prepare an operational partnering proposal to be completed by March 2020.

d) invite Eden Park Trust Board to report to the Finance and Performance Committee on at least a six-monthly basis to outline its performance and financial projections.

e) initiate discussions with the Government to seek amending the Eden Park Trust Deed to appropriately align the governance of Eden Park with funding.

6. The Trust’s last appearance before the Governing Body was on 26 September 2024.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

Eden Park 2024 Annual Report

7. The Trust’s annual report for the year ended 31 October 2024 presents the following financial results summary. The adjusted results exclude certain items (grants from MBIE, property revaluation and impairment of assets) to give a clearer view of the Trust’s underlying operating performance.

Table 1- Financial results summary

$000	2024 Stat Accounts	2024 Adjusted	2023 Stat Accounts	2023 Adjusted
Total operating income	29,172	28,656	44,073	39,733
Total operating expenses	(25,494)	(25,432)	(31,916)	(31,470
Net operating profit	3,678	3,224	12,157	8,263
Net interest	(655)	(655)	(922)	(922)
Profit before depreciation	3,023	2,569	11,235	7,341
Depreciation	(7,844)	(7,844)	(10,776)	(10,776)
Impairment	-	-	(21,745)	-
Net (deficit) for the year	(4,821)	(5,275)	(21,286)	(3,435)

8. The Trust’s financial position is reported as follows.

Table 2- Statement of financial position summary

$000	2024	2023
Total assets	259,271	264,609
Total liabilities	67,622	68,139
Total equity	191,649	196,470
Total liabilities and equity	259,271	264,609

9. Major event attendance was reported as follows.

Table 3 – Major event attendance

2024

2023

Major event attendance

540,723

881,714*

(*This figure excludes an estimated 150,000 attendance at functions, community and cultural events, so total attendance was 1.03m)

10. The Trust notes that the 2023 results benefited from an unusually high number of major events, including the Women’s Rugby World Cup, five concerts, three cricket internationals, and the FIFA Women’s World Cup. The 2024 results are more typical but show improvement over 2022.

Update on implementation of previous resolutions

Resolution a) – Loan facility

11. In 2019 the Trust’s loans were consolidated into a $54 million revolving facility with council, secured by a first-ranking mortgage. As of 2 April 2025, the drawn balance remains at $48.75m. The Trust continues to pay interest.

Resolution b) – Funding

Development Funding Agreement

12. The 2019 Development Funding Agreement provided $9.8 million, all released by 30 June 2022 for stadium upgrades. All projects have been completed.

13. Eden Park continues to maintain council signage obligations under the agreement, expiring June 2030.

Other requests for council funding

14. In 2022, the Trust requested a $62.8 million grant over 10 years ($6.28 million per year) to meet its capital requirements. The Governing Body declined the request, instead offering interest forgiveness for one year on additional facility drawdowns (GB/2022/56). No additional drawdowns occurred.

Funding from central government

15. The Crown contributed $2.4 million for FIFA Women’s World Cup 2023 facility upgrades.

16. Prior to the Rugby World Cup 2011, the Crown committed $190 million for Eden Park’s redevelopment.

Investment in major events held at Eden Park

17. Council makes investments, through Tātaki Auckland Unlimited’s Major Events fund, for sports events and concerts, a number of which take place in Eden Park. This investment is generally paid to the promoter of the event or is used to publicise the event, rather than being paid directly to the venue. However, it can be important in attracting the event to Auckland and Eden Park. Eden Park benefits through securing these events.

Summary of total public funding since 2007

18. Eden Park has received over $200 million in public funding since 2007, including $190 million for Rugby World Cup 2011, $9.8 million from Auckland Council (DFA), and $2.4 million for FIFA upgrades. In addition, the Trust benefits from access to the $54 million council loan facility. Interest on further loan facility drawdowns was also forgiven for one year in FY23, but this was not utilised.

Resolution c) – Operational Partnering Proposal and resolution e) Governance:

19. In 2020, the independent CCO Review recommended joint management of Auckland’s stadiums, and this was affirmed as a council priority in Tātaki Auckland Unlimited’s 2023/24 letter of expectation.

20. Negotiations with Eden Park toward a single operator model have been unsuccessful to date and no “operational partnering proposal” (as envisaged by the part (c) of the previous resolution) has been completed. The government has also not agreed to amend the Eden Park Trust Deed to align governance with funding (as envisaged by part e)).

21. In March 2025, the Governing Body endorsed Eden Park’s staged redevelopment in principle (GB/2025/34), subject to several conditions, including relating to resolving governance arrangements:

i) completion of a business case for Stage 1 (at their own cost) that establishes a robust case for government support and confirmation of central government support;

ii) noting there are no plans for council to provide funding towards Eden Park’s redevelopment;

iii) all parties working together to satisfactorily address challenges with the status quo (including Eden Park’s financial obligations to council, and ensuring funding, ownership structure and governance arrangements based on returning the best public value for Auckland and New Zealand).

22. Work to address the above resolutions has commenced, including conversations between council staff and Eden Park. These conversations will include central government and will be reported back to Governing Body.

23. In the meantime, the council (via Tātaki Auckland Unlimited) continues to invest in major events hosted at Eden Park. Events during 2024/25 included: All Blacks v England and Argentina, Haka Guinness World Record attempt, Coldplay concerts, Black Caps T20 v Sri Lanka, Black Caps v Pakistan, White Ferns v Australia, OFC Qualifiers Final.

Resolution d) – the trust reporting to Finance & Performance Committee:

24. The Trust continues to meet reporting obligations under the loan and funding agreements, including quarterly compliance reporting.

Climate impact statement

25. Receiving the presentation has no material climate impacts. Eden Park maintains independent sustainability initiatives including rainwater harvesting, LED lighting upgrades, waste separation, and composting.

Council group impacts and views

26. No material impacts arise. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited were consulted in preparing this report.

Financial implications

27. No new financial implications arise. The loan facility remains drawn at $48.75 million, with interest payments current and maturity due 30 September 2029. Discussions with the Trust about these arrangements are underway as part of the discussions arising from the main stadium decision.

Risks and mitigations

28. Receiving the presentation carries no immediate risks. However, the council remains exposed through the loan facility. There are also risks that Eden Park’s current arrangements do not offer the best value to the public. Risks and progress will be reported through updates on the main stadium work programme.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

29. No material impacts arise from receiving the presentation, so Māori engagement has not been sought for this item.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

30. As no decisions are required, local board views were not sought.

31. Receiving regular reporting from the Trust is a responsibility of the Governing Body (resolutions FIN/2019/26 and FIN/2019/27)

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

32. The Trust will next present to the Governing Body in September 2025. Council staff will continue to engage with the Trust and central government to address governance and funding matters arising from the main stadium resolutions.

Ngā tāpirihanga

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina

Signatories

Author

Sarah Johnstone-Smith - Principal Advisor

Authorisers

Alastair Cameron - Manager CCO/External Partnerships team

Anna Bray - General Manager Group Strategy, Transformation and Partnerships

Max Hardy - Director Group Strategy and Chief Executive Office

Phil Wilson - Chief Executive

Governing Body

01 May 2025

Western Springs Stadium expression of interest process - consultation on options

File No.: CP2025/05103

Te take mō te pūrongo

Purpose of the report

1. To:

a) receive the findings and recommendations of the expression of interest (EOI) process run by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (Tātaki) on options for the future use of Western Springs Stadium; and

b) decide whether to proceed with public consultation on the options identified, and if so, approve the communications and engagement approach.

Whakarāpopototanga matua

Executive summary

Western Springs is a significant regional venue operated by Tātaki

2. Western Springs Stadium is a regionally significant venue operated by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited (Tātaki) under its trust deed, with council funding provided through the Long-term Plan (LTP) to cover operating losses and capital needs. In October 2024, the Governing Body requested that any decisions on the stadium’s future be referred to the Governing Body for consideration (GB/2024/162).

Tātaki-led public EOI process seeking options for the future of the stadium

3. Tātaki has led a public Expression of Interest (EOI) process to identify future options for how the venue could better serve Auckland’s sports, entertainment, and festival needs. It notes the venue is relatively underutilised, faces an ongoing operating loss and there is no funding in the LTP for substantive improvement. The expiry of the Ponsonby Rugby Club lease (October 2027) and the venue hire agreement for speedway (March 2025) also make this an appropriate time to consider the venue’s future use.

4. Three options emerged from the EOI process for consideration:

Option 1: Auckland Arena Proponent: MWF NewCo (Anna Mowbray, Ali Williams, Bill Foley, Bennett Rosenthal)	Option 2: Western Springs Bowl Proponents: CRS Records, Eccles Entertainment and Ponsonby Rugby Club.	Option 3: Neither option Do nothing or explore other ideas
Multi-purpose sports and entertainment precinct centered on a football-focused 12,500-seat stadium (25,000+ capacity for concerts), including: high-performance facilities, 8 indoor basketball courts, 4 padel courts and related commercial activity (hospitality and sports/health-related services). Funded by private investment ($200m-$300m initial investment and ongoing opex and capex), with no upfront or ongoing costs to ratepayer, in exchange for a long-term discounted or community lease.	Multi-purpose sports and entertainment facilities including permanent music/festival infrastructure (capacity of 50,000), a broadcast-capable boutique stadium (5,000+ seats) and a multisport community hub as the home for Ponsonby Rugby Club and other clubs. Funded by a mix of private investment ($30m) and ratepayer funding ($18-20m upfront investment and ongoing operational and capital costs), as well as long-term discounted and/or community leases.	Under this option existing arrangements could be retained (including extending the lease with Ponsonby Rugby Club and managing the venue for concerts/festivals); or the council and Tātaki could explore other ideas for the venue. For comparison purposes, Tātaki modelled two scenarios under option 3 that involve retaining a lease with Ponsonby Rugby Club – option 3a (extending the existing lease) & option 3b (Tātaki funding a new clubroom).

Option 1: Auckland Arena

Proponent: MWF NewCo (Anna Mowbray, Ali Williams, Bill Foley, Bennett Rosenthal)

Option 2: Western Springs Bowl

Proponents: CRS Records, Eccles Entertainment and Ponsonby Rugby Club.

Option 3: Neither option

Do nothing or explore other ideas

Multi-purpose sports and entertainment precinct centered on a football-focused 12,500-seat stadium (25,000+ capacity for concerts), including: high-performance facilities, 8 indoor basketball courts, 4 padel courts and related commercial activity (hospitality and sports/health-related services).

Funded by private investment ($200m-$300m initial investment and ongoing opex and capex), with no upfront or ongoing costs to ratepayer, in exchange for a long-term discounted or community lease.

Multi-purpose sports and entertainment facilities including permanent music/festival infrastructure (capacity of 50,000), a broadcast-capable boutique stadium (5,000+ seats) and a multisport community hub as the home for Ponsonby Rugby Club and other clubs.

Funded by a mix of private investment ($30m) and ratepayer funding ($18-20m upfront investment and ongoing operational and capital costs), as well as long-term discounted and/or community leases.

Under this option existing arrangements could be retained (including extending the lease with Ponsonby Rugby Club and managing the venue for concerts/festivals); or the council and Tātaki could explore other ideas for the venue.

For comparison purposes, Tātaki modelled two scenarios under option 3 that involve retaining a lease with Ponsonby Rugby Club – option 3a (extending the existing lease) & option 3b (Tātaki funding a new clubroom).

5. The Tātaki Board has evaluated the options and referred its report to the council (at Attachment A). It requests that the council consult the public on all three options and indicates Auckland Arena (Option 1) as its preferred option, subject to public feedback and further direction from the Governing Body. It notes that the process is at an EOI stage only and that a final commitment to a proposal will be subject to detailed due diligence, a business case and commercial negotiations.

Council consideration and decision sought on consultation

6. Council officers have reviewed the EOI process, sought additional input (including from Governing Body, council departments, CCOs, local boards, mana whenua, Eden Park Trust Board, and the North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee), and undertaken an initial assessment of the options against the Stadium Investment Objectives.

7. Officers recommend that the Governing Body approve consultation on all three options. Both EOI options are assessed as likely to materially contribute to the council’s desired stadium network outcomes relating to community cohesion, economic opportunities, and a vibrant, healthy and active city. Consultation was also supported by Waitematā and Albert-Eden local boards at recent workshops.

8. If consultation is approved, council staff will carry out the process and report back in July 2025 with analysis and recommendations, after the Tātaki board formally confirms its preferred option.

Late proposal received relating to speedway

9. No proposals to continue speedway at Western Springs were received during the public EOI process. A non-complying proposal was received from the recently-formed Western Springs Speedway Association (WS Speedway Association) after the EOI deadline. After receiving external probity advice, Tātaki declined to accept this proposal, and it was not assessed by them as part of the EOI process.

10. Council officers met with the WS Speedway Association on 17 March 2025 and offered to consider any further information submitted to the council relating to their proposal. No further information was received. Their initial proposal is included at Attachment E. If a decision is taken not to proceed with either EOI option (Auckland Arena or Western Springs Bowl), then other options, including the potential for speedway and the WS Speedway Association proposal, could be considered under Option 3 ("Neither option"). Feedback may also be provided about speedway by the public as part of the consultation.

11. Any preference for renewed speedway activity at Western Springs would have several implications that need to be considered following the Governing Body’s decision to fund works at Waikaraka Park and the need to consider long-term sustainability of the sport. That funding is now contractually committed, and upgrade works on site are underway.

12. The WS Speedway Association has filed judicial review proceedings against Tātaki and the council relating to the EOI process and the council’s decision to fund upgrades at Waikaraka Park, discussed further in the risk section of the report.

Ngā tūtohunga

Recommendation/s

That the Governing Body:

a) whiwhi / receive Tātaki Auckland Unlimited’s report relating to the expression of interest process on for the future use of Western Springs Stadium (Attachment A of the agenda report), noting that the Tātaki Auckland Unlimited Board has resolved to:

i) request that council seek public feedback on all three options;

ii) agree that its currently preferred option is Auckland Arena (Option 1);

iii) require the development of a business case and agreement to contract terms before any final implementation of a decision by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited.

b) whakaae / agree to consult the public on the three identified options for the future use of the Western Springs Stadium: Auckland Arena, Western Springs Bowl and Neither Option.

c) whakaae / agree to the proposed communication and engagement plan for the consultation process, noting:

i) public consultation will run from 19 May to 15 June 2025

ii) general feedback can be provided through the AK Have Your Say website

iii) Regional Organisations and Interest Groups (ROIGs) will be invited to speak directly to the Governing Body on 30 May and 9 June 2025

iv) mana whenua and local boards will be invited to submit feedback through this process and their views will be reflected in the subsequent Governing Body report in July 2025

v) a summary of the findings will be analysed and provided as part of the final recommendations brought back to governing body in July 2025

d) tuhi / note that, following consultation, the Governing Body intends to adopt a preferred option for Western Springs Stadium

e) tuhi / note that any final implementation of a decision by Tātaki Auckland Unlimited will be subject to a business case, due diligence and agreement of commercial terms.

Horopaki

Context

History

Western Springs is a historically important venue that has had a range of uses

13. Western Springs (Te Wai Ōrea) was historically one of two major wetlands in central Tāmaki Makaurau, valued by Māori for its clean water and as a habitat for the New Zealand longfin eel, known in te reo Māori as ‘Ōrea’.

14. In 1875 the Auckland City Council purchased the freehold land from the Motion family to establish the Western Springs reservoir and pump station. An earth dam was constructed to create an artificial lake, which provided drinking water for Auckland for the next 30 years. The dam project in the Waitakere Ranges later eliminated the need to use Western Springs as a source of drinking water.

15. The area's natural amphitheatre was recognised as a good location for a stadium, and concrete terracing was built influenced by European stadiums of the time. In 1929, the stadium was opened and featured a banked concrete cycling track, a cinder running track for athletics, and a grassed central area intended for football and other sports.

16. Motorsport was reportedly commenced in 1929 with the introduction of motorcycle broadsiding, followed by open-wheel, and later speedway. The first full speedway season commenced in 1938, and the venue has been used for a range of vehicle classes since.

17. In 1997, the Ponsonby Rugby Club became a tenant at the venue. The club has leased the clubrooms at the site and used the venue as its home ground for senior and junior teams, and training. The club also has access to several other playing and training venues, including Cox’s Bay and Archibald parks.

18. As well as sport, Western Springs has served as an important venue for large-scale outdoor festivals and concerts, taking advantage of its amphitheatre and capacity for large crowds (current ~55,000 people). The venue has hosted large-scale music festivals (e.g. Big Day Out, Laneway), concerts with international and local artists (e.g. David Bowie, Led Zeppelin, Six60), and cultural and community festivals (e.g. Pasifika).

19. The stadium sits within a significant regional amenity precinct that includes Auckland Zoo, the Museum of Transport and Technology, and Western Springs Park, and is supported by nearby arterial transport connections. This location provides a distinctive setting for both local and regional events.

Current status

Owned and operated by Tātaki on trust

20. Western Springs Stadium is owned and operated by Tātaki under its trust deed. Tātaki Auckland Unlimited Limited is the corporate trustee of the charitable trust Tātaki Auckland Unlimited Trust. The trust’s charitable purposes include to “support the vision of Auckland as a vibrant city that attracts world class events”, as well as:

“Providing World Class Regional Facilities: develop and maintain, applying a regional perspective, a range of world class arts, culture, heritage, leisure, sport, and entertainment venue that are attractive both to residence and visitors to Auckland.”

21. The deed notes Tātaki will develop and operate regional facilities and that this should be on a “prudent commercial basis”, so that such facilities are operated as successful, financially sustainable community assets.

Freehold land zoned as a Major Recreation Facility

22. The stadium land is owned freehold and is not subject to reserve classification.

23. Under the Auckland Unitary Plan, the stadium is zoned Special Purpose – Major Recreation Facility Zone with site-specific precinct provisions under the Western Springs Precinct. The precinct description notes that it provides for use and development of the stadium as a “multi-functional recreation, sporting and events venue”. It contains rules which permit (subject to conditions) organised sport, recreation, concerts, motorsport and other events.

24. The Unitary Plan includes specific rules for motorsport activities that resulted from litigation before the Environment Court and High Court in 2005 and 2006. These rules reduced the number of permitted speedway practice sessions and race meetings compared to the previous planning regime. They also provide that, if motorsport events are discontinued within the precinct, then 30 special noise events (such as concerts or other organised sporting events) are permitted.

Current use and lease arrangements

25. Since 2010, Tātaki (and its predecessor) has managed the venue principally based on previous use, which has included Ponsonby Rugby Club, speedway, and as a regional venue for concerts and festivals. The status of these arrangements is as follows:

· Ponsonby Rugby Club’s current lease expires in October 2027. In June 2023, the club requested a new 30-year lease and funding support for a proposed multisport community sports hub concept. Tātaki and Ponsonby Rugby established a working group (including senior executives from Tātaki and Ponsonby Rugby Club Committee members BG Williams and Peter Thorpe) to explore potential alternative location options, and with support from the club Tātaki commissioned an independent site relocation assessment for Ponsonby Rugby (Attachments C & D). Council staff have engaged with the club on its options and further analysis is provided on this below.

· Most recent venue hire agreement for speedway expired in March 2025. Palmerston North Speedway Limited (PNSL) was the most recent operator and promoter for speedway at Western Springs. They operated the site from 2020 until the conclusion of the venue hire agreement on 31 March 2025. In October 2024, the Governing Body decided to reallocate $11 million funding from Tātaki to the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board to enable the consolidation of speedway at Waikaraka Park (resolution GB/2024/162). The capital works funding is contractually committed to the upgrade of Waikaraka Park and works onsite are now underway. The Maungakiekie–Tāmaki Local Board, Auckland Stock and Saloon Car Club (ASSCC), and PNSL are in the process of confirming the arrangements that will enable consolidation of speedway at Waikaraka Park. At present and consistent with the arrangements relating to the consolidation of speedway at Waikaraka Park, the track at Western Springs continues to be maintained pending confirmation that there will be no delay in the critical works.

· Concerts and festivals. Tātaki continues to operate the venue for concerts and festivals. This does not involve any current contractual commitments that impede consideration of other options.

Council funding limited to maintaining the current state

26. Council provides funding for the operation of Western Spring Stadium through the Long-term Plan, covering Tātaki’s operating loss and capital requirements in relation to the venue. The Long-term Plan 2024-34 provides sufficient funding to maintain the stadium in its current state but does not provide for any substantive improvement.

27. The LTP also requires Tātaki (as well as the whole of the council Group) to find savings and reduce reliance on council rates-based funding. In response, Tātaki has considered a range of options and opportunities to increase and improve operational efficiency.

Potential for better use of the venue

28. Tātaki considers that Western Springs Stadium could contribute greater public and community value to Auckland than it does at present. It notes that the venue has been relatively underutilised, and that it faces high maintenance costs and an ongoing operating loss.

Tātaki’s expression of Interest process

29. The above circumstances and context make this an appropriate time to consider the venue’s future use. In April 2024, the Tātaki board approved a public expression of interest (EOI) process to generate alternative proposals for the use of Western Springs Stadium. The public request for EOIs was issued via the Government Electronic Tendering System (GETS) in June 2024. Further details of the Tātaki -led process are available in the Tātaki board report provided in Attachment A.

30. Tātaki received four compliant expressions of interest. Of the four, one did not score high enough to progress, leaving three for consideration. Two of the parties have since combined their proposals, which means two EOI options were considered by Tātaki.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

Analysis and advice

31. This section of the report addresses:

a) Initial analysis of the three options identified through Tātaki’s EOI process. These options are at an EOI stage only, so are subject to detailed development and further analysis if progressed. The analysis includes:

i) Summary of key features.

ii) Tātaki’s evaluation of options

iii) Alignment with the Stadium Investment Objectives

iv) Additional input and considerations

b) Advice on the options currently before the Governing Body for decision, which relate to whether to consult the public on the EOI options.

Initial analysis of options identified through the EOI process

Summary of options

32. Three options emerged through Tātaki’s EOI process for further consideration.

Key features

33. The following table summarises the key features of the options, including relating to community access and expected utilisation.

Table 1 – Comparison of key features of options

	Option 1: Auckland Arena (proponent: MWF NewCo – Anna Mowbray, Ali Williams, Bill Foley, Bennett Rosenthal):	Option 2: Western Springs Bowl (proponents: CRS Records, Eccles Entertainment and Ponsonby Rugby Club):	Option 3: Neither option – do nothing or explore other ideas
Key features	Redevelopment of the site into a multi-purpose sports and entertainment precinct: · Football-focused 12,500-seat stadium (25,000 capacity for concerts) – home of Auckland FC and football in Auckland · High-performance facilities. · 4 outdoor training fields. · 8 indoor basketball court. · 6 padel courts. · Related commercial activities – hospitality, health and well-being services. · Spaces for community use, and cultural events	Installation of additional entertainment and sport infrastructure: · A new permanent stage structure (main capacity of 50,000+) · Boutique broadcast capable stadium (5,000+). · A “community sport hub” with clubrooms and corporate suites. · Upgrades to the outer fields (kikuyu grass laid to improve wear & drainage)	Allows alternative options for the stadium to be considered. This could involve renewing Ponsonby Rugby’s lease. The baseline scenario (option 3a) involves renewing Ponsonby Rugby’s lease of $20k p/a with no upgrades for clubrooms. Council covers ongoing opex/capex. Option 3b lease for Ponsonby Rugby at $1 p//a and Tātaki funds the proposed upgrade to their clubrooms. In both scenarios Tātaki maintains the facilities to support extra concert events, and to improve the bottom line by $1.1 million per year. The most recent venue hire agreement for speedway expired on 31 March 2025. So, this option does not assume ongoing speedway events (discussed below).
Community access	Community access provided to training fields, courts and facilities for community events. Facilities expected to be open 5am-10pm daily.	Community access to outer fields retained (e.g. used by Ponsonby Rugby).	Assumed to be retained.
Expected utilisation	Projecting 850,000 annual visitors	Projecting 350,000 – 700,000 annual visitors.	Baseline scenario involves a projection of 230,000 annual visitors (200,000 for concerts/festivals & 30,000 for sport/community)

Financial and commercial terms

34. Tātaki modelled the high-level financial impact of the options and this is covered in the Tātaki board report (at Attachment A).

35. As noted above, the two EOI proposals have been modelled against two scenarios under option 3 over a 10-year and 50-year period. Option 3a has been established as the ‘baseline’ and is close to the status quo.

36. A summary of the financial impact of the options is included in the table below.

Table 2 – Comparison of financial information about options

	1: Auckland Arena	2: Western Springs Bowl	3: Neither option
Private investment	Estimated $200m – $300m private investment. Covers upfront capital, as well as ongoing operational, and maintenance costs.	Estimated $30m investment from CRS & Eccles to construct new stage.	Options could be explored that involve private or public investment. Option 3a involves Ponsonby Rugby’s continuing to make a lease payment of $20k p/a.
Public investment	· Discounted lease of land (modelled based on $0) · One-off public funding may be required to cover displacement of Ponsonby Rugby and upgrade of Stadium Rd (estimated at $13 million) · No ongoing capex or opex.	· Discounted lease of land (modelled based on proposed $100,000 p/a, but scope for negotiation) · $18-20m sought to develop new clubrooms. · Council meets the ongoing cost of operating the venue (maintenance and renewal)	Assumed that council meets the ongoing cost of operating the venue (including maintenance and renewal). Under option 3b, council would fund new clubrooms.
Proposed lease term	Seeking a 50-year lease, with 2x 25-year rights of renewal.	Seeking 30-year leases, with 2x 10-year rights of renewal.	Ponsonby Rugby seeking a 30-year community lease extension with 2x 10 rights of renewal.
Net financial impact on ratepayers	When compared with the baseline scenario (option 3a), initial analysis is that the overall impact of this option is: · 10 years – $3.1m additional cost to ratepayers · 50 years – $18.1m savings to ratepayers. There is an initial impact from lost revenue and the initial investment provision for potential displacement costs and access upgrades, but over time benefits emerge because ongoing investment is not required.	When compared with the baseline scenario (option 3a), initial analysis is that the overall impact of this option is: · 10 years – $35.3m additional cost ratepayers · 50 years – $106.7m additional cost to ratepayers.	*Baseline (option 3a): The estimated net cost to the ratepayer of the baseline option is: · 10 years – $9.9m net cost · 50 years – $31.1m net cost Alternative (option 3b)* When compared with the baseline scenario (option 3a), the impact of this option is: · 10 years – $21m additional cost ratepayers · 50 years – $26.8m additional cost ratepayers
Budget impact	Initial analysis is that required investment could be covered within existing LTP budgets Some existing budget committed to Western Springs would be freed up. This could be allocated to support other venues or released as savings.	Requires further budget to meet investment requirement.	Option 3a could be covered within existing LTP budgets. Option 3b requires additional funding. Other options may also require additional funding.

37. The financial modeling over a 10 and 50-year period is presented in summary below.

Table 3 – Financial modelling over 10 and 50-year period

$m	Baseline - Option 3a	Option 1 – Auckland Arena	Option 2 – Western Springs Bowl	Option 3b
10-year impact:
Capital investment (excl private investment)	(20.1)	(13.0)	(40.9)	(40.9)
Direct expenditure	(24.4)	-	(5.4)	(24.4)
Total revenue	34.6	-	1.0	34.4
Total benefit/(cost) to ratepayers (10-year)	(9.9)	(13.0)	(45.2)	(30.9)
*Change from baseline*	-	(3.1)	(35.3)	(21.0)

50-year impact:
Total benefit/(cost) to ratepayers (50-year)	(31.1)	(13.0)	(137.8)	(57.9)
*Change from baseline*	-	18.1	(106.7)	(26.8)

38. Tātaki currently has $20.7m budgeted for renewals and maintenance at Western Springs Stadium through the LTP. There is currently no existing council funding for other options under option 3 that might be considered at Western Springs Stadium.

39. The investment requirements for Options 1 and 3a could be covered within existing budgets subject to a business case and Tātaki board approval. The Auckland Arena proposal (Option 1) includes an estimated one-off cost of $13m for displacement (Ponsonby Rugby Club relocation) and an upgrade of Stadium Road. Options 2 and 3b would require further budget to meet their investment requirements. This would need to be funded through additional borrowings or the prioritisation of the council group’s capital programme.

Tātaki’s evaluation and recommendations

40. Tātaki evaluated the options against the original EOI criteria and council’s Stadium Investment Objectives and a range of other relevant considerations. As noted in the table above, for comparison purposes it modelled two scenarios under option 3 that involved retaining a lease with Ponsonby Rugby.

Tātaki recommends council seek public feedback on all options

41. The Tātaki Board has referred its report to council and requests that council seek public feedback on all three options. Tātaki’s report (including appendices) is at Attachment A.

Auckland Arena is the current preference

42. Subject to public feedback and direction of the Governing Body, Tātaki has indicated that its currently preferred option is Auckland Arena (Option 1). The reasons for this are:

· The proposal strongly aligns with the Tātaki Trust Deed and Council’s Stadium Investment Objectives.

· It offers a major financial and infrastructure contribution to Auckland sport, with no additional cost or ongoing reliance on ratepayer funding after one-off funding that may be required to cover displacement of Ponsonby Rugby and upgrade of Stadium Road (estimated at $13 million)

· The proponent has a strong track record in delivering large-scale stadium projects.

· The concept is innovative, with flexible community uses and improved connections to the surrounding precinct and attractions.

· It is expected to boost attendance and utilisation at Western Springs Stadium, while supporting access for community groups.

· The development helps address a recognised gap in the fast-growing sports of football, basketball, and padel.

EOI stage only – final commitment would require business case

43. Tātaki note this process is at an EOI stage only. A final commitment to a proposal would need to take account of public feedback and be subject to detailed due diligence, a full business case and negotiations.

Alignment with Stadium Investment Objectives

44. In March 2025, Governing Body approved the adoption of the Stadium Investment Objectives (GB/2025/31) that would support decision making for stadium venues such as Western Springs Stadium.

45. The following section provides an initial assessment of the three options for alignment with the Stadium Investment Objectives. This is based on the initial analysis done on the proposals, set out above and below. It is noted that this is an early stage of the process.

Public value outcomes

46. The Stadium Investment Objectives state that the council will seek to maximise public benefits for public funding, and that the stadium network contributes to the following outcomes areas:

· Economic opportunity & prosperity: Create economic opportunities through attracting visitors, stimulating local businesses and forming connected, thriving urban precincts.

· Community cohesion: Provide community hubs that bring people and communities together in ways that support greater community cohesion and wellbeing and fosters pride.

· Vibrant city & culture: Support a vibrant, globally competitive city that has great opportunities for people to experience cultural and sporting activities, and showcases our diverse cultures, including Auckland’s Māori identity.

· Healthy and active communities: Promote a healthy and active community by encouraging participation in sporting, and other community and cultural activities.

47. Officers consider that both EOI options (Auckland Arena and Western Springs Bowl) have merit and would be likely to make a material contribution to these outcomes, in particular providing for additional events and community activities that enhance community cohesion and the vibrancy of the city. Both options involve private funding that would contribute to these public outcomes without solely relying on public funding (enabling the public contribution to be leveraged), with option 1 providing the largest benefit in this respect.

48. Option 3 (neither EOI proposal) is considered to provide a more limited contribution to these outcomes, although this would depend on what options are explored.

Investment priorities

49. The following table provides an initial assessment for alignment with the stadium network investment priorities.

Table 4 – Comparison of aligned with Stadium Network investment priorities (initial analysis)

	1. Auckland Arena	2. Western Springs Bowl	3. Neither option
1. Get the most out of our infrastructure	The proposal is likely to significantly increase utilisation of the venue and enable more frequent use, based on private investment into the existing site. The 12,500 capacity stadium could be used across several codes and concerts and is a good size for regular sporting events in Auckland. Building new infrastructure allows greater opportunity to ensure it is fit for purpose. The private operators associated with the proposal have a strong history of running similar venues globally and can bring this experience for efficient operation of the stadium and precinct.	The semi-permanent infrastructure would improve the efficiency and utilisation of the venue for concerts/festivals. It also honours the history of the natural amphitheatre. International acts may be attracted to this unique venue. This option is still event based and would likely not have as frequent use outside of events and rugby.	A significant driver for exploring alternatives was the current relative underutilisation of the facility and generally only activated for events. Any future proposals should cover options for more regular use and how this would improve operational efficiency.
2. Support a complementary network of multi-use facilities	The proposal includes multiple elements (such as basketball and padel courts) which meet an identified need in the wider network. The stadium would be multi-use but football focused. It is considered complementary to other stadiums, as it provides a smaller configuration and meets a need not currently provided. There may be concern around the potential impact on content in the rest of the network and negative impacts on other stadiums (see analysis below).	The proposed 5,000 capacity sports venue meets a need within the network, particularly for rugby. There are several proposals about where this could be located which would be impacted by this option. This proposal would establish the venues role primarily as a concert venue within the network. This would have an impact on large concerts in other parts of the network and reduce the commercial viability of those venues (see analysis below).	The base case provides a modest contribution to the network, mainly through the opportunity for continued provision of concerts/festivals at the site and community sport. Any new proposals should consider a multi-use option that complements other parts of the network.
3. Promote integrated, sustainable precincts	The multiple elements included in the proposal would benefit the local area and includes health and hospitality facilities. This option includes development that would improve the connection to MOTAT, Zoo and park. The size of the proposed events is more compatible with transport network constraints (see analysis below). There are opportunities to contribute to planned public transport improvements in the area.	The proposals are primarily event based and it is unclear how they would contribute to the wider area outside of this. The size and frequency of the events proposed to be hosted at the venue present transport network concerns (analysis below). There are opportunities to contribute to planned public transport improvements in the area.	Opportunities could exist for proposals to outline options that contribute to the local area and develop a precinct. Status quo options have not been able to demonstrate this. The size of events hosted at the venue present transport network issues.
4. Improve financial sustainability	The private investment removes the ongoing operational and maintenance cost otherwise borne by the ratepayer. This could allow allocated LTP funding to support other venues in the network. It could draw content and impact income opportunities from other venues however (e.g. AFC from Mt Smart). The members involved in the consortium allows opportunities for partnerships, sponsorship and commercial opportunities.	The proposal includes initial capital investment, but ongoing operational cost would likely still be borne by the ratepayer, particularly for Ponsonby Rugby Club.	Tātaki note that even with increased event numbers, the site would only break even operationally and still requires ongoing LTP funding for capex.

Investment and stewardship principles

50. These proposals are an EOI stage only. If any option was to be progressed further, then the Investment and Stewardship principles would need to be adhered to. This would include ensuring a robust business case is completed and community views are understood (as proposed through the consultation). Final commercial terms would need to consider the impact on ratepayer funding and secure public value for use of an important public asset.

51. The Stadium Network Investment Objectives (including the investment priorities and principles) will help inform further advice, as well as negotiations on any final arrangements.

Additional considerations relevant to options

52. Council officers have considered Tātaki’s report and the identified options. Additional input was sought from:

· relevant council departments and CCOs, including Healthy Waters, Play, Sport and Recreation, Auckland Transport and Watercare;

· key stakeholders including Ponsonby Rugby and the Western Speedway Association (in relation to its proposal for WSS);

· mana whenua groups;

· Eden Park Trust Board and the North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee (NHSSC);

· Waitematā and Albert-Eden local boards, through workshops held with each board;

· Governing Body, through workshops with the proponents for each option and subsequent drop-in sessions.

53. Based on this information, this section of the report addresses a range of additional considerations relevant to the options.

Community and high-performance sports provision (including for Ponsonby Rugby)

54. As a regional stadium, Western Springs Stadium has a greater focus on large-scale events and commercial return than purely community-based parks or venues. Even so, it has a role in community sport provision and impacts on this need to be considered.

General provision analysis

55. Council’s Play, Sport and Recreation team have provided comment on the current state of provision in Auckland as well as some initial analysis of the possible impacts and opportunities from the two EOI proposals. Key points from the analysis about general provisioning gaps is outlined below.

· Significant shortfall in winter sport training fields, especially for football. There is a significant shortfall in training fields for winter sports during the week, with demand for floodlit fields being the greater need. Football is projected to have the greatest shortfalls of winter codes with the greatest impact being in south and central areas. Football has the highest number of participants at both junior and senior levels of the winter codes.

· Critical shortage of indoor court facilities, especially for basketball. All indoor codes assessed by the council (futsal, badminton, table tennis, basketball, netball and volleyball) have experienced growth but this is being limited by the lack of provision. There is a particular under-provision for basketball.

· Sufficient provision for rugby club facilities. Rugby has high levels of provision vs club requirements for both field and training time, often influenced by historical arrangements with well-established domiciled clubs and limited growth in the code. Participant numbers for both union and league have remained static.

· No plans to build sufficient facilities to address shortages. Council has increased funding for sports and recreation infrastructure, but it does not have current plans to fund or build sufficient facilities to address the identified need for indoor courts.

· Limited high-performance facilities for football. While focused on community provision, it is noted that there could also be additional demand for high-performance football facilities in Auckland. There are high-performance facilities at North Harbour and Ngahue Reserve in Ōrākei. However, there are limited pathways for professional careers in New Zealand in the same way that other sports have, such as NPC for rugby. The Oceania Football Confederation (OFC) are proposing to launch the OFC Professional League in January 2026 and have indicated Auckland as a preferred location to host the tournament but that there are limited facilities to host events. The new league is supported by FIFA and would bring over $30m of additional investment to the city.

56. With the upgrades of Waikaraka Park, council’s assessment is that there is sufficient provision to accommodate speedway activities in Auckland without needing to retain Western Springs as a speedway venue.

Provision for Ponsonby Rugby Club

57. Western Springs is currently leased for community sport to Ponsonby Rugby Club. This would continue under Option Two and possibly under Option Three. However, Option One (Auckland Arena) would displace Ponsonby Rugby Club’s current use and would require provision to be made for them elsewhere.

58. An independent location analysis was commissioned by Tātaki as part of ongoing engagement with Ponsonby Rugby to assess potential sites within its catchment area, including the option of remaining at Western Springs Stadium. The analysis is at Attachment C and D. It adopts a multi-method approach, incorporating a review of secondary data, interviews with key stakeholders, catchment and demographic analysis, and technical site assessments. The findings indicated that, in addition to Western Springs, Cox’s Bay or Victoria Park could meet the club’s requirements, subject to further investigation.

59. In March 2025, council staff met with Ponsonby Rugby Club to discuss the club’s future aspirations and needs, independent to the work on the EOI. Ponsonby Rugby Club expressed a preference to remain at Western Springs Stadium. However, the club also acknowledged that the status quo has significant problems too - the current clubrooms are in a flood plain, which presents an insurance risk, there are clashes with festivals and concerts (requiring the club to vacate), and the quality of the Outer Fields is suboptimal.

60. Ponsonby Rugby Club remains committed to finding a long-term solution and has identified six priorities for any future location:

1) Security of tenure to provide certainty and enable investment into facilities

2) Improved game day experience for players and spectators

3) Improved revenue opportunities to support the club’s growth

4) Ability for membership growth

5) Ability to host additional fixtures such as NPC games or National 7s

6) Development of a flexible, multi-use community hub beyond rugby.

61. If the council decided to progress Option 1, then the council and Tātaki would actively work with the Ponsonby Rugby Club on a suitable relocation plan which would accommodate its needs and seek to meet these priorities. This would likely include:

· Local board approval (the Waitematā Local Board has indicated support for considering options for Ponsonby Rugby).

· Funding to upgrade fields and facilities to increase playing and training capacity, so that Ponsonby Rugby’s needs are accommodated without negatively impacting other users.

· Funding new or upgraded clubrooms, possibly to be shared with other clubs and codes.

62. Council staff have a moderate level of confidence that an acceptable solution could be found within this timeframe. This would require a feasibility study on the preferred option, motivation of Ponsonby Rugby Club and a funding pathway. The Governing Body could require confirmation that a suitable option is feasible as a requirement of implementing option 1 if that was its preference.

Assessment of impact on options on sport provision

63. A summary of the initial and high-level assessment of each option’s impact on community sport provisioning is set out in the table below.

Table 5 – Comparison of impact on community sport provision (initial analysis)

	1. Auckland Arena	2. Western Springs Bowl	3. Neither option
Impact on community sport provision	A positive impact on sport provisioning if community access is provided to additional training fields and indoor courts, and a suitable alternative for Ponsonby Rugby is found (which could be required as a condition of proceeding with this option). This option would help address critical shortages in facilities, especially for indoor courts. It may also address a gap in high-performance facilities for football.	Neutral impact as assumes that current arrangements are maintained.	Neutral impact as assumes that current arrangements are maintained.

Broader stadium and venue network impact

64. The impact of the proposals on the broader stadium and venues network has also been considered and will be further assessed if options are progressed.

65. Tātaki note the potential impact of each proposal on the wider stadium network can be considered in terms of the extent to which each:

a) Addresses gaps / shortcomings in the existing network

b) Potentially competes with / displaces activity from existing venues in the stadium network

c) Displaces existing activity from Western Springs Stadium

66. Both the Eden Park Trust Board and the North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee (which is made up of the chairs and deputy chairs of the Upper Harbour and Hibiscus & Bays Local Boards) were contacted to provide initial comment relating to the impact of the proposal on their respective venues.

67. Eden Park did not provide any detailed feedback at this time but note that any decision will have impacts on the network and their operation. They also reaffirmed their ongoing commitment to work closely with council and central government. The Local Board-led North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee provided their perspective on both proposals, as well as a general comment that they felt the stadium process over the last few years has taken place in a disjointed way, impacting their decision making for North Harbour. Their feedback relating to impacts on North Harbour Stadium is noted in the table below.

68. The following table outlines an initial summary of the projected network impact of the options.

Table 6 – Comparison of impact on stadium network (initial analysis)

	1. Auckland Arena	2. Western Springs Bowl	3. Neither option
Overall	The Auckland Arena proposal would likely enhance the stadium network by addressing gaps, through a boutique stadium and high-performance training facilities. There is a recognised growth in professional level football and opportunities arising such as the Oceania Football Confederation professional league who would like to host games in Auckland but have noted a lack of suitable venues. While there is a recognised need for a smaller capacity stadium (<10,000), the proposed 12,500–15,000 capacity may exceed demand and reduce differentiation from existing venues. The focus on football may leave a gap for rugby and league codes. The high-performance facilities would strengthen provision for football, though access balance between elite and community use remains unclear. Development on Western Springs' outer fields would displace music festivals, requiring alternative venues.	The CRS/Ponsonby Rugby Club proposal offers potential benefits to the stadium network through a broadcast-capable boutique stadium and permanent concert infrastructure. The proposed 5,000–8,000 seat boutique stadium aligns well with the identified network gap but may lack the amenity levels expected by hirers, with concerns around seating, shelter, and lighting. Seasonal club use may also limit its availability. Investment in permanent concert infrastructure responds to rising costs of temporary setups, likely improving the commercial viability of events and attracting more concerts and festivals to Auckland, but weakening the commercial performance of other venues. The proposal is not expected to displace the existing activities at Western Springs, which are largely concert/festival based and rugby.	In the scenarios that Tātaki has modelled (options 3a and 3b), Tātaki maintains the facilities to support extra concert events. This would not displace the existing activities at Western Springs (concert/festival based and rugby), but does have a continued impact on other venues. If other ideas are explored (including renewal of speedway), then the network impacts would depend on the activities and could be assessed based on individual proposals.
Eden Park	The proposed 12,500 –15,000 capacity of the Auckland Arena means it will not complete with Eden Park for larger events and this proposal is considered broadly complementary. Eden Park has also discussed the possibility of developing a smaller boutique rectangle stadium as an option for their wider precinct development (currently unfunded). This proposal would not necessarily affect these plans given the difference in size and purpose.	The main stadium would be able to hold 50,000 capacity for outdoor concert events so would continue to be in competition with Eden Park (although they offer different experiences), and the promoters would be incentivised to direct concerts to their venue. This would be expected to have a negative impact on Eden Park’s commercial model (more so than option 3). This proposal would likely impact Eden Park’s tentative plan to develop a similarly sized boutique rectangle stadium as an option for their wider precinct development (currently unfunded).	Western Springs Stadium competes with Eden Park for large concerts, although they offer different formats and experiences (Western Springs providing for outdoor, festival-style events, & Eden Park for enclosed stadium experience). As such, this option is considered to have a negative impact on Eden Park’s commercial model.
North Harbour Stadium	If existing football consolidated at Western Springs, this would reduce tenancy revenues at North Harbour Stadium, and therefore could increase reliance on ratepayer funding if other tenants were not able to be secured. North Harbour Stadium has been previously identified as a good option for hosting festivals so could work to attract more of this content (as well as concerts) previously held at Western Springs. The Local Board-led North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee consider the proposal could duplicate existing facilities at North Harbour and place increased burden on ratepayers to manage those facilities. They consider investment should be based on a clear needs assessment. They noted that if this option was not progressed, it that would not necessarily mean AFC would not be interested in alternative options.	Existing football tenants would likely stay at Norh Harbour in the foreseeable future – which is positive for the stadium. This option would have a negative impact on North Harbour Stadium’s ability to attract concerts and festivals (currently modest). The Local Board-led North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee noted that any proposal to build a new stadium at Western Springs requires careful consideration and a clear needs assessment. Concerns were raised about unclear content assumptions, particularly for a proposed broadcast-standard stadium, and the potential impact on North Harbour.	Existing football tenants would likely stay at Norh Harbour for the foreseeable future – a positive impact. Western Springs Stadium competes for concerts and festivals with North Harbour. This would likely continue under this option, negatively impacting North Harbour Stadium’s ability to attract this content.
Go Media Stadium Mt Smart	The proposal would impact existing stadium operations, with a projected $1 million annual revenue loss for Go Media Stadium in 3 – 5 years if no alternative content could be secured. Some AFC games requiring the larger capacity (such as derby matches) may still be held at Go Media, but most AFC games no longer held there May be able to secure some of the large concerts and festivals previously held at Western Springs.	Possible displacement of some concert events however impact may be less due to differences in event models and facility offerings. AFC would likely continue to play matches at Go Media in the current absence of any other suitable venue.	Western Springs Stadium competes for concerts and festivals with Go Media. This would likely continue under this option, so has a negative impact on Go Media attracting this content. Other impacts are neutral.
Wider venue network	Development on Western Springs' outer fields would displace music festivals, requiring alternative venues with more permissive planning rules This could include greater use of North Harbour, Auckland Domain or waterfront locations such as at Wynyard Point. These would need to be actively explored if this option was progressed.	This could result in less use of other venues in the network for concerts, including possibly Auckland Domain, waterfront locations such as at Wynyard Point and Spark Arena.	Impact depends on the other options considered. If renewal of speedway activities at Western Springs was considered, this would be expected to have a significant negative impact on the operation of the upgraded facilities Waikaraka Park which may require additional public support. This is because consolidation of speedway activities at Waikaraka Park is expected to support the sustainable growth of the venue.

Transport network

69. The Western Springs precinct is already an important destination and increasing public transport options for the area is important for its ongoing success.

Initial comments from Auckland Transport

70. Initial discussions with Auckland Transport advised that the possible transport impacts from construction relating to any options could be mitigated through early engagement with the Works Coordination team throughout the planning process.

71. For the potential impact from events, Auckland Transport advises that smaller-scale events under Option 1 (Auckland Arena) would have significantly lower network impacts than larger-scale events proposed under Option 2 (Western Springs Bowl) and the status quo.

72. AT noted that the low historical uptake of integrated ticketing at Western Springs reduced public transport effectiveness. AT notes that improved outcomes depend on commitment from the proposals—and/or Council—to invest in solutions such as integrated ticketing (provision of free public transport with event tickets).

73. AT would also need to better understand the intended capacity and on-site parking capacity under both proposals to more accurately assess the potential impacts of the day-to-day operations on the transport network.

74. A summary of AT’s initial comment on the options is noted below.

Table 7 – AT comment on options

	1. Auckland Arena	2. Western Springs Bowl	3. Neither option
Auckland Transport comment	The existing network could support the Auckland Arena proposal with minimal changes required for the current timetable and public transport infrastructure. Based on historical figures for smaller-scale events (under 25,000) public transport usage for Western Springs events has historically been low ranging from 3-15%.	The Western Springs Bowl would require high-impact traffic management plans and is expected to result in considerable disruption to local roads and potentially the motorway network, with increased impacts on nearby residents and businesses. Public transport use has historically been slightly better at larger events but still low, ranging from 12-17%. Based on historical examples, the Western Springs Bowl would exceed current public transport capacity and require additional services and infrastructure investment to manage the services required. This would incur cost from either the event or Auckland Council. Large scale events would also likely result in longer event clearances and customer delays.	As noted for Western Springs Bowl, large events at Western Springs require high-impact traffic management plans and result in considerable disruption to local roads and potentially the motorway network. AT noted that low historical uptake of integrated ticketing at Western Springs reduced public transport effectiveness.

1. Auckland Arena

2. Western Springs Bowl

3. Neither option

Auckland Transport comment

The existing network could support the Auckland Arena proposal with minimal changes required for the current timetable and public transport infrastructure.

Based on historical figures for smaller-scale events (under 25,000) public transport usage for Western Springs events has historically been low ranging from 3-15%.

The Western Springs Bowl would require high-impact traffic management plans and is expected to result in considerable disruption to local roads and potentially the motorway network, with increased impacts on nearby residents and businesses.

Public transport use has historically been slightly better at larger events but still low, ranging from 12-17%.

Based on historical examples, the Western Springs Bowl would exceed current public transport capacity and require additional services and infrastructure investment to manage the services required. This would incur cost from either the event or Auckland Council.

Large scale events would also likely result in longer event clearances and customer delays.

As noted for Western Springs Bowl, large events at Western Springs require high-impact traffic management plans and result in considerable disruption to local roads and potentially the motorway network.

AT noted that low historical uptake of integrated ticketing at Western Springs reduced public transport effectiveness.

75. AT’s Special Events team continues to work closely with Tataki, stadiums and event organisers to ensure appropriate transport management plans are in place.

Northwestern Rapid Transit

76. The Government announced on 23 April 2025 that the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotahi (NZTA) Board had endorsed the investment case for Te Ara Hauāuru – Northwest Rapid Transit project, which would see the development of a rapid transit corridor from Brigham Creek to the city centre.^{^[1]}

77. A bus station at Western Springs is planned as part of Stage 3 of this project and would significantly improve public transport options to and from the area. Currently this stage is not expected to be delivered in the next 10 years.

78. Initial conversations with the project team have identified that due to the very early nature of the proposed project, there is an opportunity for joint planning with future proposals for Western Springs Stadium to ensure they support each other.

Stormwater and flooding

79. Council’s Healthy Waters team have provided comments on the site, noting that it is a natural bowl on a floodplain and therefore will flood during extreme weather events. They also noted that the overland flow path naturally flows from the roads above down to the lake.

80. While acknowledging the flood plain, Healthy Waters noted that flooding risks could be mitigated through the design and consenting process and did not identify any major concerns with any of the options.

81. The Ponsonby Rugby Club clubrooms flooded in the 27 January 2023 storm which Healthy Waters believed was impacted by a block wall on the west-side of the building near the stream likely blocking the overland flow path. They advised that a large gap in the wall could help mitigate this in the future.

82. Figure 1 below illustrates the potential flood plain and overland flow paths.

Figure 1. Western Springs Stadium flood plains and overland flow paths

83. Noting that it is still early in this process, if either proposal was supported it would need to fully address stormwater issues as part of its resource consent.

Climate impact

84. A high level, qualitative assessment of climate impacts has been undertaken and is provided in the table below. This is reflective of the limited data available at this early stage of concept development. Impacts on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions are considered across three project life phase: before use, during use and end of life.

Table 8 – Comparison of climate impact (initial analysis)

	1. Auckland Arena	2. Western Springs Bowl	3. Neither option
Initial climate impact assessment	Before use: Significant new infrastructure, likely generating embodied emissions from construction, concrete, and earthworks. Use: Daily operations will likely emit more than the smaller-scale, lower-use proposal & base case. Although some will be displaced from elsewhere. Waste is generated from events, but proposal includes some onsite recycling and composting. Likely to have greater GHG emissions impacts on systems beyond the project boundary such as transport, with higher daily travel demand and private car travel promoted through substantial provision of onsite carparking. End-of-life: Uncertain but expected to be higher for Auckland Arena due to the scale of infrastructure.	Before use: Proposes limited new infrastructure and re-use of existing features, resulting in lower embodied emissions. Use: Lower-use Western Springs Bowl proposal would generate emissions during events. Waste is generated from events. End-of-life: Uncertain, but likely to be higher than a “do nothing” approach given the construction new infrastructure	Before use: Assuming no significant development, will have the least overall impact on emissions. Construction of new clubrooms would have an impact. Use: Events will continue to generate emissions and waste, which will depend on options considered. If speedway was renewed, this would generate further emissions (although these could occur elsewhere). End-of-life: uncertain, but likely to have least impact.

1. Auckland Arena

2. Western Springs Bowl

3. Neither option

Initial climate impact assessment

Before use: Significant new infrastructure, likely generating embodied emissions from construction, concrete, and earthworks.

Use: Daily operations will likely emit more than the smaller-scale, lower-use proposal & base case. Although some will be displaced from elsewhere.

Waste is generated from events, but proposal includes some onsite recycling and composting.

Likely to have greater GHG emissions impacts on systems beyond the project boundary such as transport, with higher daily travel demand and private car travel promoted through substantial provision of onsite carparking.

End-of-life: Uncertain but expected to be higher for Auckland Arena due to the scale of infrastructure.

Before use: Proposes limited new infrastructure and re-use of existing features, resulting in lower embodied emissions.

Use: Lower-use Western Springs Bowl proposal would generate emissions during events. Waste is generated from events.

End-of-life: Uncertain, but likely to be higher than a “do nothing” approach given the construction new infrastructure

Before use: Assuming no significant development, will have the least overall impact on emissions. Construction of new clubrooms would have an impact.

Use: Events will continue to generate emissions and waste, which will depend on options considered. If speedway was renewed, this would generate further emissions (although these could occur elsewhere).

End-of-life: uncertain, but likely to have least impact.

85. All options will face climate impacts associated with extreme heat and flooding (noted above) and will need to plan for this.

86. Early design stages provide the greatest opportunity to reduce emissions and build climate resilience. Both EOI proposals present opportunities to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change, but only if identified and planned early.

87. Staff recommend a detailed climate impact assessment for the preferred option, covering emissions reduction and resilience through design, construction, and operations. This assessment should follow whole-of-life carbon methodologies (e.g. PAS2080, MBIE’s WOL Embodied Carbon Framework) and include system-wide impacts.

Speedway

88. Western Springs Stadium has a long and important history as a motorsport venue, particularly for speedway. Speedway has been a significant part of the venue’s identity and has contributed to its cultural and sporting heritage in Auckland. However, the use of the venue for speedway limits its availability for other purposes and is subject to court-imposed restrictions. For some time, there has been discussion about consolidating speedway activities at other venues.

89. The most recent venue hire agreement for speedway at Western Springs Stadium expired in March 2025. Although the most recent speedway promoter at Western Springs (PNSL) supports the consolidation of speedway at Waikaraka Park and did not seek to renew its most recent venue hire agreement, some members of the speedway community continue to support the provision of speedway at Western Springs.

90. During the public EOI process for Western Springs Stadium, no proposals to continue speedway operations at the stadium were received before the closing date. A non-complying proposal was received from the recently formed Western Springs Speedway Association (WS Speedway Association) on 25 February 2025. After receiving external probity advice, Tātaki declined to accept this proposal, and it has not been assessed as part of the EOI process. The probity report prepared by PwC at Attachment B.

91. The WS Speedway Association proposal is included as an attachment to the report at attachment E. In its proposal, the aassociation expressed interest in assuming the management and operational responsibilities of Western Springs Stadium to continue hosting speedway events while supporting a diverse range of community activities. The information submitted contained limited detail but proposed maintaining Western Springs Stadium as a motorsport venue while integrating shared use with Ponsonby Rugby and other interested parties. WS Speedway Association’s stated aim is to ensure the effective and profitable utilisation of the stadium for various sporting and entertainment events through a subleasing model.

92. Council officers met with the WS Speedway Association on 17 March 2025 and offered to place further information regarding the proposal, including regarding any proposed financial contribution, before the Governing Body. On 28 March 2025 staff wrote to the WS Speedway Association’s barrister outlining the decision-making process for Western Springs Stadium and stating any information received from WS Speedway Association would be put before the Governing Body at its 1 May meeting. No additional information has been received.

93. If a decision is taken not to proceed with either EOI option (Auckland Arena or Western Springs Bowl), then other options, including the potential for speedway and the WS Speedway Association proposal, could be considered under Option 3 ("Neither option"). Public feedback may also be provided during the consultation.

94. Any preference for renewed speedway activity at Western Springs would have several implications that need to be considered following the Governing Body’s decision to fund works at Waikaraka Park and the need to consider the long-term sustainability of motorsport activities across Auckland. That funding is now contractually committed, and upgrade works on site are underway.

Options for next steps

95. Several options are available to the Governing Body. This paper is focused on supporting the Governing Body to make a choice about public consultation. Later in July, officers will provide elected members advice summarising feedback received through public consultation, with a recommendation on the three options and further analysis of the substantive options.

96. Council officers recommend that the Governing Body receive the information provided on the EOI process. Council officers also support Tātaki’s recommendation that the Governing Body approve consultation on all options. Consultation was supported by the Waitematā and Albert-Eden local boards at recent workshops. The Governing Body is advised that now is an appropriate point to seek public input before the council or Tātaki progress further with developing any option.

97. Options identified for next steps are:

· Option 1: Endorse a preferred proposal for public consultation

This option would invite the Governing Body to indicate a preferred option prior to consultation.

Rationale: Governing Body may wish to provide an indication of their preference to the public and use this consultation process to invite views on their preference. The Tātaki report has indicated that in their opinion one proposal scores more highly than the other and elected members may wish to proactively support that view through endorsing a preferred option.

Considerations: This approach allows the council to identify the reasons for a particular option being its preferred option, if it does have a preferred option at this stage. However, the Governing Body may consider that it would like further information on community views before expressing a preference for one of the proposals.

· Option 2: Undertake public consultation without endorsing either proposal

This option would note the Tātaki board’s recommendation, but the Governing Body would remain neutral on their preference at this stage.

Rationale: This option allows Governing Body to consider and incorporate public feedback into their decision before choosing a preference.

Considerations: The public would not have the benefit of knowing the council’s initial preference and the reasons for that. On the other hand, this approach means the council does not have to identify a preferred option at this stage, which it may feel unable to do in the absence of public feedback.

· Option 3: Do not consult – decide to do something else

This option would acknowledge the Tātaki board’s recommendation, but council would decide not to progress further with the EOI and instead pursue a different option.

Rationale: This option allows the council to end the EOI process and consider other options.

Considerations: This option would not provide an opportunity to reflect the views of Aucklanders on all the proposals. Due to the high amount of public interest and the long-term implications of this decision obtaining these views would enable more informed decision making. This option would also result in the work undertaken as part of the EOI process (by council, Tātaki and the proponents) being wasted and could affect confidence of proponents in participating in such processes.

98. Option two is the recommended option for the consultation process as it allows Governing Body to consider the views of the public and potentially impacted organisations before choosing a preferred option.

Climate impact statement

99. There are no material climate impacts expected from a decision on whether to consult on the options.

100. An initial assessment of the climate impacts of the EOI options is provided in the analysis section of the report. Staff recommend a detailed climate impact assessment for the preferred option.

Council group impacts and views

Tātaki Auckland Unlimited

101. Tātaki currently oversee the operation of Western Springs Stadium and have led the EOI process. Tātaki’s views have been provided in this report and attachments.

Auckland Transport

102. Auckland Transport’s views are set out in the analysis section of the report.

Watercare

103. Staff at Watercare acknowledged and agreed with comments from Healthy Waters with respect to flooding.

104. Additional comment was provided on the Central Interceptor, which runs near the stadium site and is expected to be completed before either proposal would proceed. While the Central Interceptor is primarily a wastewater asset, it will help reduce wastewater overflows that occur during heavy rainfall and flooding.

105. Watercare did not anticipate any impact on the Central Interceptor from construction of either proposal.

106. The main point of concern raised was associated with potential odour that could be emitted from the Central Interceptor shaft near the stadium. This can be addressed through air treatment facilities but would need to be included in further design proposals.

Financial implications

107. Any decision to proceed with public consultation would be covered by existing budget and resource, so would not have material financial implications.

108. The financial implication of the EOI options being considered for Western Springs are address in the analysis section of the report.

Risks and mitigations

109. This paper is to provide a summary of the EOI proposals to proceed to public consultation, and the risks associated with the consultation process are focused on those associated with the consultation process.

110. A summary of possible risks and mitigations is provided below.

Risk (if this...)	Impact (then…)	Mitigation
Judicial Review from WSSA
There is a reasonable degree of litigation risk associated with the decisions on the future of Western Springs Stadium, and the WSSA has filed legal proceedings in the High Court challenging council and Tātaki decisions in relation to Waikaraka Park and Western Springs Stadium.	Litigation gives rise to uncertainty in the decision-making process and may have financial and reputational implications for council and Tātaki.	Council and Tātaki continue to follow a robust process and comply with legal requirements, including in relation to consultation and decision-making. Council and Tātaki may continue to make decisions about Western Springs Stadium, including the decisions related to the Expressions of Interest process for the long-term future of Western Springs Stadium. It will be important for council and Tātaki to consider the impacts of the litigation on the relevant decision-making processes, and officers will provide advice to Governing Body on this as required.
Limited feedback
If there is only a small amount of engagement there would be a limited amount of usable feedback	This could limit confidence in how accurately it reflects the public view.	It is anticipated there will be public interest and both the engagement and communications teams are preparing a public messaging campaign to ensure awareness of the proposals and how they can provide input. Regional Organisations and Interest Groups (ROIGs) and key stakeholders will be directly contacted and supported to provide feedback.
Significant changes to proposals post consultation
If core aspects of the proposals change once consultation has concluded	The perception may be that consultation would be of limited value and this might impact on public trust and confidence.	Consultation needs to be clear that the options are at the EOI stage and are therefore indicative only. They may be subject to change as they are further developed. Consultation needs to provide scope for broad feedback.
Trust in the consultation process
Concerns could be raised that the options are not presented neutrally	This could result in a lack of confidence in consultation results	Council’s engagement team will carefully craft and review the consultation questions and material and this will be independently reviewed by and external expert (details below).
Process is protracted
The process is drawn out or lacks a clear end point	One or more proponent may withdraw interest, and council would lose the opportunity presented by the private interest and investment	Progressing with consultation and high levels of stakeholder engagement

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori

Māori impact statement

111. Western Spring or 'Te Wai Orea' (The water of the eels) was originally a natural river fed by water from Te Tatua-a-Riukiuta, Mount Albert, and Maungawhau / Mount Eden and was valued by Māori for its clean water.

112. Western Springs/Te Wai Orea is a recognised wāhi tūpuna/site of significance to mana whenua. The council has contacted mana whenua about the Te Wai Orea, considering it is adjacent to the site managed by Tātaki, but they have not yet provided feedback.

113. Any future use of Western Springs Stadium could create opportunities for mana whenua. For example, procurement, expressing culture and identity, or adopting culturally appropriate practices.

114. Council provided mana whenua groups with information about the options being considered and invited them to share their views on the future of Western Springs Stadium. No input was provided at this point in the process. During and following public consultation, council will continue to engage with mana whenua.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe

Local impacts and local board views

115. Two workshops were held with the Waitematā and Albert-Eden local boards on 8 and 10 of April 2025.

116. The workshops were jointly facilitated by Tātaki and council staff to provide information on the proposals and gather initial feedback for this report.

Waitematā local board feedback

117. The local board strongly supports public consultation, particularly on the two EOI proposals.

118. Concerns were raised around the potential impacts on the wider stadium network for both proposals and the board requested that this be articulated for consideration as part of the public consultation. The potential displacement of Ponsonby Rugby Club was noted, and a willingness to work with the club on alternative locations should re-location be required.

119. The board also expressed their desire to support the growth of women’s sport and proposals that enable this should be an important factor for consideration.

Albert-Eden local board feedback

120. The Albert-Eden local board also strongly supported taking the proposals to public consultation.

121. It was acknowledged that it would be premature for the board to provide any substantive feedback with the limited information they have had so far but look forward to future opportunities to provide formal input on the proposals.

122. The board emphasised the importance of community participation and that if either of the proponents progress to the next stage that considering community needs should be central to decision making.

123. They noted that they had received feedback from the community on the lack of training and playing fields for football and a lack of indoor courts for basketball in their local board area.

Broader local board feedback

124. Feedback from the Local Board-led North Harbour Stadium Steering Committee is noted in the analysis section of the report.

125. Formal feedback and resolutions would be sought from all local boards through the consultation process.

126. Local groups and residents would also be invited to submit their feedback through the consultation process provided consultation is approved by Governing Body.

Ngā koringa ā-muri

Next steps

127. Following direction from the Governing Body on 1 May, all consultation material will be finalised and made available online in time for the start of the consultation process in May 2025.

128. Dr Lara Greaves, a respected political scientist with academic appointments at both the University of Auckland and Victoria University of Wellington, will provide an independent review of the feedback form for public consultation.

129. This role will be to ensure the form aligns with best practice in questionnaire design and that this part of the consultation process is robust, impartial, and informed by expert advice.

130. The proponents of the proposals and other interest groups are free to discuss the proposals publicly and campaign for options.

131. Depending on the feedback received, staff may engage with the proponents or any other interested third parties at the conclusion of the public consultation process to seek clarification or to invite a response to any matters raised by this process before bringing the final recommendations back to the governing body.

132. The key steps (subject to final refinement) are:

Activity	Description	Indicative Timeline
Awareness raising	Raise awareness of the process and the opportunities to provide feedback through the upcoming consultation process.	5 – 9 May 2025
Public consultation period	General public can submit feedback via AK Have your say. Online information seminars will be held for the public. Information will be printed and available at council libraries	19 May – 15 June
Regional Organisations and Interest Groups (ROIGs)	ROIG’s will be able to submit via AK have your say and will be invited to present submissions to Governing Body	19 May – 15 June
Analysis and review	Collation and theming of feedback. Analysis will identify common themes and provide a summary report of the feedback.	16 June – 30 June
Review and comment on feedback	Local boards and mana whenua will be able to respond to public input and resolve their feedback	2 – 24 July
Tātaki board decision	Following consultation, the Tātaki board will decide to formally adopt or confirm a preferred option.	July (date TBC)
Governing body decision	Summary of all feedback and Tātaki I board decision brought back to Governing Body for decision on the preferred option.	31 July
Business casing, and contract negotiations	If Option 1 or 2 is the preferred option, business casing and contract negotiations to occur.	Jul – Dec 2025