Design Ideas for new Perth Stadium

[The Speaker]

That's obvious. Even you have to admit that Burswood is not the grand plan it started out to be.

Have to admit? Why?

Exactly my point. There's nothing stopping Labor canning the idea.
Barnett could have easily locked in the project with a little more effort.

.

Smart politics.

 

[Admiral Byng]

That's obvious. Even you have to admit that Burswood is not the grand plan it started out to be.



Exactly my point. There's nothing stopping Labor canning the idea.
Barnett could have easily locked in the project with a little more effort.

.

I think it's a damn good plan for a stadium. I'd catch the train anyway because I like a drinkie or two, so I'm not fussed about the lack of parking. Good train access and a nice big shiny new train station works for me, even a big new station with a matt finish would work. I see no major change in design that has been the project down-graded.

i don't think in the timeframe available it would have been possible to do more. Yes, they delayed it by two years, but that was because of the GFC and the new children's hospital got the priority over the stadium at the time. Given that constraint, I think we're about as far down the path as could reasonably be hoped.

 

[cos789]

I think it's a damn good plan for a stadium.

That wasn't the question was it.
It's good. But it has expensive construction and limited capacity and not in the CBD
You haver to admit a stadium in the CBD would be "damn good"..

I see no major change in design that has been the project down-graded.

We're not talking just about the stadium but the whole concept of Eastern Gateway.
As I said, I think that is quite visionary and worth the quite considerable expense but it's not going to happen for in the near future if ever. Now it's just a good stadium on a windy pennisula.

Yes, they delayed it by two years, but that was because of the GFC and the new children's hospital got the priority over the stadium at the time.

And will the trains get priority over the stadium this time?
Barnett is deffinately not pushing the stadium in his election promotion, everthing but.
As I said there was plenty of opportunity to "lock" the stadium in like Riverside Drive.
Labor is actively pushing a new stadium at KP. I like the idea of saving money but at the same time I'm worried that this will detract from the stadium.

I like that Barnett built a new hospital. That's what governments are for. I don't like the fact it wasn't built by Australians. Will barnett have the same approach to Burswood?
Why is Riverside Drive costing us money? Shouldn't a plan like this be self funded by private enterprise? It's a commercial undertaking with little to offer the taxpapers and a lot to upset the taxpayers.

.

 

[Admiral Byng]

That wasn't the question was it.
It's good. But it has expensive construction and limited capacity and not in the CBD
You haver to admit a stadium in the CBD would be "damn good"..



We're not talking just about the stadium but the whole concept of Eastern Gateway.
As I said, I think that is quite visionary and worth the quite considerable expense but it's not going to happen for in the near future if ever. Now it's just a good stadium on a windy pennisula.



And will the trains get priority over the stadium this time?
Barnett is deffinately not pushing the stadium in his election promotion, everthing but.
As I said there was plenty of opportunity to "lock" the stadium in like Riverside Drive.
Labor is actively pushing a new stadium at KP. I like the idea of saving money but at the same time I'm worried that this will detract from the stadium.

I like that Barnett built a new hospital. That's what governments are for. I don't like the fact it wasn't built by Australians. Will barnett have the same approach to Burswood?
Why is Riverside Drive costing us money? Shouldn't a plan like this be self funded by private enterprise? It's a commercial undertaking with little to offer the taxpapers and a lot to upset the taxpayers.

.

Not really. The problem with a stadium in the CBD is that the stadium is a dead space most of the time and will get used at an average of less than one day a week. For non match-days (most of the time) it will detract from the vibrancy of the city. It will be a big empty concrete bowl most of the time, people won't just casually wonder in and around the stadium unless there happens to be an event on. Picking a site for the stadium is a balancing act. It needs to be outside the CBD but near enough to be able to use the public transport system that serves the city during ordinary working days.

But nobody except you is talking about the CBD, it's Burswood or Subiaco. Last time I checked Kitchener Park was not in the Perth CBD.

All the rest of the stuff about Riverside Drive is irrelevant. That's just digging a big hole and filling it with river water. Far simpler to plan and construct than a stadium.

 

[cos789]

The problem with a stadium in the CBD is that the stadium is a dead space most of the time and will get used at an average of less than one day a week.

Most of the city is dead space as you say. Very liitle viibrancy in the place.
Those office blocks may bring people into the city on week days but they don't hold the people.
Why have museums in cities they attract minimal people per week etc etc.
You don't have much of a vision do you.
A football stadium can incorporate whatever you like if you want it too.
Besides modern football stadium are living entitiies these days .
They hold the offices for football and sports organisations so they are used throughout the week.

For non match-days (most of the time) it will detract from the vibrancy of the city. It will be a big empty concrete bowl most of the time, people won't just casually wonder in and around the stadium unless there happens to be an event on.

That's not the case with the MCG or Docklands or the SCG nowadays is it.
There are offices and attractions at the stadium.
Nobody says I wish they hadn't built Docklands.
FFS do you want to look at rail tracks or a well designed stadium.

But nobody except you is talking about the CBD,

That's not because it isn't the preferred option if it were available.
We're talking about Subiaco and Burswood because they are only options the two parties are delivering.

Last time I checked Kitchener Park was not in the Perth CBD.

And your remarks are getting totally irrelevant because I have always said that a stadium in the CBD could be financed in part by the rail saviings of Subiaco and Burswood. More savings would acrue from the construction needed at Burswood. The Labor party has zeroed in on this savings issue. The only question is what the savings amount to.

All the rest of the stuff about Riverside Drive is irrelevant. That's just digging a big hole and filling it with river water. Far simpler to plan and construct than a stadium.

No, it's the history of the party making the promises.
Barnett promised the Ellenbrook railway and reneged.
Barnett lockked in Riverside Drive when he needn't and who have left it to private enterprise.
Barnett built the new hospital with foreign labour thus depriving Australia of tax income which would have diminished the actual cost of the hospital significantly.
Barnett hasn't locked in a new stadium and it doesn't figure prominently in his election platform.
A new stadium does figure prominently in Labor's election platform. It will supposed be part financed by the savings of not building Burswood and Riverside Drive.

If you add up the cost of the indoor stadium, the rectangular stadium and the taxpayers cost of Riverside Drive then you could have built almost two stadia.

Australian Football just has has not been a priority of the Liberal government.

.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Most of the city is dead space as you say. Very liitle viibrancy in the place.
Those office blocks may bring people into the city on week days but they don't hold the people.
Why have museums in cities they attract minimal people per week etc etc.
You don't have much of a vision do you.
A football stadium can incorporate whatever you like if you want it too.
Besides modern football stadium are living entitiies these days .
They hold the offices for football and sports organisations so they are used throughout the week.




That's not the case with the MCG or Docklands or the SCG nowadays is it.
There are offices and attractions at the stadium.
Nobody says I wish they hadn't built Docklands.
FFS do you want to look at rail tracks or a well designed stadium.




That's not because it isn't the preferred option if it were available.
We're talking about Subiaco and Burswood because they are only options the two parties are delivering.




And your remarks are getting totally irrelevant because I have always said that a stadium in the CBD could be financed in part by the rail saviings of Subiaco and Burswood. More savings would acrue from the construction needed at Burswood. The Labor party has zeroed in on this savings issue. The only question is what the savings amount to.



No, it's the history of the party making the promises.
Barnett promised the Ellenbrook railway and reneged.
Barnett lockked in Riverside Drive when he needn't and who have left it to private enterprise.
Barnett built the new hospital with foreign labour thus depriving Australia of tax income which would have diminished the actual cost of the hospital significantly.
Barnett hasn't locked in a new stadium and it doesn't figure prominently in his election platform.
A new stadium does figure prominently in Labor's election platform. It will supposed be part financed by the savings of not building Burswood and Riverside Drive.

If you add up the cost of the indoor stadium, the rectangular stadium and the taxpayers cost of Riverside Drive then you could have built almost two stadia.

Australian Football just has has not been a priority of the Liberal government.

.

Are you working for McGowan's office?

Are you honestly trying to convince us that the Burswood stadium will never actually be built if we vote for Barnett?

You are desperate that we don't vote for Barnett, that's it, that's all it boils down to. You don't actually give a stuff about footy.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Labour's claim is false. The original report estimated the cost of the stadium at Subiaco at just under 1 billion and Burswood at 1.25 billion. So yes, the original plan for Burswood was was $300 million dearer. But, the planing work that has gone into the Burswood stadium has got the cost down to around $1 billion ($700 million for the building and $300 for the transport upgrades). Roughly equal to the original cheapest options. Now Labour have shifted the goal posts and have cut back another $300 million. They must somehow think that the transport in Subiaco doesn't need upgrading.

I'm going to say that bolded part is wrong. Any Stadium cost reductions would translate across to Subiaco, and also would have been eaten up by inflation in construction costs which the report states.


The original report included $90 million for transport upgrades at Burswood and just over $30 million for transport upgrades for Subiaco (underground carpark and new bus terminal with no provision for the upgrade of West Leederville Station). Later estimates suggested 300 million dollars for transport upgrades at both sites would be preferable with a large amount of that money going into new station, bridges over the river in Burswoods case and new bridges over the Fremantle line.


The original report put the stadium construction costs at Burswood at $89 million dollars above and beyond that of Subiaco, however this included construction inflation caused by a 12 month delayed start and a longer construction time frame, that is probably a smaller figure with Burswood being the one with all the detailed planning done. The cost of the plaza, carpark estimated at an amazing $256 million, but i don't know what this figure includes as far as number of parking bays, size of plaza level, size of bus port. I know the current masterplan doesn't include a large volume of parking or any bus terminal larger than the one proposed at Subiaco, the additional cost is really in building up that large plaza and the associated ground works around the area. But that would be an unknown figure.

In the end Labors proposed savings don't exist, they can't build the stadium component or the transport upgrades for much less than what’s being proposed at Burswood. It's essentially the extensive ground works (not so much foundation works) that will see money saved.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

That's not because it isn't the preferred option if it were available.
We're talking about Subiaco and Burswood because they are only options the two parties are delivering.

You are one of handful of people to talk about a CBD stadium. It simply isn't on the planning agenda and wasn't even considered for the NBL site.

Barnett promised the Ellenbrook railway and reneged.

Good thing too the proposed Light Rail route will get more than twice the number of passangers per day. I suggest you visit a rail forum to see people rip into the plan, it's not that large parts of it shouldn't happen they just shouldn't be done now (or in some cases the next 20 years) ahead of more viable transport projects.

Barnett lockked in Riverside Drive when he needn't and who have left it to private enterprise.

Not sure what this is about. The M4 does a lot of damage to Sydney and the Pacific highway does the same to Brisbane, Perth already has the massive interchange screwing up our western foreshore we don't need RSD to become re-entrenched as a city bypass route. Period.

A new stadium does figure prominently in Labor's election platform. It will supposed be part financed by the savings of not building Burswood and Riverside Drive.

If you add up the cost of the indoor stadium, the rectangular stadium and the taxpayers cost of Riverside Drive then you could have built almost two stadia.

I think that's because the alternative has to present an alternative for the sake of presenting an alternative. Play to the strengths of the Subiaco site and fudge up some figures and they have a plan to deliver the stadium.

A Labor election will result in a 3 year delay to the stadium project, they would be lucky to see soil turned on either the stadium or ellenbrooke line in their first term.

 

[Herne Hill Hammer]

This

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Not really. The problem with a stadium in the CBD is that the stadium is a dead space most of the time and will get used at an average of less than one day a week. For non match-days (most of the time) it will detract from the vibrancy of the city. It will be a big empty concrete bowl most of the time, people won't just casually wonder in and around the stadium unless there happens to be an event on. Picking a site for the stadium is a balancing act. It needs to be outside the CBD but near enough to be able to use the public transport system that serves the city during ordinary working days.

But nobody except you is talking about the CBD, it's Burswood or Subiaco. Last time I checked Kitchener Park was not in the Perth CBD.

All the rest of the stuff about Riverside Drive is irrelevant. That's just digging a big hole and filling it with river water. Far simpler to plan and construct than a stadium.

A good point. A stadium would bring less people into the city than the proposed developments at the NBL site during the week. Anyway the project hasn't been designed for a stadium of that size at any stage, the better part of the site was where the Arena sits and it's construction was being planned in 2007/08.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

This

MetroNet.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

It's easy to comprehend that some people have given up being discerning and using their logical instincts actually for believing (or hoping) politician's promises.

Did you see today that the contracts are drawn for Riverside Drive. Where stuck with Barnett's folly.
He couldn't go and sign the contracts for the stadium could he. He's had plenty of time tomsign contracts and lock it all in. No . Now we're talking about railways or the the lack of them when we don't have enough carriages to serve the current demand. We're the boom state in the best performing country in the world but the media says we'll be downgraded if the deficiet gets any worse.

You still think we're going to get a state-of-the-art stadium with decent capacity on shedule??
Looking pretty dim to me.

.

It's pretty obvious your the one buying into a partisan vision of some sort.

Every planner, transport engineer ive spoken to has that there will need to be duplication on the Midland from day one and quite possibly Joondalup line as well under this plan. If it doesn't happen the network will start to break down as far as frequencies go as well as conflicting moves at Perth west rail rard.

Things they all suggest:
- A lot more rolling stock on existing lines to improve peak hour frequencies to ensure the long corridors that service the most outer suburbs.
-Light rail spine running down the cities spine, some suggest a city loop instead, alot have different routes in mind and prefer an extensive light rail network to the inner and mid ring suburbs that are closer to the city and denser than a large metro servicing outer suburbs with lower densities.
- Most admit that rail down highway/ freeway reserves simply don't work in getting people out of cars, require new town centres to be constructed at the expense of existing ones that are struggling to grow already.
- Split down the middle on how soon Ellenrbooke needs rail or if it all.

I asbsolutly support the diversion of RSD, it's no different to the traffic calming that has occured in South Perth or the Western Suburbs only it's acheiving more than slowing traffic on suburban streets (same nuffs oppose the diversion), it's creating a large waterfront precinct south of traffic.

Id be suprised if the Burswood stadium was ready for the 2019 season, id be suprised if Subiaco was ready for the 2021 season.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

That's obvious. Even you have to admit that Burswood is not the grand plan it started out to be.

What grand plan? get me quotes, plans, images of this grand plan sold to us all?

Pretty sure it was sold as the stadium in a park and not a stadium in an urban setting. The provision for future development still exists, just like the Scitech proposal.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Maybe people should stop trying to read too much into what I say.

Sure thing Mr Abbott.

No, IMO, the like scenario is that the project will be delayed and run down.

We have already seen Barnett wind down the big picture of the Eastern Gateway, light rail etc.

Eastern Gateway as in the Riverside project? or the Gateway road project? How has either been down scaled? no real inlet at riverside, partial freeway to freeway at tonkin/roe?

The proposed light rail project got extended to include QEII and Vic Park connection, not reduced in size. The detailed planning on that route was done first and done under Labors watch.

Maybe the pedestrian bridge will get dropped.
The extended capacity will never happen.
Remember this stadium was "promised" before the rush to buy railway election votes.
Something will be a broken promise or so slow on takeup that it's effectively the same.
There's mean a huge lead in to the Burswood stadium yet we we have no contracts signed like we do for Riverside Drive. Barnett doesn't not seem to be energetically promoting this stadium idea.

P.S. The Riverside Drive project basically puts the Citylink idea on hold so the CBD stadium could be built.

The easy extension of capacity is built into the design, it wont be needed for a long time. Either way it's not something that's as possible at Subiaco.

The stadium might have been promised before hand but Labor are the party with the additional rail spending commitments. My tip would be that the Liberals drop the airport line, it's a massive white elephant at the moment as far as the liberals costed the departments proposal or in Labors case a massive misfiring dud that won't attract passengers.

The bolded part is nonsense. The NBL is far more advanced and has two towers with precomitted tenants.

The waterfront has expressions of interest on the hotel site only and Chevron who where touted with a possible move are staying put for another 10 years in QV1. Im predicting a lot of vacant sites.

 

[cos789]

Are you honestly trying to convince us that the Burswood stadium will never actually be built if we vote for Barnett?.

FFS Again. Don't you read AB you sugested that it might never be built not me.
Again , I'm suggesting it wont proceed with priority a new stadium demands.

. You don't actually give a stuff about footy.

FFS AB, I'm the only one saying it should go further.
The stadium should be built at it's maximum capicity.
I'm saying if Burswood goes ahead it should be the original grand plan.
I'm the one say it should really be in the CBD.

Barnett has been the most major disappointment since Bob Hawke.
You just cannot admit to this.
Unfortunately you're only as good as your opposition.
I have quoted what barnett has or has not done.
I have quoted what labor has said it will do rather what I expect will happen.

.

 

[cos789]

In the end Labors proposed savings don't exist, they can't build the stadium component or the transport upgrades for much less than what’s being proposed at Burswood.

Brilliant Einstein, because that's where they said the savings weren't coming from.

There will be savings building a stadium at KP - it's just a question of how much.

 

[cos789]

The provision for future development still exists, .

Which means in effect it will never be realistically built.
It's a non issue.

ATM the most we can hope for is what the politicians promise us.
We're unlikely to get all those promises.
Both parties have promised railways and a stadium.
Barnett seems even less enthusiatic than in the past about committing to this stadium.
Labor seems to have grabbed a simplistic idea of non commital and rolled it out as policy.
I have to repeat it yet all again for you and AB.
I'm not rapt with Labor's idea and I'm not rapt with Barnett's footy performance.(and utility price hikes)
But they are the only two choices we have

 

[Admiral Byng]

FFS Again. Don't you read AB you sugested that it might never be built not me.
Again , I'm suggesting it wont proceed with priority a new stadium demands.




FFS AB, I'm the only one saying it should go further.
The stadium should be built at it's maximum capicity.
I'm saying if Burswood goes ahead it should be the original grand plan.
I'm the one say it should really be in the CBD.

Barnett has been the most major disappointment since Bob Hawke.
You just cannot admit to this.
Unfortunately you're only as good as your opposition.
I have quoted what barnett has or has not done.
I have quoted what labor has said it will do rather what I expect will happen.

.

I still don't understand.

What is your overall grand vision for the stadium (anywhere)?

What is the grand plan as you see it specifically for Burswood? I thought the grand plan was a 60,000 seater with modern amenities, fixed oval most suited to Australian football but can be used for cricket, rugby and soccer if needs be but at a slightly less than optimal layout. A roof over the grandstands to provide most seats with protection from the elements but the playing surface open to the sky to allow natural light for the grass. A railway station and bus station built nearby as part of the overall plan to move people in and out. I thought that this was the grand plan - is the grand plan something else in your eyes? If so, what? The way I see it, if Barnett will build something along the lines of what I've just outlined then I won't feel cheated or ripped off or lied to. What is it about the Barnett plan that I should be suspicious of?

Edit: and the footbridge over the river, that's part of the plan too.

 

[cos789]

I still don't understand.

Do you work for bf trying to get the hits up or something .

.

 

[cos789]

You are one of handful of people to talk about a CBD stadium.

How many f...........g times do i have to say stuff.
It's a choice between the unenthusiatic and the re-active loose cannon.
I mention the CBD as a logical exercise. It's really interesting to hear why people think we can't have a stadium in the CBD when other cities do and it works well for them.

 

[Silent Alarm]

How many f...........g times do i have to say stuff.
It's a choice between the unenthusiatic and the re-active loose cannon.
I mention the CBD as a logical exercise. It's really interesting to hear why people think we can't have a stadium in the CBD when other cities do and it works well for them.

Nice to see a post that doesn't end with a weirdly placed full stop.
.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Do you work for bf trying to get the hits up or something .

I'm just trying to understand what your position is. I still don't know. When I ask you a direct question on the subject you reply with this. I still don't know.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Brilliant Einstein, because that's where they said the savings weren't coming from.

There will be savings building a stadium at KP - it's just a question of how much.

Sure it will be cheaper, but not as much as previously stated. Probably around 100 - 150 million dollars cheaper.

Alan Carpenters proposed Subiaco stadium was costed at 1.1 billion dollars and now Labor are suggesting they can do it for less?
In reality neither site can hope to deliver a total cost below that 1.1 billion figure (even with a modifed design specification) which was done in 2008 dollars. That proposal in 2011 prices had blown out to 1.5 billion dollars.

They havent budgeted for transport upgrades to Subiaco and the cost escalation will wipe out a lot of savings made in the reduced ground/ foundation works.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

How many f...........g times do i have to say stuff.
It's a choice between the unenthusiatic and the re-active loose cannon.
I mention the CBD as a logical exercise. It's really interesting to hear why people think we can't have a stadium in the CBD when other cities do and it works well for them.

You didn't need to repeat yourself.

The location issue is still a problem. You have suggested the CityLink site but it's not ideal as the whole point is to create a city grid with unique spaces and places that we don't yet have in the city. The Arena is doing a wonderful job at bringing people into the CBD as is. During week night games as well, which is a bonus.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Which means in effect it will never be realistically built.
It's a non issue.

I don't expect much on this side of things for some time, as I’ve said before the Watefront, CityLink, Riverside, The Springs as well as developments at Belmont Park and Mirvac's Peninsular take development precedent over things early in the theoretical stage.

The cool aspect of the Burswood location is that it can be integrated into the East Side renewal project that will be done by the EPRA in the medium term when they get the funding from politicians to get around to it.

ATM the most we can hope for is what the politicians promise us.
We're unlikely to get all those promises.
Both parties have promised railways and a stadium.
Barnett seems even less enthusiatic than in the past about committing to this stadium.
Labor seems to have grabbed a simplistic idea of non commital and rolled it out as policy.
I have to repeat it yet all again for you and AB.
I'm not rapt with Labor's idea and I'm not rapt with Barnett's footy performance.(and utility price hikes)
But they are the only two choices we have

I think your using political cynicism and dressing it up as wisdom. Previously Buswell had rolled out the airport line as part of the 2031 transport vision (when it will be more viable), the light rail and stadium have both previously been backed to be completed by 2018 (say whatever you will of those dates). So in the order of priorities they would come first. Especially when you look at the modelling for the Airport line as far as commuter numbers go and the huge scope of planning that needs to go into the proposed Liberal route.

The problem for me is the lack of consensus politics, Labor have played politics with public transport and suggested outlandish and expensive to build and operate lines. I'm backing an entrenched government to get more done than one that has promised comprehensive change to plans that are already well into the detailed planning stage. Give it one more term and waterfront, light rail and stadium will hopefully have been under construction for a couple of years and the pressure wont be on Labor to promise alternatives, instead they will concentrate on the track record of a two term liberal government.