Design Ideas for new Perth Stadium

[Admiral Byng]

WTF would I want to read a report when you cannot see $300 million is a lot of money that possibly could be used for better effect somewhere else.

You cannot agree to in principle to the likes of that some of money being used to overcome some of the supposed deficiencies in other proposed sites within the the CBD.


Does that AO proposal have $300 million set aside for traffic infrastructure?
What's so differentr with the the two cities that we cannot have what Adelaide is getting.
They are getting a top stadium for literally half the money and it's a short walk from the CBD.

Oh go on read it - you know you want to.

You gotta get with the program Cos. You're still looking at this from the first stage. In the real world the short list of sites has been narrowed down to only 3 or 4, which both major parties agree to. All the other options have been looked at objectively and ruled out. So it's time to drop them from the argument. Neither you nor I can influence the WA cabinet to change this decision and go back to stage 1.

I thought you would have looked at the report and gained an insight into the transport realities of moving this number of people around. I'm basing everything on the basic premise that to build a stadium anywhere of 60,000 capacity you must give due consideration to how people are going to get there and back home. You can't just build a stadium in isolation. The report gives some insight into how many trains per hour to move X number of people, how many buses to move Y number of people, how many parking spaces for buses to bank up awaiting the rush, how many train carriages to bank up awaiting the rush; all that sort of practical stuff. Stuff that would be needed at any location with a stadium this size. The bigger the stadium, the more transport infrastructure it needs.

 

[holybishop]

Once it's built no one is going to give a damn how much it cost

 

[cos789]

Oh go on read it - you know you want to.

Why would I want to read propaganda.

You cannot see that the people of Adelaide are do this much cheaper and appear not to be spending $300 million on traffic infrastucture. When you cannot admit even on a supeficial level that there is some merit in having a MCG or AO style development principly avoiding the need for such big spends then I might recognise you want a serious debate but at the moment you haven't acknowledged one negative about Burswood so I know it's just a lump of government propaganda designed to get them through the next election.

.

 

[Admiral Byng]

We are not Adelaide or Melbourne, we are Perth, we have to cope with the the hand we have been dealt in terms of history and geography. Decisions have already been made regarding other sites to build something else there rather than a sports stadium. It's pointless to keep going back to them and arguing that the stadium should be built there instead.

 

[Rob]

Arguing with cos is like arguing with a brick wall. Is he suggesting we bulldoze half of Northbridge just so we can fit a stadium next to the central train station in order to avoid the need for better public transport infrastructure?

inb4 bulldozing half of Northbridge would improve the place by 400%

 

[cos789]

We are not Adelaide or Melbourne, we are Perth.

yes, looks like another poor perth decision.

we are Perth, we have to cope with the the hand we have been dealt in terms of history and geography.

Why don't you add politics to that.

Decisions have already been made regarding other sites to build something else there rather than a sports stadium.

Decisions get changed all the time.

It's pointless to keep going back to them and arguing that the stadium should be built there instead.

$300 million goes a long way to covering any perceived deficiences in other sites don't you think?

.

 

[Admiral Byng]

You still don't seem to get the fundamental principle Cos, the need for transport infrastructure arises from the decision to have a stadium for 60,000 people, not from the decision where to build it. There is no site in greater Perth can cope with crowd numbers on this scale.

The capacity of roads and rail is finite. They can handle X number of cars or people per hour. Once they get to saturation point you can't add more numbers to it, all that happens is you get congestion and queuing. Moving 60,000 people in one hour is a big challenge, it's a lot of people to move around. Anywhere you build the new stadium will require additional transport infrastructure on about the same scale.

 

[cos789]

There is no site in greater Perth can cope with crowd numbers on this scale.

You've said that so many times that you believe it.
There are still places in Perth to build a stadium if you really desired to so.
The government simply desires not to do so.
Jusy own up to this fact and stop with all the bs.
I accept political reality.
I accept things aren't going to happen.
I don't accept it's not possible if you really wanted it that way.

And I do believe $300 million would do it.

.

 

[Admiral Byng]

You've said that so many times that you believe it.
There are still places in Perth to build a stadium if you really desired to so.
The government simply desires not to do so.
Jusy own up to this fact and stop with all the bs.
I accept political reality.
I accept things aren't going to happen.
I don't accept it's not possible if you really wanted it that way.

And I do believe $300 million would do it.

The short-list of sites was drawn up by the original stadium taskforce headed by John Longoulant. Lots of potential sites were looked at but ruled out. This was not a group of politicians acting for political reasons. The Labor government under Carpenter picked Subiaco from the short-list, Barnett's government has picked Burswood from the same short-list. It's perfectly proper for them to use that short-list as a starting point without going back to square one and looking at everything from scratch.

The plan for Subiaco also needed about $300 million in addition to the cost of the stadium for transport infrastructure upgrades. It was initially thought that the transport costs for Burswood would be considerably more, but now they work out around about the same. It's not committing to any great extra expenditure.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Meh. It's getting built on this site if the Liberals win the next election.

Will do wonders for this part of the city in the long run.

 

[McCrann]

Time for the dreamers to prepare for shock & awe !!

With half the games of the Docklands Stadium, this place is going to be expensive on a per game basis. 47 at Etihad, 22 in this new facility.

Get a 3rd WA Team = 22+11=33 games. Big Bash capable?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Big Bash capable?

Yes, for sure.

 

[redmonkeyman]

Has it been reported yet that Ian "Collo" Collins is working as a consultant on the new Perth Stadium. Good experience there to provide some consultancy given his experience with the AFL (Waverly, MCG, Optus etc.) not to mention his time at Docklands Stadium!

 

[Pessimistic]

Has it been reported yet that Ian "Collo" Collins is working as a consultant on the new Perth Stadium. Good experience there to provide some consultancy given his experience with the AFL (Waverly, MCG, Optus etc.) not to mention his time at Docklands Stadium!

Good luck with that. Maybe get Ross Oakley too !!

 

[Kwality]

Get a 3rd WA Team = 22+11=33 games. Big Bash capable?

Who do these people support now, right now? Its like thinking Pies supporters will change to North supporters - so crazy !!
Easily said:Get a 3rd WA Team, but its a recipe for disaster, financial disaster that ALL clubs will pay for through reduced AFL dividends.

Big bash: the WACA will take the games until 20+k fans go thru the gate - why is that McCrann, cos they control WA cricket & they own the WACA.

 

[Kwality]

Meh. It's getting built on this site if the Liberals win the next election.

Will do wonders for this part of the city in the long run.

Regardless of the politics the new stadium can do heaps for WA tourism IF managed well, attracting particularly Melburnians, as is one of Tourism WAs aims:
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/...sm-recovery-plan/story-e6frfkp9-1226545173826

 

[Admiral Byng]

Who do these people support now, right now? Its like thinking Pies supporters will change to North supporters - so crazy !!
Easily said:Get a 3rd WA Team, but its a recipe for disaster, financial disaster that ALL clubs will pay for through reduced AFL dividends.

Big bash: the WACA will take the games until 20+k fans go thru the gate - why is that McCrann, cos they control WA cricket & they own the WACA.

I expect that domestic T20 cricket will go straight to the new stadium. They got a sell-out last night. Also, I think at some stage the WACA will become only part-owners of the franchise, if they haven't already sold some of it. This will mean they have other franchise partners to keep happy. If it was already built and in operation this weekend I reckon the Scorchers would have got plenty more bums on seats than the 20,000 they got last night.

 

[wedgetail]

Good luck with that. Maybe get Ross Oakley too !!

Oakley would be perfect imo. Sign him up.

He is just the bloke we need to get the league to lock in a final or two regardless of merit to help tip the finances...

I think a prelim every other year (on average of course) and the GF every third should be fair given the precedents in place and the mans track record.

 

[holybishop]

I expect that domestic T20 cricket will go straight to the new stadium. They got a sell-out last night. Also, I think at some stage the WACA will become only part-owners of the franchise, if they haven't already sold some of it. This will mean they have other franchise partners to keep happy. If it was already built and in operation this weekend I reckon the Scorchers would have got plenty more bums on seats than the 20,000 they got last night.

Cricket wont be moved from the WACA. The WACA redevelopment will increase capacity to 25k which will be enough for the 3-4 Big Bash games a year and keep cricket at the WACA. And that's assuming the Big Bash will still be around in 6 years time. I wouldnt be surprised if it's scrapped and reverts back to a state v state competition in a few years. If it is then the only way Big Bash games will be played at the new stadium is if they create a 2nd franchise in Perth based there.

 

[Kwality]

Yep, the WACA wont be giving up revenue to help the viability of the new stadium.

What was the crowd the other night, sell out can mean any number attending these days - were they hanging from the rafters?

 

[Rob]

Yep, the WACA wont be giving up revenue to help the viability of the new stadium.

What was the crowd the other night, sell out can mean any number attending these days - were they hanging from the rafters?

You'll find that OH&S regulations nowadays prevent them selling spots on the rafters.

 

[holybishop]

Yep, the WACA wont be giving up revenue to help the viability of the new stadium.

What was the crowd the other night, sell out can mean any number attending these days - were they hanging from the rafters?

14000. I was at the game and while it was crammed pack on one side of the ground the members arent really turning up in their droves for Scorcher games.

 

[Dont be a lemon]

Potentially 20Twenty and One Day Internationals.

For all domestic and test cricket the WACA suits fine.

The Ashes? Seems to always sell very well these days.

 

[Kwality]

The Ashes? Seems to always sell very well these days.

Wishful dreaming .... AFL footy needs to get its digit out, draw interstate vistors to their games*, the rest is a sideshow, just as cricket is a non event for the MCG.

* a WA derby is on the bucket list of many Vic footy fans, clearly not the types that only follow a club, not the game.

 

[Luigi742]

14000. I was at the game and while it was crammed pack on one side of the ground the members arent really turning up in their droves for Scorcher games.

"It's just not cricket!"