Etihad Stadium Gone by 2025?

[CharacterFirst]

I think he is correct.

It blocks the city from the docklands.

It may well go in the future, if there is enough money in it for the AFL.

 

[Seedsfan]

It is a ****ing crap ground the sooner it is demolished the better

 

[LeverPuller]

There would have to be enough money in it for the AFL to demolish it and build a new stadium at a profit. That is a LOT of dough considering that a new stadium will probably cost $1bn+. Not to mention trying to find a place to site a 60,000 seat stadium - it's not like they are easy to find.

 

[Seeds]

Problem is he's not alone in saying Etihad's future is grim. That stadium is sitting on very, very expensive land, and if in a few years someone offers the AFL squillions to sell it, what will happen?

Part of the reason land around there is so valued because its close to facilities like Etihad Stadium. Get rid of the stadium, put in more buildings and values fall sharply. No one would be stupid enough to pay a fortune for that land.

 

[Seeds]

I think he is correct.

It blocks the city from the docklands.

It may well go in the future, if there is enough money in it for the AFL.

Why do docklands and the city need to be connected? Who wants to go to Docklands

 

[kfc1]

AFL take over operation 2025 now that is within the 20 year period is it not?
Let me know if you need help comprehending that(see this is why Geelong supporters rank number 1 on the Bigfooty intel rankings)

> thread title "stadium gone by 2025"
> first line of quoted article "Doyle predicts Etihad Stadium will be gone in 20 years"
> pick one

 

[Seedsfan]

Imagine the capital return on the land in the ten years from 25-35

 

[Underdog]

The time frame he's talking about is 20 years.

The line about the AFL taking it over in 2025 is just a bit of trivia.

At least, that's how I interpreted it...it's a poorly written article. Someone who listened to the context may be able to better advise.

 

[Richo83]

I think he is correct.

It blocks the city from the docklands.

It may well go in the future, if there is enough money in it for the AFL.

Who cares? Melbourne has one of the best city centres in the world. The waterfront is windy and cold in the winter, and is only really good in the summer, where it gets outflanked by Melbourne's beer gardens and gardens in the other parts of the city. Making the docklands a residential and commercial centre makes sense anyway, and it's not that uncommon, many stadiums in the world are either surrounded by housing or skyscrapers. Etihad works, it's easily accessible, has decent sightlines and building another stadium would cost a lot of money. Please don't go down the route of the US where they replace a stadium after 20 years once it stops making 1000% revenue.

 

[Mootsy]

There is also a Costco down there...

The problem with Docklands is that in my opinion it feels so cold, dull and not very inviting...

The parking is all paid, which is fair enough, but it needs something to give it personality...

I don't know, more trees and greenery I guess..

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Terrible sight lines.

Can you expand on this.

 

[Richo83]

It's a sterile design that has aged very quickly. New Perth stadium, Adelaide Oval, even Startrack and Metricon make it look out-dated.

Terrible sight lines. Terrible seats. Not enough food or bar locations. It was supposed to be a centerpiece of Docklands but has ultimately contributed to its downfall.

IMO, the AFL will sell it off and it'll get broken down. That is prime real estate and atm it's just a piece of concrete in an area screaming out for more parkland and better overall development.

The end of the Footscray Markets precinct will see that area grow. That's the key to improving Docklands. Etihad will make way eventually. Bookmark it. Might not be 20 years but by 2050, that Stadium won't exist anymore.

It is quite literally blocking the gateway from the city to Docklands.

Shocking planning. Shocking design.

A Melbourne supporter doesn't like Etihad? COLOUR ME SHOCKED.

 

[master bate]

The stadium is in a crap spot. It stops the city connecting to the Victoria Harbour/Central Pier/Waterfront city area which is the best bit of Docklands.

It's in the name - Docklands.

Yes it can be cold and windy but it's still waterfront land next to the CBD and that should be used that way. It should be a compliment to Southbank, especially given the North bank of the Yarra isn't utilised due to Flinders St Station.

There's room at the E-Gate site next to North Melbourne station that is only 1 train stop down the line.

The issue is it's already built and good luck getting the AFL to move any time soon.

 

[JoeHawk]

They should build a stadium in Waverley with a seating capacity of 73000.....oh damn

I've never been a fan of Etihad/colonial/whatever but knock down and rebuild down the road? What's Doyle been smoking??

 

[Cudi_420]

A Melbourne supporter doesn't like Etihad? COLOUR ME SHOCKED.

Because it's a garbage wannabe modern stadium.

Richo83, pls.

 

[Cudi_420]

Can you expand on this.

If you're back 5 rows on first level, can't see boundary line.

If you're on the top level, need to stand up whenever the play is below you.

=

Bad sight lines

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Love watching games at etihad but it is in such a shit position, hidden away behind all those Gotham city like buildings.

Nothing wrong with its position, two minutes walk from a major train station.

Es[ecially compared to Waverley.

You cant just go round moving these grounds on a whim, its nonsensical. If anything seperates the City from Docklands, its the train tracks.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

They should build a stadium in Waverley with a seating capacity of 73000.....oh damn

I've never been a fan of Etihad/colonial/whatever but knock down and rebuild down the road? What's Doyle been smoking??

He's up for reelection, say no more

 

[Bomberboyokay]

If you're back 5 rows on first level, can't see boundary line.

If you're on the top level, need to stand up whenever the play is below you.

=

Bad sight lines

MCG has those problems. Dockland's first level of seating is even on a better incline.

 

[L_W_P]

To the people talking about how the stadium "cuts off the city from Docklands"; What exactly would get built there if they demolished Etihad? What kind of facility could you put in to herd traffic through to Docklands on a more regular basis?

Another train station?
More office towers?
Apartment buildings?
A shopping centre?
Parks and playgrounds?

Aren't the issues with Docklands more to do with... ya know... Docklands, rather than Etihad blocking the city's Feng Shui or something? How many people are really thinking "Gee I might go to Docklands today... oh but I have to go around Etihad... Nah I wont bother."?

 

[Richo83]

Because it's a garbage wannabe modern stadium.

Richo83, pls.

It was built in the late 90s. Have a look at stadiums built around the same time, it stacks up fairly well.

 

[jbass002]

50k-plus stadiums that are very close to the city centre and are connected to the whole city via public transport don't exactly grow on trees. Yes it's sterile and needs a lot of work, and sometimes it seems like the people who run it want to take the AFL back to the 80's, but it's going nowhere

 

[melbournemartin]

I do agree that it blocks off the largely-dead Docklands precinct.

 

[flamethrower]

The railway lines form more of a physical barrier between the Docklands Precinct and the CBD than Etihad Stadium.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Not a comment on the stadium itself, but he's absolutely right. Etihad - in terms of planning - is an absolutely epic cockup.

The idea of Docklands was to give Melbourne a waterfront. It could and should be an extension of the CBD.

What did they do? Build the mother of all enormous blockades between the CBD and the water in the form of a stadium. It blocks everything, roads and foot traffic. Beggars belief really.

Stadium itself is what it is, but the wider Docklands area will never ever work whilst it's there.