Etihad Stadium Gone by 2025?

[Micksy]

medium density buildings

Bahahaha!

Classic.

 

[Rouel_14]

So does anyone remember how dead the city CBD used to be?, likewise dock lands needs time to mature..

As for the stadium, yeah sure, let's build a new stadium further from the city centre, further away from public transport, and further away from where any action is. Sounds super smart, not.

Give it a coat of paint and freshen up the image, make the roof so it is always closed and hang 4 massive screens from it (nba like), get rid of the 4 hideous boxes that the screens hang on now and replace with seats (adds capacity and gets rid of the restricted viewing problem), add some more lighting so it's not so dull and what a stadium it would be!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pessimistic]

Could have undergrounded the rail lines and station while there was room. But the people at the tome did it all on the cheap.

So the result is half arsed. Shit happens. The old derilict docklands was visially more appealing than what we have now

 

[Pessimistic]

So does anyone remember how dead the city CBD used to be?, likewise dock lands needs time to mature..

As for the stadium, yeah sure, let's build a new stadium further from the city centre, further away from public transport, and further away from where any action is. Sounds super smart, not.

Give it a coat of paint and freshen up the image, make the roof so it is always closed and hang 4 massive screens from it (nba like), get rid of the 4 hideous boxes that the screens hang on now and replace with seats (adds capacity and gets rid of the restricted viewing problem), add some more lighting so it's not so dull and what a stadium it would be!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That concrete stuff behind the screens ? It holds the roof up by the way

 

[Rouel_14]

That concrete stuff behind the screens ? It holds the roof up by the way

Well it's really ugly and probably the only real design flaw


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Rotayjay]

Sure, just piss the half-a-billion-dollar construction bill down the drain and bulldoze Etihad. No biggy.

 

[parano1a]

Am I the only one who thinks it's odd idea to pull down the existing Etihad stadium because it's on "expensive development land on the waterfront" and rebuild it at great expense a few hundred metres further away from Southern Cross station on to another lot of "expensive development land on the waterfront" that is nowhere near public transport?

Yeah, makes as much sense as Springfield rebuilding the Burns Casino when they moved the town...

 

[Mat Mann]

Also wasn't much chop as a teacher.

spent my senior high school years( 9-12 ), with him as my year level co-ordinator and 3 years as my english teacher, u refute your assertions. He was very good at both.

 

[The Joker]

Yeah why not scrap it and start again, 3rd times a charm!

 

[Bombermania]

There is nothing wrong with Eithad stadium, the Docklands area has been a flop as it was developed on the assumption that Melbourne had a large population of professional well off types who would flock to it, only problem, those people already have their favorite areas and were never likely to move to it.

Not sure why the NAB built that large building next to it considering they have another large building over the other side of the ground. I don't see the stadium going, the corporate and others like to use the function facilities and universities have started using those facilities for exams.

 

[Crankyhawk]

What sort of teacher joins the Liberal party anyway?

An economics one who was employed by scotch college o(expensive private school)

 

[Cudi_420]

How short are you?

6"2

 

[HBF]

No chance of this happening. Absolute pipe dream.

 

[Rotayjay]

Sticking buildings wherever they fit, with no regard to what the area will look like afterwards, is all too common. They want to take that approach around the river in Adelaide too. Because it's all about money and not about being sensible, eyesores are built.

 

[cats2rise]

View attachment 192610

It would be in that large empty lot of land on the left by the Bolte Bridge. It will take longer for punters to get there from Southern Cross Station.

Again from a town planning sense (following from my first post):

The MCG has the presence of arrival.

• You walk from Flinders along the river
• You descent to the ground from Jolimont through the parkland
• You walk through the gardens from Parliament
• The lesser presence is from Jolimont.
• All of these walks have 'options' of where you want to walk, how you want to get to a particular gate,

For Etihad you have to bunch up on a bridge - albeit it is convenient to be there in two minutes from Southern Cross.

The walk along the waterfront to get to the 'new' ground would certainly improve the experience, and would engage the waterfront more. It depends what would replace the stadium in its current form. But overall, the whole area would be more engaging. Unsure of what residents would say or think of 50k people walking to and from a ground through residential areas.

However, as I have said in my original post, from a town planning sense this just will not happen. Doyle is in a tizz as the City of Melbourne has no real say in the development of Docklands. The stadium is there, and its staying. Who would foot the bill to move it? Not the AFL. The City of Melbourne cannot, and will not fund a move. Property Developers can't really get involved.

Firstly, the AFL would want better public transport option to get to the ground. A 10-15 minute walk through a maze of residential buildings would not cut it for the AFL. Trams, albeit closer, would not be a preferred option due to limited capacity.

Southbank was allowed to grow organically in the 80s/90s, whereas Docklands was manufactured way too quickly. Southbank is predominantly north facing, so in the middle of winter it still feels warmer due to the north facing (sun) orientation. Docklands is predominantly east-west facing so there is already a problem.

If Doyle wants Docklands to improve, move the stadium and build a ruddy great big park thats north facing with a heap of trees to mitigate (to a degree) the whirlwinds created by buildings. Thats the only way to 'open up' and 'engage' the face of Docklands to the CBD.

Will still not happen though. Etihad stays. Just be smarter in future decisions regarding the remaining land.

Docklands will improve in time when it has more of a soul. It was never going to happen within a decade, and the push to do so was done by those who do not fully grasp how cities and people work and move.

 

[cats2rise]

MCG is Crown land; it will never be developed.

It was a mistake building Etihad where it is OR allowing apartments, hotels and office towers to be built around it.

I don't think Etihad should go, but if it did I'd understand.

It is also said Etihad was configured wrongly, essentially N-S instead of E-W.

Two very valid points not taken into consideration as much as they should be.

Issues with grass not growing was always going to happen.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

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.

Again, you're going to have to explain what demolishing a stadium and building another less than a kilometre away is going to achieve.

 

[le dominateur]

Save the money and build another stadium for Victory.
By that time they will arguably be the biggest sporting club in the country.

Drugs really cause damage, witness this laughable post above.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

Two very valid points not taken into consideration as much as they should be.

Issues with grass not growing was always going to happen.

The issue with the grass not growing can be fixed by adding under-soil heating like they do in Europe.

Can't imagine that project would cost more than $10 million, a fraction of the cost of demolishing and rebuilding.

 

[cats2rise]

The issue with the grass not growing can be fixed by adding under-soil heating like they do in Europe.

Can't imagine that project would cost more than $10 million, a fraction of the cost of demolishing and rebuilding.

Under-soil heating is used for weather (snow, ice etc) in Europe - not to make the grass grow. I have never heard or read under-soil heating used to grow grass.

Grass needs sun. Thus why they roll out the system of 'grow lights' when there is no game on.

 

[Handsome.B.Wonderful]

Under-soil heating is used for weather (snow, ice etc) in Europe - not to make the grass grow. I have never heard or read under-soil heating used to grow grass.

Grass needs sun. Thus why they roll out the system of 'grow lights' when there is no game on.

It takes a lot longer for grass to grow in cold soil even with UV lights.

The under-soil heating and UV lights used together would produce a much more even pitch.

 

[Richo83]

Not a dumb idea at all. It wasn't going to be Sydney, nothing like it. It was simply to add a large scale waterfront to the city. Don't know if you've been down Southbank to South Wharf lately but they finally seem to be getting that right, restaurants and bars doing well on the river. It could have been something similar but on a bigger scale. It wouldn't have affected the current CBD etc at all.

It was incredibly poorly executed, with the stadium as the barely believable jewel in the cockup crown.

Southbank works because it already had infrastructure around it to attract people to the area. There's the Exhibition building, Crown, NGV, Hamer Hall, the Victorian Arts Centre and it's next to the Alexandra Gardens, which is a great place. It's a place for culture. I dunno about the South Wharf, I've never heard many people crowing about it.

My point is that for docklands to work, it needs something to work, something that differentiates it from everything else. Southbank doesn't just have the river, it has a lot more, its river area is nice because it backs onto a nice part of the CBD where flinders st is. Docklands isn't surrounded by nice architecture.

 

[Roddy]

At least a new stadium would give all the sooks yet another thing to whinge about.

 

[Prince Imperial]

I went for a walk there after work yesterday and its probably about 20 minutes walk away from Southern Cross for the average person. The park is certainly long enough but I doubt it has the width for a large scale AFL stadium; though they could get by a bit with building over the roads.

Unless the AFL gets a killer offer from developers, there is no way they would move from the current stadium site which is perfectly located.

 

[Dazb86]

How exactly does it stop people from gaining access to the docklands?