Hobart Stadium: $750 million cost

[beema limapep]

Which would mean more money for those authorities who own the grounds when football is played

Now people are catching on!

 

[beema limapep]

26-28 week season likely.

I think you are correct. Just a matter of whether it will be in the next 1-2 years or a little later.

 

[VicBased]

With all the political stuff happening in Tas right now you would think AFL are playing Politics and influencing outcomes of elections.
A new political power coming up perhaps?
Labor.
Liberal.
AFL.???

 

[madmug]

With all the political stuff happening in Tas right now you would think AFL are playing Politics and influencing outcomes of elections.
A new political power coming up perhaps?
Labor.
Liberal.
AFL.???

Don't get carried away. The AFL won't touch it until the dust has settled. We have no idea what individuals will comprise the Parliament. It should be a Minority Liberal Government. I don't think Labor will want to kill the Stadium off as it'll provide construction jobs for its members & a team for its voters as well.
Watch this space!!

 

[Bomber53]

I think it’s a ridiculous idea when you can pretty much swim to Bellerive, which is more than adequate to host what I assume will be 7-8 games a year. Establish the team first, get a passionate local fan base and then work on upgrading to a specialist stadium

But yes, I do think in order to win over the AFL and clubs they’ll fork out the cash to build it.

The Tassie government need to show they’re committed to the 20 million or so a year required to stop the team becoming a drain on the comp. There’s no better way to show that commitment by forking over a stash of cash for the stadium.

I’m don’t think there is an immediate need for the stadium and many Tasmanians will see the stadium as an unreasonable impost on the State’s treasury, which is not unreasonable. Even though Tassie is a footy State, it’s not a universal passion.

I am currently watching the Bulldogs v Gold Coast in Ballarat, on a ground that is no stadium but it works as a good size country ground and I don’t see any issues with the quality of the game.

Let the situation evolve with a commitment to a new ground and ongoing development being the better option over the longer term.

 

[Teen Wolf]

I am currently watching the Bulldogs v Gold Coast in Ballarat, on a ground that is no stadium but it works as a good size country ground and I don’t see any issues with the quality of the game.

Congratulations for figuring out football in March typically provides good playing conditions. Bit different to asking supporters to pay premium prices every 2nd week throughout winter.

It's only profitable for the Bulldogs to play in Ballarat because the local government, using taxpayer money, is paying for it. Jesus. A ground like that as a team's primary home would not be able to generate anywhere near enough matchday revenue, nor would the AFL ever give it marquee fixturing, thus limiting the club's exposure and further hurting the bottom line.

So one way or the other, a viable Tassie AFL team has to be financially backed by the state govt. The benefit of doing it via a stadium is that it assures the AFL of the government's long-term commitment to supporting the team, while also providing the state a world class venue to attract other major events.

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

I’m don’t think there is an immediate need for the stadium and many Tasmanians will see the stadium as an unreasonable impost on the State’s treasury, which is not unreasonable. Even though Tassie is a footy State, it’s not a universal passion.

I am currently watching the Bulldogs v Gold Coast in Ballarat, on a ground that is no stadium but it works as a good size country ground and I don’t see any issues with the quality of the game.

Let the situation evolve with a commitment to a new ground and ongoing development being the better option over the longer term.

If the Bulldogs played all of their home games in Ballarat then they’d be a financial black hole on the competition. They play their low-drawing games there that would normally run at a loss at Marvel. Fortunately for the Dogs they share a city with 8 other clubs, so they host Melbourne derbies for half of their home games. Many of these games are against big clubs, which ensure big crowds and profitable games.

Tassie, being a one-team state, doesn’t have that luxury, so if they are playing all of their home games at small capacity, second rate venues then they won’t generate the economic return from their home games that make them economically viable. The only way to counteract this would be for the AFL to provide Tassie with Giants and Suns-level additional funding, which they don’t want to do, and this is precisely why a building a new, more profitable stadium is a non-negotiable condition from the AFL.

 

[catters05]

silly question, could North Hobart oval be rebuilt as a new AFL ground? Close proximity to cbd?

 

[Teen Wolf]

silly question, could North Hobart oval be rebuilt as a new AFL ground? Close proximity to cbd?

Too small and not close enough to the CBD, is what the site selection report concluded. Consequently it wasn't among the 6 closely examined options.

Stuff from that report relating to NHO:

 

[Mitchell Madness]

silly question, could North Hobart oval be rebuilt as a new AFL ground? Close proximity to cbd?

I think they want mac point so it can be built into an event precinct

 

[justlookingaround]

Old design an example of 'what we don't want to do', say new architects of Hobart AFL stadium

The newly appointed architects for Hobart's waterfront stadium say the earlier artist impression of the site is an example of what the company doesn't want to follow.

www.abc.net.au

To be designed by the same firm that architected Optus Stadium and the Adelaide Oval redevelopment.

 

[madmug]

silly question, could North Hobart oval be rebuilt as a new AFL ground? Close proximity to cbd?

NHO has a great atmosphere. However Nowhere near enough room to put an MCG size ground.

 

[BG32]

Just heard the stadium was going to be 23k capacity. Surely that’s on the low side especially if this becomes the main stadium for cricket (and soccer)

 

[Teen Wolf]

Just heard the stadium was going to be 23k capacity. Surely that’s on the low side especially if this becomes the main stadium for cricket (and soccer)

23,000 seats. More than double what the current main "stadium" has.

Whether the design incorporates standing room, and to what degree, remains to be seen. Adelaide Oval style hill behind the goals at each end would get the overall capacity up to 30k:

 

[justlookingaround]

23,000 seats. More than double what the current main "stadium" has.

Whether the design incorporates standing room, and to what degree, remains to be seen. Adelaide Oval style hill behind the goals at each end would get the overall capacity up to 30k:

View attachment 2031002

Must say I’ve never heard of an artificial sloping grass hill in an indoor stadium before. Surely would be a world first?

 

[Bjo187]

Just heard the stadium was going to be 23k capacity. Surely that’s on the low side especially if this becomes the main stadium for cricket (and soccer)

Just heard? Hasn't this been public knowledge for at least a few years or did something change?

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

Just heard? Hasn't this been public knowledge for at least a few years or did something change?

Yes, this has been the plan all along. One of the scoping reports stated that 23k was the optimal capacity at the start, as they predict that demand will only outstrip supply for finals games and games v Big 4 Victorian clubs. Therefore, the extra cost of a higher capacity could not be justified for just a few fixtures each year. Despite this, the Mac 1 proposal will allow for expansion in stages to 31k and then 40k, if it’s required in the future.

 

[kurt_kb]

Yes, this has been the plan all along. One of the scoping reports stated that 23k was the optimal capacity at the start, as they predict that demand will only outstrip supply for finals games and games v Big 4 Victorian clubs. Therefore, the extra cost of a higher capacity could not be justified for just a few fixtures each year. Despite this, the Mac 1 proposal will allow for expansion in stages to 31k and then 40k, if it’s required in the future.

How will constructing a stadium with a roof allow for capacity expansion? AAMI Park is technically expandable to 50,000, but the whole roof structure would need to be replaced which makes it costly and completely unfeasible. A stadium with a roof that entirely covers the ground is only likely to be more impractical still.

 

[Teen Wolf]

How will constructing a stadium with a roof allow for capacity expansion? AAMI Park is technically expandable to 50,000, but the whole roof structure would need to be replaced which makes it costly and completely unfeasible. A stadium with a roof that entirely covers the ground is only likely to be more impractical still.

Designing a roof that isn't like AAMI Park's would be an obvious starting point.

In other words, leave enough room for expansion, which is what the stadium footprint test-fit suggested:

 

[Cunnington Cartel]

How will constructing a stadium with a roof allow for capacity expansion? AAMI Park is technically expandable to 50,000, but the whole roof structure would need to be replaced which makes it costly and completely unfeasible. A stadium with a roof that entirely covers the ground is only likely to be more impractical still.

As Teen Wolf has shown through the image above, Mac Point stadium will have similar features to Optus Stadium to allow for an expanded capacity in the future. Leaving extra room above the top tier of seating gives scope for that space to be filled in with additional seating later on. Therefore, the roof won’t be an impediment. The first concept designs will be released next week, so we might be able to visualise how it can be done then. AAMI Park was started 17 years ago, I dare say design techniques have improved a fair bit since then.

 

[catters05]

Designing a roof that isn't like AAMI Park's would be an obvious starting point.

In other words, leave enough room for expansion, which is what the stadium footprint test-fit suggested:

View attachment 2031780

They should start at 31k. 23k will be too small. Tasmania needs to market for visitors as well. Tourism dollars etc.

 

[Teen Wolf]

They should start at 31k. 23k will be too small. Tasmania needs to market for visitors as well. Tourism dollars etc.

Would've required $100m more from the federal government.

The commercial model estimates that around 5,000 people will travel per game to Hobart.