Hobart stadium Cost

[Mr Taswegian]

I'm just interested on people's opinions on whether they think the Mac point stadium can be built for $715 million or if you think it will highly blow out to a billion dollars or more?.......

I have seen that the new stadium in Christchurch with a capacity of 30,000 is being built at a cost of $715 million and that includes a roof. I think if they can do it then surely we can do it and I know the government has said they have the best people possible working on the stadium design.

 

[Tassie4ever]

I'm just interested on people's opinions on whether they think the Mac point stadium can be built for $715 million or if you think it will highly blow out to a billion dollars or more?.......

I have seen that the new stadium in Christchurch with a capacity of 30,000 is being built at a cost of $715 million and that includes a roof. I think if they can do it then surely we can do it and I know the government has said they have the best people possible working on the stadium design.

As a Tasmanian I follow this issue closely. IMHO a new stadium= a Tassie team is far far from a done deal. From years of Green alliances with ALP there is a deeply entrenched anti-everything attitude toward any form of progress in Tassie. And that's not including the whole North v South stuff that complicates all.

It wouldn't matter if the stadium was to cost $5, there would be the usual reaction. Ie, don't change anything.

In short I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

I

As a Tasmanian I follow this issue closely. IMHO a new stadium= a Tassie team is far far from a done deal. From years of Green alliances with ALP there is a deeply entrenched anti-everything attitude toward any form of progress in Tassie. And that's not including the whole North v South stuff that complicates all.

It wouldn't matter if the stadium was to cost $5, there would be the usual reaction. Ie, don't change anything.

In short I'll believe it when I see it.

I live in the north of the state so have seen how anti development Hobart is and I really dislike the north south divide in this state. I have seen how hard labour is trying to grab as many votes from up here in the north by turning them against the stadium. The POSS process is going to be extremely hard to pass in my opinion but with decent costings it has more of a chance and I think the regatta point proposal definitely can't be ruled out.

 

[Tassie4ever]

As a Tasmanian I follow this issue closely. IMHO a new stadium= a Tassie team is far far from a done deal. From years of Green alliances with ALP there is a deeply entrenched anti-everything attitude toward any form of progress in Tassie. And that's not including the whole North v South stuff that complicates all.

It wouldn't matter if the stadium was to cost $5, there would be the usual reaction. Ie, don't change anything.

In short I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

As a Tasmanian I follow this issue closely. IMHO a new stadium= a Tassie team is far far from a done deal. From years of Green alliances with ALP there is a deeply entrenched anti-everything attitude toward any form of progress in Tassie.

The Greens did support a light rail line being constructed along the old Northern Suburbs Railway. Isn't that a form of progress that they supported?

 

[madmug]

As a Tasmanian I follow this issue closely. IMHO a new stadium= a Tassie team is far far from a done deal. From years of Green alliances with ALP there is a deeply entrenched anti-everything attitude toward any form of progress in Tassie. And that's not including the whole North v South stuff that complicates all.

It wouldn't matter if the stadium was to cost $5, there would be the usual reaction. Ie, don't change anything.

In short I'll believe it when I see it.

Its become quite interesting, particularly of late. The ALP attempt to use the stadium as a wedge issue to improve their 'northern' vote, seems to be failing. Recent polls show a fall in ALP support with a leaning towards independents. . The Libs appear stagnant.
The next election, due 2025, will elect a 35seat Parliament, up fron the current 25. It may well see a minority Government. More likely Liberal than ALP on this poll showing.
ALP have just dis-endorsed current ALP member & pro-stadium advocate David O'Byrne. This vindictive move will hurt the ALP.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

Its become quite interesting, particularly of late. The ALP attempt to use the stadium as a wedge issue to improve their 'northern' vote, seems to be failing. Recent polls show a fall in ALP support with a leaning towards independents. . The Libs appear stagnant.
The next election, due 2025, will elect a 35seat Parliament, up fron the current 25. It may well see a minority Government. More likely Liberal than ALP on this poll showing.
ALP have just dis-endorsed current ALP member & pro-stadium advocate David O'Byrne. This vindictive move will hurt the ALP.

A hung parliament between the greens and labour is also very likely and that would be a disaster for the stadium.

 

[Tassie4ever]

The Greens did support a light rail line being constructed along the old Northern Suburbs Railway. Isn't that a form of progress that they supported?

I was one of the few to regularly use the old suburban rail system, from Sunderland Street to Cornelian Bay, on the way to school at Hobart High, as was.

Guess why the old rail passenger system was discontinued? Lack of patronage. Simple as. No-one used the bloody thing. Any simple research will demonstrate this as a rock solid fact.

Now the usuals fixate on a light rail to solve Hobart's vanishingly small traffic problem in the Northern suburbs [peak minute traffic as I describe it to my rel's who live there, and who freak out when they might be held up 5 minutes or so on the Brooker].

Get real- it will never happen!!! If ever Tassie joins the real Aussie world of 500,000 extra migrants each and every year THEN we might have a problem.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I was one of the few to regularly use the old suburban rail system, from Sunderland Street to Cornelian Bay, on the way to school at Hobart High, as was.

Guess why the old rail passenger system was discontinued? Lack of patronage. Simple as. No-one used the bloody thing. Any simple research will demonstrate this as a rock solid fact.

Now the usuals fixate on a light rail to solve Hobart's vanishingly small traffic problem in the Northern suburbs [peak minute traffic as I describe it to my rel's who live there, and who freak out when they might be held up 5 minutes or so on the Brooker].

Get real- it will never happen!!! If ever Tassie joins the real Aussie world of 500,000 extra migrants each and every year THEN we might have a problem.

So you don't agree that creating a light rail line would be progress?

 

[madmug]

So you don't agree that creating a light rail line would be progress?

Its a ridiculous idea & waste of money. For a start Hobarts growth areas are nowhere near where a rail line would go. Passenger rail stopped because people found cars were far more convenient, Our lifestyles, patterns of travel & where we live are far different to the days when we did actually use trains.
Forget it. Government has. The rail corridor might be useful as a bus lane to reduce adjacent road traffic the 9km from Hobart to Glenorchy. Thats about all it'd be useful for.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

I was one of the few to regularly use the old suburban rail system, from Sunderland Street to Cornelian Bay, on the way to school at Hobart High, as was.

Guess why the old rail passenger system was discontinued? Lack of patronage. Simple as. No-one used the bloody thing. Any simple research will demonstrate this as a rock solid fact.

Now the usuals fixate on a light rail to solve Hobart's vanishingly small traffic problem in the Northern suburbs [peak minute traffic as I describe it to my rel's who live there, and who freak out when they might be held up 5 minutes or so on the Brooker].

Get real- it will never happen!!! If ever Tassie joins the real Aussie world of 500,000 extra migrants each and every year THEN we might have a problem.

Do you think the

Its a ridiculous idea & waste of money. For a start Hobarts growth areas are nowhere near where a rail line would go. Passenger rail stopped because people found cars were far more convenient, Our lifestyles, patterns of travel & where we live are far different to the days when we did actually use trains.
Forget it. Government has. The rail corridor might be useful as a bus lane to reduce adjacent road traffic the 9km from Hobart to Glenorchy. Thats about all it'd be useful for.

So do you believe the buses they are planning will be successful?

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Its a ridiculous idea & waste of money. For a start Hobarts growth areas are nowhere near where a rail line would go. Passenger rail stopped because people found cars were far more convenient, Our lifestyles, patterns of travel & where we live are far different to the days when we did actually use trains.

That tends to work right up until too many people want to drive on the same roads at once. And then when enough people complain, politicians try to fix it by adding more lanes to roads. But then more people start driving. So they add more lanes. That's how we get situations like Los Angeles and Houston where they have 16 lane highways that are still congested. There are only two ways to avoid that fate: implement better public transport, or don't grow.

Note that every other major Australian city has trains of some sort. And Canberra, with a comparable population to Hobart, has light rail.

Forget it. Government has. The rail corridor might be useful as a bus lane to reduce adjacent road traffic the 9km from Hobart to Glenorchy. Thats about all it'd be useful for.

The specific type of vehicle isn't all that important, the point is a dedicated public transport corridor is useful, and you've admitted that here. Something that could really develop Hobart into a city with more happening in it is increased density, and that can be achieved by creating fast and reliable public transport and building a bit taller around the stations.

 

[madmug]

That tends to work right up until too many people want to drive on the same roads at once. And then when enough people complain, politicians try to fix it by adding more lanes to roads. But then more people start driving. So they add more lanes. That's how we get situations like Los Angeles and Houston where they have 16 lane highways that are still congested. There are only two ways to avoid that fate: implement better public transport, or don't grow.

Note that every other major Australian city has trains of some sort. And Canberra, with a comparable population to Hobart, has light rail.


The specific type of vehicle isn't all that important, the point is a dedicated public transport corridor is useful, and you've admitted that here. Something that could really develop Hobart into a city with more happening in it is increased density, and that can be achieved by creating fast and reliable public transport and building a bit taller around the stations.

LA? Houston? Get a grip on reality please!!
The rail corridor exists. Maybe busses (depending on a CBA) before you spend a $billion on reinventing something that failed 50 years ago.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

LA? Houston? Get a grip on reality please!!
The rail corridor exists. Maybe busses (depending on a CBA) before you spend a $billion on reinventing something that failed 50 years ago.

I think the buses they are proposing will be the best and they carry 200 passengers so can definitely get good numbers to the stadium in good time.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

LA? Houston? Get a grip on reality please!!
The rail corridor exists. Maybe busses (depending on a CBA) before you spend a $billion on reinventing something that failed 50 years ago.

You think there's some grand difference between people catching trains and buses if they're on dedicated corridors? Please explain it to me, I'd like to hear it.

The only major differences are that railways have a higher capacity, and the initial capital cost of a railway is higher but the operating cost of a dedicated road for buses is higher, because the surface wears out quicker, more drivers have to be paid and more vehicles have to be commissioned to move the same number of people.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I think the buses they are proposing will be the best and they carry 200 passengers so can definitely get good numbers to the stadium in good time.

The longest bus in Australia can only carry 180 people at a time, and that's in event mode with the overwhelming majority of people standing. Meanwhile, the Bombardier Flexity 2 trams used on the Gold Coast can carry up to 309 people at max capacity. In terms of carrying capacity, it isn't a contest, and a lot less money has to be spent on drivers when you need fewer vehicles to move the same number of people.

 

[Mr Taswegian]

The longest bus in Australia can only carry 180 people at a time, and that's in event mode with the overwhelming majority of people standing. Meanwhile, the Bombardier Flexity 2 trams used on the Gold Coast can carry up to 309 people at max capacity. In terms of carrying capacity, it isn't a contest, and a lot less money has to be spent on drivers when you need fewer vehicles to move the same number of people.

Yes I just checked and the transit buses planned for Hobart have a capacity of 180.

 

[Tasmanian saint]

I
I live in the north of the state so have seen how anti development Hobart is and I really dislike the north south divide in this state. I have seen how hard labour is trying to grab as many votes from up here in the north by turning them against the stadium. The POSS process is going to be extremely hard to pass in my opinion but with decent costings it has more of a chance and I think the regatta point proposal definitely can't be ruled out.

Regatta point is absolutely pie in the skye type stuff to build it over the top of the water like that will be unbelievably expensive

 

[Tasmanian saint]

Its become quite interesting, particularly of late. The ALP attempt to use the stadium as a wedge issue to improve their 'northern' vote, seems to be failing. Recent polls show a fall in ALP support with a leaning towards independents. . The Libs appear stagnant.
The next election, due 2025, will elect a 35seat Parliament, up fron the current 25. It may well see a minority Government. More likely Liberal than ALP on this poll showing.
ALP have just dis-endorsed current ALP member & pro-stadium advocate David O'Byrne. This vindictive move will hurt the ALP.

That was a bizarre move on labor’s part he will get elected easily as an independent and and won’t be doing them any favours in the future . I would say Rebecca was worried about him making another run for labor leadership

 

[Tasmanian saint]

A hung parliament between the greens and labour is also very likely and that would be a disaster for the stadium.

The greens are losing support not gaining it . It will probably be decided buy independents

 

[Tasmanian saint]

You think there's some grand difference between people catching trains and buses if they're on dedicated corridors? Please explain it to me, I'd like to hear it.

The only major differences are that railways have a higher capacity, and the initial capital cost of a railway is higher but the operating cost of a dedicated road for buses is higher, because the surface wears out quicker, more drivers have to be paid and more vehicles have to be commissioned to move the same number of people.

I imagine there would be a huge cost difference between buses and trains to start with

 

[madmug]

You think there's some grand difference between people catching trains and buses if they're on dedicated corridors? Please explain it to me, I'd like to hear it.

The only major differences are that railways have a higher capacity, and the initial capital cost of a railway is higher but the operating cost of a dedicated road for buses is higher, because the surface wears out quicker, more drivers have to be paid and more vehicles have to be commissioned to move the same number of people.

Busses can leave the corridor at any designed exit & drive on roads to areas not adjacent to the corridor. They become part of the public bus routes that exist currently, without having to get off & wait for a bus.
I think thats a very big difference in itself'
Also, again, the population that live on the Eastern shore & Kingston gain no benefit from the $700million that'll need to be spent on any such rail system.
Government may not be real bright, but they're not silly enough to not realise the foley of rail in Hobart or Tasmania in general.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Busses can leave the corridor at any designed exit & drive on roads to areas not adjacent to the corridor.

Not the 180 seat ones. In Brisbane they're to be restricted to dedicated corridors only and not permitted to run routes in regular traffic.

They become part of the public bus routes that exist currently, without having to get off & wait for a bus.

We have this system in Brisbane and we're finding that we have serious problems in peak time with queueing to get into or out of the CBD. A funnel for road vehicles inevitably creates a bottleneck. That's exactly why the bi-articulated, 180 seat buses are being brought in, because the only way to prevent congestion in a narrow corridor is to have fewer vehicles but with higher capacity.

But as I said above, the bi-artics are just travelling up and down the corridor over and over, because that's how you service the most people. And if the same route is being run the same way over and over, why not have this route run on tracks instead of a road surface? They have far lower rolling resistance, so they'll be much more energy efficient. And why not run them off overhead electric wires? That's also more energy efficient than having to lug around a huge battery or a big tank of fuel everywhere.

Look at statistics all over the world for light rail vs bus rapid transit in cities of comparable size, it's no contest. Light rail can carry more people and has fewer problems with bottlenecks. This is why Ottawa converted their bus rapid transit corridor into light rail.

By the way, bus rapid transit often has to have its road surface constructed out of concrete rather than the usual gravel and asphalt, due to how frequently heavy vehicles are crossing it. This will especially be the case for the 180 seat bi-artics. That drives up the price of construction.

I think thats a very big difference in itself'
Also, again, the population that live on the Eastern shore & Kingston gain no benefit from the $700million that'll need to be spent on any such rail system.b

It can be extended to those places in future. I can't imagine they'd gain any benefit from a new hospital or school being built in Northern Tasmania either, but that doesn't mean those things shouldn't be built. That's similarly true for other infrastructure in other places.

Government may not be real bright, but they're not silly enough to not realise the foley of rail in Hobart or Tasmania in general.

Are hundreds of cities around the world with urban rail all foolish? Along with every major city in Australia, and places like Canberra and Newcastle that aren't much bigger than Hobart. Are they all foolish?

Something else you're missing is that railways, including light rail, are more effective than buses at fostering urban redevelopment. The object permanence of the tracks being in the ground convince property investors that regular public transport services will come to the location in perpetuity, compared to bus routes which can be changed and redirected at any time. That encourages them to build more dense, mixed-use neighbourhoods, which is something that would create real progress in Hobart.

 

[madmug]

Nice, but Hobart is a small city of 250k You cannot justify rail through the corridor, over to the river to the East & through the hills to the South. Population size & geography both make rail systems far too expensive for any benefit they may bring.
Government built the new Bridgewater bridge for $750million, without a rail facility. They know reinventing the system rail is expensive & pointless. If they had included it in this new bridge then you might have a chance of the northern corridor working.
Right now, rail is a dead duck. EOS.