News Jack Dyer Stand -Demolition Has Begun

[beema limapep]

well I guess council will have the numbers, but generally it costs twice as much to build below ground than above ground.

It can cost 200k to build an underground carpark for a family home, imagine a four storey, commercial capacity version...!

Economies of scale wouldnt mean 60 car parks x 200k = 12 million.

The question stands.

 

[beema limapep]

Can we take a photo of it and strategically place it on a billboard so it looks like its still there, or maybe just a hologram in the new museum?

Yes. We can even include a smellivision feature which pumps out ammonia when at the press of a button to replicate the smell of the stand when old timies pissed where they stood, and, for 250k extra release polio spores for that extra authentic early 1900s feel.

 

[theyellowsash]

Economies of scale wouldnt mean 60 car parks x 200k = 12 million.

The question stands.

Correct, building costs aren't linnear like that, as well as residential construction being very different

 

[acr2751]

My opinion is not important but Australia's historian's opinion is.

the opinion of the majority is what should count

 

[theyellowsash]

Yes. We can even include a smellivision feature which pumps out ammonia when at the press of a button to replicate the smell of the stand when old timies pissed where they stood, and, for 250k extra release polio spores for that extra authentic early 1900s feel.

Don't forget the asbestos and lead paint

 

[beema limapep]

Don't forget the asbestos and lead paint

Funny you should say that. A bit off topic but I was watching a brief documentary a few days ago about the 20-25 year correlation between lead in petrol (and paint) in utero and violent crime, across multiple countries.

 

[_RT_]

Sounds easy in theory. In fact there are many theories in this thread that sound easy, but they are actually incredibly complex due to;

• regulatory agencies involved;
• Melbourne traffic flow and planning;
• lease agreements and property ownership;
• alignment of the City Loop rail tunnels and track gradient to Richmond Station;
• Council boundaries;
• Yarra Park Community Management;
• Melbourne Cricket Club and MCG Trust.

I could go on.

Haere Ra

if you had to pick which way you see this going would you say we're getting approved or looking for land out in the sticks to build a new training hub.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Correct, building costs aren't linnear like that, as well as residential construction being very different

and just imagine the water ingress issues 4 storeys down in Yarra Park. Nightmare stuff.

Just save a whole bunch of money and refurb the heritage stand

 

[DickieKnee]

if you had to pick which way you see this going would you say we're getting approved or looking for land out in the sticks to build a new training hub.

I don't think the club would want to move out to the sticks. Most players live inner city.

 

[beema limapep]

if you had to pick which way you see this going would you say we're getting approved or looking for land out in the sticks to build a new training hub.

Approved 90% chance.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Chill out guys and girls, one thing that hasn’t been spoken of , once they demolish the stand and start building an underground car park and all the centres for the various community groups are we going to relocate to craigeburn?

We're gonna takeover the G.
Play/Train/Dine/Drink/Party/Screw & Make finals.

 

[beema limapep]

and just imagine the water ingress issues 4 storeys down in Yarra Park. Nightmare stuff.

Just save a whole bunch of money and refurb the heritage stand

Point 1 - not a significant cost issue in this location.

Point 2 - refurb and building elsewhere (if possible) will significantly cost more.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

Yes architecture, including heritage/history/cultural studies, and currently a working regiatered architect having to deal with heritage preservation constantly.

Whats your expertise?

Ok so what's your informed opinion?

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

the opinion of the majority is what should count

No , if someone has no knowledge of the issue, their opinion doesn't count.

 

[PetterdHoisted]

Point 1 - not a significant cost issue in this location.

Point 2 - refurb and building elsewhere (if possible) will significantly cost more.

water ingress not an issue you reckon? Obviously we have done much to control the mighty Yarra, but Richmond and Collingwood used to be subject to serious flooding, above ground, let alone 10 metres down.

The Birrarung Marr area was also loooong used by indigenous Australians, if we encounter a midden or eel pens, or something archeologically significant digging down there, that may put a freeze on construction for a very long period. It's like digging under the old European capitals, they run into Roman ruins all the time, and dodgier builders cover it up so as not to hold up the project at hand!

 

[Profop]

There’s a live stream. Looks like they’ve already discussed the punt road redevelopment though

 

[manangatang]

There’s a live stream. Looks like they’ve already discussed the punt road redevelopment though

 

[PetterdHoisted]

then the battle will begin in earnest!

 

[Coach_Required]

Should have knocked the thing down in the 70's when no one would have given a shit.

Typical Richmond always 50 years behind.

 

[Coach_Required]

 

[theyellowsash]

Ok so what's your informed opinion?

My informed opinion is as I've already stated. I'd like it to be retained, I think that its significant enough that if it can reasonably be retained it should be, but that its not so sacrosanct that it can't be demolished.

I've actually worked on something similar before where we had to assess an old grandstand just for very minor work, and there is a whole range of issues that could make it completely unviable to retain. Anything from the building not being structurally sound to support any work, to just straight up not having the space inside to bring it up to the various modern building codes (wheelchair access, fire safety, the works). The work required to make it legally usable may gut the building so completely that you might as well knock it down. That's surprisingly common. The alternative then is to just let it rot, in which case you've arrived at the same outcome.

There's also a completely different aspect to cultural heritage, which is that its not the building that is significant, but the place/use. Think about the mcg, none of its grandstands are original. Yet its undoubtedly a cultural and heritage icon. Thats because its the fact of playing sports there and being the heart of the Melbourne sporting landscape which makes it heritage, not the buildings themselves. The heritage of the mcg will be retained as long as its is the sporting capital of Melbourne.

Punt Road is the same. Who honestly knows what the grandstand looks like off the top of your head, other than just picturing a generic old grandstand? Its known as the home of the Richmond football club, that's the heritage value of the site. That will stay as long as the club stays. So while it would be nice to keep the grandstand, its really not the true heritage of the site. Think of Waverley, theres still a grandstand there but is it really significant anymore?

This idea of intangible heritage is something that is being considered far more nowadays, particularly as we start to care about aboriginal heritage more and more, as most often they have sites which are incredibly significant even though there is no building that a traditional Western viewpoint would look at as a prerequisite.

 

[Bojangles17]

Do we really need this it doesn't really have much of its old look anymore, didn't the roof once have a tiger or something on it that you could see from the train, I seem to recall it back in my youth?

I remember going to the disco under the stand back in the day, that was grubby as hell.

That wasnt under the stand , lol, it was the Richmond social club where the new section now is ,you must have had a few

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

My informed opinion is as I've already stated. I'd like it to be retained, I think that its significant enough that if it can reasonably be retained it should be, but that its not so sacrosanct that it can't be demolished.

I've actually worked on something similar before where we had to assess an old grandstand just for very minor work, and there is a whole range of issues that could make it completely unviable to retain. Anything from the building not being structurally sound to support any work, to just straight up not having the space inside to bring it up to the various modern building codes (wheelchair access, fire safety, the works). The work required to make it legally usable may gut the building so completely that you might as well knock it down. That's surprisingly common. The alternative then is to just let it rot, in which case you've arrived at the same outcome.

There's also a completely different aspect to cultural heritage, which is that its not the building that is significant, but the place/use. Think about the mcg, none of its grandstands are original. Yet its undoubtedly a cultural and heritage icon. Thats because its the fact of playing sports there and being the heart of the Melbourne sporting landscape which makes it heritage, not the buildings themselves. The heritage of the mcg will be retained as long as its is the sporting capital of Melbourne.

Punt Road is the same. Who honestly knows what the grandstand looks like off the top of your head, other than just picturing a generic old grandstand? Its known as the home of the Richmond football club, that's the heritage value of the site. That will stay as long as the club stays. So while it would be nice to keep the grandstand, its really not the true heritage of the site. Think of Waverley, theres still a grandstand there but is it really significant anymore?

This idea of intangible heritage is something that is being considered far more nowadays, particularly as we start to care about aboriginal heritage more and more, as most often they have sites which are incredibly significant even though there is no building that a traditional Western viewpoint would look at as a prerequisite.

I agree apart from it being generic, it's architecturally significant according to the National Trust.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

That's typical of council. They are in the pocket of the developers.

 

[Rioli2Rioli]

water ingress not an issue you reckon? Obviously we have done much to control the mighty Yarra, but Richmond and Collingwood used to be subject to serious flooding, above ground, let alone 10 metres down.

The Birrarung Marr area was also loooong used by indigenous Australians, if we encounter a midden or eel pens, or something archeologically significant digging down there, that may put a freeze on construction for a very long period. It's like digging under the old European capitals, they run into Roman ruins all the time, and dodgier builders cover it up so as not to hold up the project at hand!

I got some lebbo mates that do demolition in broady , I can guarantee you - NOTHING WILL BE FOUND