The next Melbourne stadium

[Bunk Moreland]

Saw this video



Docklands is 25yo this year and really, about halfway through an expected 50-year lifespan.

The stadium received a mid-life update this year but is really starting to to show its age.

Probably the major issue with it is the roof - it is never opened for events because it was poorly designed and leads to harsh shadows and glare across the ground… so it’s effectively an indoor stadium with a solid roof, which isn’t ideal. The lack of natural light really impacts the experience for spectators and is outdated.

It’ll seem like a long way off - and it is - but the time will come to look at replacing it as Melbourne’s second stadium.

One option is to level it and rebuild on the same site - this would be hugely expensive given the infrastructure around it, but certainly could be done.

The other option is to relocate to somewhere else. I think this would be preferred by the city as the failure of the large Docklands precinct can largely be laid at the feet of the stadium - it’s in a shocking sport for the precinct as it blocks it all off from the city.

Where would you look to move to?

 

[BomberManU]

The surrounding businesses would want it to stay, I reckon - probably the only thing getting people down there.
Maybe a new roof, along with another general refresh?

 

[Saucy]

Saw this video



Docklands is 25yo this year and really, about halfway through an expected 50-year lifespan.

The stadium received a mid-life update this year but is really starting to to show its age.

Probably the major issue with it is the roof - it is never opened for events because it was poorly designed and leads to harsh shadows and glare across the ground… so it’s effectively an indoor stadium with a solid roof, which isn’t ideal. The lack of natural light really impacts the experience for spectators and is outdated.

It’ll seem like a long way off - and it is - but the time will come to look at replacing it as Melbourne’s second stadium.

One option is to level it and rebuild on the same site - this would be hugely expensive given the infrastructure around it, but certainly could be done.

The other option is to relocate to somewhere else. I think this would be preferred by the city as the failure of the large Docklands precinct can largely be laid at the feet of the stadium - it’s in a shocking sport for the precinct as it blocks it all off from the city.

Where would you look to move to?

The entire project from the very beginning has been a disaster. Not just the stadium. The entire docklands precinct.

They would have been better off redeveloping Waverley and having Hawthorn & St Kilda playing out of it. Building a 40,000 seat stadium in the E-Gate area for North & Footscray to share. And have the G for the other 5 clubs.

Selling a 75,000 seat stadium for a much smaller stadium is still one of the strangest decisions you will see.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The entire project from the very beginning has been a disaster. Not just the stadium. The entire docklands precinct.

They would have been better off redeveloping Waverley and having Hawthorn & St Kilda playing out of it. Building a 40,000 seat stadium in the E-Gate area for North & Footscray to share. And have the G for the other 5 clubs.

Selling a 75,000 seat stadium for a much smaller stadium is still one of the strangest decisions you will see.

On the size however, with a 100k stadiums it’s a fair argument that you don’t need the second stadium to be 75k

 

[Saucy]

On the size however, with a 100k stadiums it’s a fair argument that you don’t need the second stadium to be 75k

IMO, had Hawthorn & St Kilda been still playing at Waverley, they would be even better off by now.

Essendon & Carlton should have always been at the G, along with Pies & Tigers.

And this isn’t about which teams are better or matter more. This is only about memberships and attendances.

The whole thing was done poorly.

 

[JohnZ]

Melbourne needs a third stadium of ~35k capacity built in either E-gate or gosch's paddock. Then the 9 Melbourne clubs need to get over having a home ground, and instead let each game be scheduled in the right sized venue.

Pies v Blues? MCG
Hawks v North? Docklands
Tigers v GWS? Boutique Stadium

How to pay for it? Increase the season length. 45*(3/9) = 15, therefore each of the Melbourne clubs would need to play 15 home games in Melbourne per year to allow each stadium to get 45 games per year. That would mean a 30 H+A game season. If you want to appease the MCC, let them run the new stadium if built at Gosch's paddock (same model as them running the MCG).

Reduce the game time to 18min quarters (from 20), to ensure games can start every 2 hours on the dot (allowing 12/2.30/5/7.30 on a Saturday, 12/2.30/5 on a Sunday). This also helps the players to play a longer season by slightly reducing load.

Instead of club byes, give each player four weeks of "annual leave" during the season each year. Byes suck.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The entire project from the very beginning has been a disaster. Not just the stadium. The entire docklands precinct.

They would have been better off redeveloping Waverley and having Hawthorn & St Kilda playing out of it. Building a 40,000 seat stadium in the E-Gate area for North & Footscray to share. And have the G for the other 5 clubs.

Selling a 75,000 seat stadium for a much smaller stadium is still one of the strangest decisions you will see.

Waverley to this day would have had no train line, which is a must in the 21st century with a capacity that large. There's little point to a huge capacity if you're creating the mother of all traffic jams after every game. I see exactly why they downsized, better to give a decent experience for 45 000 people than a subpar one for 70 000. Despite all of Docklands' problems, it's still fantastically located for public transport, and when the AFL eventually sell the land to rebuild elsewhere, they'll make far more from the land than Waverley ever would have.

Forget Waverley, it's a dream that failed. There are better locations in the east, like Box Hill City Oval or Sandown Racecourse. If there were a proper AFL stadium in the east (not that I think it would actually happen), those would be preferable to Waverley.

 

[errant bounce]

I have no idea what they've actually done with the money at Marvel recently.

I'm a big fan of the place. it serves every possible area of the state, it's got good vantage point, and you never have to walk more than 20 metres for a toilet or a box of brown food if you're so inclined.

But **** me, getting in is still a nightmare – it's squashed all the way to the only two gates anyone uses and the useless staff are hamstrung even more by the terrible way everyone has to line up. the toilets still have a 2002 Ikea tone of green, the AFL Members bar still looks like like a slapped together cold second thought, the ramps are one of the most poorly designed things I've ever come across (it's basically completely open; just mesh at the 'walls')...

It basically seems like all the money was spent on some minimally clear tickle up of the facade (it's basically hidden by the surrounding office buildings; everything is so tight as you walk in, you never look up anyway) and a bunch of random tatt like barber shops and shite in every corner that looks like a child's 'activation zone' at a Westfield.

There was a lot they could have done but I have no idea what they actually have. they've basically tarted the thing up and it looks and feels even worse.

The main issue with the ground is it feels cold and very early 2000s but the accessibility and navigation of space is actually well done; viewing is great, the current tenants are playing good footy. they really rooted it.

 

[Fire]

The whole docklands precinct is probably destined to be a slum. Its so incredibly poorly designed and inaccessible. I remember we stayed in a holtel there once, and to access the car park about 20 meters away I literally had to drive several kilometers due to the one way streets and no turn signs. It was the most farcical thing I have ever seen.

The stadium is the only thing that really brings people to that area. They need to bury Spencer Street station and extend the city grid up to it if they want a hope of integrating that area. If they just bulldoze the stadium and put up apartments then its really game over for that area because you are replacing the only thing it has going for it, with more problems, without addressing anything.

The stadium should last a lot longer than 25 more years. Give it a major upgrade with a better designed roof if you want, but it should not be going anywhere for a very long time.

 

[errant bounce]

I don't really think Docklands is inaccessible at all, the way the city's mapped out means you can just keep walking down the same road and go from Fitzroy or Carlton Gardens to where the water starts. the city needed to expand but naturally people are going to prefer being in and visiting the more historical and established parts – happens with desired suburbs, happens with arenas.

It's just some bias that's developed and people just keep perpetuating it. the city has plenty of ugly buildings and glum feeling streets once you start getting west of Elizabeth Street.

It just lacks historical connection to a certain thing and hurts because of that. it's a fine area, it's just not a hundred years old.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Melbourne needs a third stadium of ~35k capacity built in either E-gate or gosch's paddock. Then the 9 Melbourne clubs need to get over having a home ground, and instead let each game be scheduled in the right sized venue.

Pies v Blues? MCG
Hawks v North? Docklands
Tigers v GWS? Boutique Stadium

How to pay for it? Increase the season length. 45*(3/9) = 15, therefore each of the Melbourne clubs would need to play 15 home games in Melbourne per year to allow each stadium to get 45 games per year. That would mean a 30 H+A game season. If you want to appease the MCC, let them run the new stadium if built at Gosch's paddock (same model as them running the MCG).

Reduce the game time to 18min quarters (from 20), to ensure games can start every 2 hours on the dot (allowing 12/2.30/5/7.30 on a Saturday, 12/2.30/5 on a Sunday). This also helps the players to play a longer season by slightly reducing load.

Instead of club byes, give each player four weeks of "annual leave" during the season each year. Byes suck.

Melbourne has had two stadiums since Princes Park closed nearly 20 years ago so I don’t think there will be a third. The G and Docklands handle it fine, the cost to build a third smaller stadium can’t really be justified when you can just play the smaller games at Docklands.

I do think there’s a good chance Docklands is replaced in ~20 years time… and I agree that Gosch’s Paddock stands out as the location from every perspective. It has the space and is ready to go without surrounding upgrades to transport etc. Richmond Station needs a major upgrade (has needed it for decades) but that needs to happen regardless.

The stadium is a huge part of the problems at Docklands. It is the major roadblock between the CBD and Docklands which makes it so inaccessible. The whole area needs to be re-done to make it a waterfront aspect for the CBD - part of the CBD, not a seperate area.

 

[Roogal]

The third stadium is at Kardinia Park, the fourth at Ballarat. When North Melbourne return from Tas I wouldn't mind betting that they'll end up playing two games a season at either Ballarat or a re-developed QEO in Bendigo. There really isn't anything fundamentally broken about Marvel Stadium except the roof could be made translucent by taking off the tin roof and replacing with a modern material that permits light to naturally enter. In Winter this would create a glass house effect and the stadium would accordingly be five to six degrees warmer inside during the day.

Perhaps rather than spending the billion(+) dollars replacing the GSS at the MCG, that money might be better invested putting a new roof on Marvel? After all is the GSS broken or not fit for purpose? It's not like Melbourne will be hosting a soccer world cup or an Olympics any time in the next 50 years, so why the urgency to replace the GSS?

 

[JohnZ]

Melbourne has had two stadiums since Princes Park closed nearly 20 years ago so I don’t think there will be a third. The G and Docklands handle it fine, the cost to build a third smaller stadium can’t really be justified when you can just play the smaller games at Docklands.

From a scheduling perspective, you're right there's no need for a third stadium. We're not at capacity fixturing wise. Having a third stadium however would allow 3 games per day in Melbourne, which could help share Friday nights around the country (a noble guesture the AFL would be unlikely to follow through on), and as for smaller games, Docklands loses money on crowds less than 30k, so you're no better off there than at the MCG. The economics of that ground are completely broken.

I do think there’s a good chance Docklands is replaced in ~20 years time… and I agree that Gosch’s Paddock stands out as the location from every perspective. It has the space and is ready to go without surrounding upgrades to transport etc. Richmond Station needs a major upgrade (has needed it for decades) but that needs to happen regardless.

100%. Richmond station should be rebuilt west of Punt Rd and properly fixed up. Deck of the railwayline and fully connect the tennis precinct to the G as well.

 

[Commando]

How can Docklands lose money with crowds of less than 30k now that the AFL own the venue
Something doesn't stack up there...

 

[Speck]

I think a Tassie Stadium type clear roof would do wonders for the place. Even if you just built it over a permanently open existing roof I think it would help with the "darkness" of the place.

 

[BallaratBulldog]

How can Docklands lose money with crowds of less than 30k now that the AFL own the venue
Something doesn't stack up there...

They paid it early at a big cost. Plus some of the redevelopment

 

[Fire]

The stadium is a huge part of the problems at Docklands. It is the major roadblock between the CBD and Docklands which makes it so inaccessible. The whole area needs to be re-done to make it a waterfront aspect for the CBD - part of the CBD, not a seperate area.

The stadium doesn't block any road that the station also blocks, but the station also blocks more. Knocking down the stadium by itself achieves nothing. Burying the station and all its viaducts buys real estate or parkland, and actually opens docklands up. Once the station is buried you can talk about demolishing the stadium to continue Lonsdale st and little bourke; but not before.

 

[errant bounce]

They paid it early at a big cost. Plus some of the redevelopment

The AFL buying Docklands early nearly saved the AFL from its covid dramas.

 

[Roogal]

The stadium doesn't block any road that the station also blocks, but the station also blocks more. Knocking down the stadium by itself achieves nothing. Burying the station and all its viaducts buys real estate or parkland, and actually opens docklands up. Once the station is buried you can talk about demolishing the station to continue Lonsdale st and little bourke; but not before.

I can foresee a time in the future when inner city land will become so premium that the existing station and lines will simply be built over. There will one day likely be a series of skywalks crossing Spencer Street interconnecting with buildings on both sides which in turn will interconnect with the Docklands.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

The stadium doesn't block any road that the station also blocks, but the station also blocks more. Knocking down the stadium by itself achieves nothing. Burying the station and all its viaducts buys real estate or parkland, and actually opens docklands up. Once the station is buried you can talk about demolishing the stadium to continue Lonsdale st and little bourke; but not before.

Not exactly - the tracks north of the station certainly need to be dropped (ideally all the way to North Melb station) but the Southern Cross station footprint itself sits between Collins and Burke and could largely be retained at ground level.

Whereas the stadium directly blocks Lonsdale St which is a major city street that you would want running all the way to the waterfront.

It’s also a giant waste of space if you’re trying to revive an area. It’s just about the prime waterfront position and it’s a giant, ugly concrete structure that just sits there completely empty and locked for 300+ days per year. A major station can at least cater for foot traffic through it. A stadium is just a giant roadblock that you have to walk around.

It really was a disastrous piece of planning.

 

[Fire]

Not exactly - the tracks north of the station certainly need to be dropped (ideally all the way to North Melb station) but the Southern Cross station footprint itself sits between Collins and Burke and could largely be retained at ground level.

Whereas the stadium directly blocks Lonsdale St which is a major city street that you would want running all the way to the waterfront.

It’s also a giant waste of space if you’re trying to revive an area. It’s just about the prime waterfront position and it’s a giant, ugly concrete structure that just sits there completely empty and locked for 300+ days per year. A major station can at least cater for foot traffic through it. A stadium is just a giant roadblock that you have to walk around.

It really was a disastrous piece of planning.

The station also blocks Lonsdale street. It runs into a car park.
If you bury the station and viaducts then yes it clears it up, but that's what I said. Do that first, or as a part of an overall plan, then you get something out of knocking the stadium down. But just knocking the stadium down down does nothing.

(I would not necessarily hate this idea for the record, as the Latrobe street overpass also looks really uninviting when looking down it from the city, whereas if it was flat it would have beautiful harbor views. Dudley street is also the only way to access it from the north, and that is an even more unpleasant walk next to a six lane road under an 11 rail overpass with absolutely nothing of interest on the way. 'opening up' the docklands is more than just the logistics.)

 

[errant bounce]

As cool as a 'The Rail Yards' stadium at E-Gate (what the **** is E-Gate? I have never heard of anyone ever refer to that space as it before or since) sounds with a Baltimore Orioles like rough-but-historical look out, architecture that fits into the old train yard buildings sounds (and it does sound really good, particularly with a sunk rail line and rejuvenation of the relics and assets still sitting there) I genuinely think that they'll build any third stadium at Gosch's Paddock with a mega-station at Richmond that's like 70% underground with Stockholm-style multiple separate exits/entraces: one to Stadium 3, one to AAMI Park, one to the tennis centre, and then one at the MCG with an additional one with a footbridge connection to Swan Street.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

I can foresee a time in the future when inner city land will become so premium that the existing station and lines will simply be built over. There will one day likely be a series of skywalks crossing Spencer Street interconnecting with buildings on both sides which in turn will interconnect with the Docklands.

Having stations at the bottom of medium and high rise buildings is hardly uncommon. Its how some of the best transport systems fund their station building and expansion. A combination of residential and office towers on top of Southern Cross (particularly if regional lines get electrified so diesel fumes aren't an issue in the station itself, or at least fumes vented far better than they currently are) makes perfect sense.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Having stations at the bottom of medium and high rise buildings is hardly uncommon. Its how some of the best transport systems fund their station building and expansion. A combination of residential and office towers on top of Southern Cross (particularly if regional lines get electrified so diesel fumes aren't an issue in the station itself, or at least fumes vented far better than they currently are) makes perfect sense.

They might fully electrify a couple of lines, like Geelong and maybe Ballarat, but I can't imagine they'll be able to electrify all regional lines, particularly the line to Sydney as it's just too long. But once the Suburban Rail Loop gets built, I think they might stop regional trains at the junction stations (Broadmeadows, Sunshine, Clayton), which would allow Southern Cross to be moved underground. Still 20 years away, but Docklands stadium should last another 20-25 years anyway.

I agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Howard Littlejohn]

They might fully electrify a couple of lines, like Geelong and maybe Ballarat, but I can't imagine they'll be able to electrify all regional lines, particularly the line to Sydney as it's just too long. But once the Suburban Rail Loop gets built, I think they might stop regional trains at the junction stations (Broadmeadows, Sunshine, Clayton), which would allow Southern Cross to be moved underground. Still 20 years away, but Docklands stadium should last another 20-25 years anyway.

I agree with the rest of your post.

Fair point on electrifying the longer lines, especially the Sydney and Adelaide links that would require co-operation with other states.
Although, would they need to be electrified the whole way? It still would allow for the build over the station, without the fumes, if they ran on electricity only within Melbourne and diesel outside city area.

There's a fair chance any new stadium built mid-century gets hotels or something attached too. Not uncommon in stadia these days. Possibly at the southern end to avoid shadows over an open (if retractable) or translucent roof.