#VIS: Riverside (Entertainment Precinct)

[Wayno]

From The Messenger:

Chiefs from the Convention Centre, Festival Centre, Hyatt Regency, SACA, Tennis SA and the SA Tourism Commission gathered for the first time last month at a meeting organised by the City Council.

Good to see a united front starting to form. Who within the ACC initiated this?

[ricecrackers]

I disagree, it should still go ahead. Semaphore is one of the most underrated suburbs of Adelaide.

Lesbians are always underrated

[Shuz]

Thankyou for your productive insight, ricecrackers. Come 2018, we may see an increase of lesbians being able to access the city via tram. Good things can only come out of that.

[Cruise]

Thankyou for your productive insight, ricecrackers. Come 2018, we may see an increase of lesbians being able to access the city via tram. Good things can only come out of that.

Why would they travel by tram?

I thought Lesbians only travel by motorbike.

[Brando]

Thankyou for your productive insight, ricecrackers. Come 2018, we may see an increase of lesbians being able to access the city via tram. Good things can only come out of that.

Why would they travel by tram?

I thought Lesbians only travel by motorbike.

Hahaha what a crack up.

Nice one Cruise

[flavze]

Whilst i like the idea of the riverside development i don't like the idea of bulldozing Hindmarsh stadium and making AU play out if the new stadium. It would seem that the SANFL want it to be 60k and thats just to big for AU to play out of, even if they manage to draw 20-25k to a game it's still gonna be way less than half full and would kill any atmosphere.
For me the perfect scenario would be to redevelop AO similar to what they are doing in NZ to AMI stadium, upgrading the capacity and facilities whilst not ruining the look of it. Playing AFL and Cricket out of that and building a smaller capacity rectangular stadium for AU and any Rugby games that come to town and maybe a team if NRL decides to expand here or a Union team if the Super 14 comp breaks down and we have a Aus and NZ comp.

By building a new "multi-purpose stadium" we will still have 2 oval stadiums in SA when we really only need one, and a AU is still playing out of a slightly small and outdated rectangular stadium in an awkward location.
Whilst giving SA a stadium that will be acceptable standard for a WC bid, and giving the AFL teams a brilliant stadium in a great location it doesn't help the rest of SA stadium related problems.

Then their is the other stipulation in regards to a succesfull WC bid in that FIFA declares that any WC must leave a lasting football legacy for the host cities and i don't see how a oval stadium owned and run by a rival football code does this?
I think the riverside development is a good idea, just lacking in the detail.

[ricecrackers]

Whilst i like the idea of the riverside development i don't like the idea of bulldozing Hindmarsh stadium and making AU play out if the new stadium. It would seem that the SANFL want it to be 60k and thats just to big for AU to play out of, even if they manage to draw 20-25k to a game it's still gonna be way less than half full and would kill any atmosphere.
For me the perfect scenario would be to redevelop AO similar to what they are doing in NZ to AMI stadium, upgrading the capacity and facilities whilst not ruining the look of it. Playing AFL and Cricket out of that and building a smaller capacity rectangular stadium for AU and any Rugby games that come to town and maybe a team if NRL decides to expand here or a Union team if the Super 14 comp breaks down and we have a Aus and NZ comp.

By building a new "multi-purpose stadium" we will still have 2 oval stadiums in SA when we really only need one, and a AU is still playing out of a slightly small and outdated rectangular stadium in an awkward location.
Whilst giving SA a stadium that will be acceptable standard for a WC bid, and giving the AFL teams a brilliant stadium in a great location it doesn't help the rest of SA stadium related problems.

Then their is the other stipulation in regards to a succesfull WC bid in that FIFA declares that any WC must leave a lasting football legacy for the host cities and i don't see how a oval stadium owned and run by a rival football code does this?
I think the riverside development is a good idea, just lacking in the detail.

what i've been saying all along

but you'll be reprimanded for going "off topic" again!

[adam73837]

Baker Steinhardt Report backs new stadium

Monday, 20 April 2009
The State Treasurer who guided SA out of the State Bank collapse has backed the concept of a new city-based sporting stadium as a “catalyst for a profound rejuvenation of the surrounding precinct”.

Stephen Baker, former State Treasurer and Deputy Premier presided over the repair of the State finances from 1993-1997.

A year ago he accepted an invitation from current Liberal Leader Martin Hamilton-Smith to chair a small working group to examine the feasibility of a new stadium located in the city’s western precinct.

He was joined by former elite Commonwealth Games athlete and IT business entrepreneur Adam Steinhardt.
The 65 page Baker Steinhardt Report released today provides the basis for the development of an Opposition policy on the its preferred model for a stadium.

It includes;

• Impact of stadium concept on economic rejuvenation and tourism
• Further development potential in the broader precinct
• Major event bidding
• Stadium cost estimates
• Seating capacity, roof configuration
• Facilities for conferences and conventions
• Transport strategy
• Future use of current stadiums and ovals
Baker and Steinhardt presented their report to Mr Hamilton-Smith last week and meetings have already been held with key stakeholders.

“The working group has spent more than a year on this project and their work is very impressive,” he said.
“I look forward to the debate it generates, especially on the level of economic activity, the jobs and the investment opportunities.

‘’Now that Labor recognises sport’s next big stadium will be in the city, it’s a question of where.”
http://www.martin2010.com.au/Articles/d ... final).pdf

[BenJ]

I think people should stop thinking about a Riverside precinct in terms of Melbourne's Southbank or the MCG and tennis centre precinct. I just spent the weekend in Brisbane and I have to say that their Southbank is Sooooooooo much better than Melbourne's in terms of design, free public space and general aesthetics. They did something original and different which includes swimming pools, a beach with sand, tropical rainforest to walk through, the Brisbane Eye (ferris wheel), beautiful sculpted walkways and an incredible variety of plants and trees. It's a great place just 'to be'.

We should be doing something like this as long as it's distinctly "Adelaide".

[BenJ]

Here's a website for those interested. Also interesting to see how the precinct is marketed and advertised. There's A LOT to see and do.
http://www.visitsouthbank.com.au/

[adam73837]

Here's a website for those interested. Also interesting to see how the precinct is marketed and advertised. There's A LOT to see and do.
http://www.visitsouthbank.com.au/

I also enjoyed Brisbane's Southbank when we spent a day there when returning from the Gold Coast to catch a plane back to Adelaide from Brisbane Airport. After a trip from the CBD on a ferry, we got off and found ourselves in what was like a tropical rainforest. Then suddenly, we found ourselves in University precinct I think it was; Brisbane's Southbank is very nice indeed.
However Brisbane as a greater city is not the best planned city. My Dad was there last week and said that the road system was just horrible on the way to the airport from the CBD (I too remember the journey from the CBD to the airport, but I guess I was too busy thinking about that trip to worry about how well planned Brisbane was). He said that the cab drivers said that the new SEQ Infrastructure program will help, but it just can't come soon enough. I guess we should be thankful that William Light went ahead with his plan despite protests from people like Governor Hindmarsh; although I must admit that it's interesting to think about what Adelaide would have been like had it been built where Port Adelaide currently is...
And we wouldn't have had to worry about shifting AAMI Stadium!

[Prince George]

Baker Steinhardt Report backs new stadium
http://www.martin2010.com.au/Articles/d ... final).pdf

Well, at least this paper tries to be realistic about the costs and risks of building a stadium - eg mentioning that selling gold/platinum memberships for Stadium Australia raised less than a third of the $340M that they were hoping for - but what it presents hardly seems to be a ringing endorsement for the stadium idea. The table at the end with the details of the revenue/expense estimates for such a stadium tell the story:

• Total annual revenue: $98 million
• Total annual operating costs: $45 million
• Total annual profits: $53 million
• But the split between the stadium and the teams is not even - the stadium owner pockets $3 million, the teams get a total of $50 million.

And I notice that their maths is a little off, they omitted the carparking revenues from the totals on the bottom line; without that, the operator's profits are only $1 million. Those numbers do help put this whole thing into a clearer perspective: the State Government spend several hundred million dollars on what amounts to being a gift to the teams. The revenue from operating the stadium will never pay for building it, leaving us again with the choice between saying "Oh well, sport in the city is worth paying a fortune for" or hoping for some mass influx of tourists.

And then there are the recurrent mentions of the corporate facilities, about how useful having a stadium in town is to CBD businesses for entertainment purposes, the reserved parking that they will get (etc). As that book (Public dollars, private stadiums) mentioned, business leaders are the people who are typically behind the push for new stadia; they want it for executive recruitment, but they aren't interested in paying for it themselves. Interesting to see little signs that this pattern could be repeated again here.

[monotonehell]

I actually came away from that document very disillusioned. After reading it, it seemed more like a set of reasons why we should not bother with a stadium at all. There were neither compelling financial or social reasons to go ahead with it. They even said that there's near zero chance of getting a private investment up due to the poor returns, apart from maybe the car park or similar isolated parts.

I'll have to give it another read later, and see how it comes across then...

[BenJ]

The more I think about it, maybe it would be best to go for an amazing riverbank precinct, forget the new stadium and keep upgrading Adelaide oval instead so that it can host world cup games etc. Given the current economic climate this might be more feasible and could be seen as the responsible approach come election time. I really hope the hospital is built elsewhere, like maybe the Keswick railway station if the interstate lines were diverted into the city. Building a hospital on prime waterfront real estate is like giving into the idea that Adelaide is a retirement vilage for the old and frail.

[AG]

Casino plan for Adelaide's Torrens Lake
BRAD CROUCH
May 02, 2009 10:30am

A NEW Adelaide casino and hotel - styled on Melbourne's glamorous Crown complex - is proposed for one of two landmark city sites.

The bank of the Torrens Lake, in the city's West End, and the Royal Adelaide Hospital site, in the east, have been identified by two construction consortiums, which have started work on plans to be presented to casino operator SkyCity.

While SkyCity says it has not commissioned plans, it has made no secret of its wish for a new casino and hotel, and has now confirmed that ambitious relocation talks are planned with the State Government. Separate building industry, political and gaming sources also confirmed two new casino options are being drawn up, depending on who wins next year's State election:

A CASINO-HOTEL development on the Torrens Lake, modelled on Melbourne's Southbank precinct, as part of the Liberal Party plan for a sports stadium and entertainment precinct at the Riverside West site.

A SHOWPIECE North Tce casino-hotel on the existing RAH site, as part of the State Government's plan to turn the area into Adelaide's version of Melbourne's Federation Square.

Under both scenarios, a casino/hotel would ease the financial pressure on whoever wins government. Construction sources say the waterfront site would be a "better fit" than the North Tce RAH frontage but both have huge commercial appeal.

The move for a bigger casino comes as a Sunday Mail investigation found:

A SWEETHEART deal between the State Government and the casino prevents release of information showing how much gambling patrons lose;

DESPITE the information blackout, the investigation shows gamblers have lost almost $2 billion at the casino since it opened in 1985;

THE casino now rakes in an average of $100 million in gambling revenue a year – about half each from machines and tables – and revenue is soaring.

Casino operator SkyCity Adelaide has confirmed it wants to move from the heritage-listed Adelaide Railway Station site into bigger, purpose-built premises incorporating a hotel.

Management has embarked on a broad overhaul of its business plan, which is expected to result in a change of name and logo, as well as a shift to new premises built from scratch.

Any plan to move the casino shapes as political dynamite as the Labor and Liberal parties pin their futures on rival entertainment precincts based on retaining or demolishing the RAH.

SkyCity chief executive Nigel Morrison has told investors Adelaide deserves a bigger casino, while casino general manager David Christian confirmed relocation talks were planned with the Government.

However, when questioned about the "Southbank v Federation Square" option, Mr Christian released a short statement: "The casino has not held any discussions with any party about moving the casino and we are busy focusing on improving the business we have."

SkyCity last year dumped a $30 million car park plan at its existing site.

While at least two consortiums are working on proposals, a SkyCity spokeswoman said the casino had not engaged anyone to draw up plans.

"We are looking at a greenfields site for a move in the future but nothing has officially been discussed with any party at this stage," she said. "I am not aware whether other people are drawing up such plans to put to us."

In 2001, Adelaide developers revealed detailed plans for a $200 million, 22-story hotel with casino and 240 apartments on the railyards site and revived it again in 2006, but failed to win government support.

A new casino/hotel adds a new dimension to battlelines drawn by the political parties in the run-up to the March 2010 election. Labor is committed to building a $1.7 billion hospital on the city's western railyards site and turning the existing RAH campus into an entertainment area. The Liberals are committed to upgrading the existing RAH and instead building a sports stadium on the railyards site as part of a new entertainment complex.

Under either scenario, a new casino/hotel complex would help cover costs and guarantee a critical mass of patrons flock to the area regularly.