[DEF] AAMI Stadium Upgrade | $100m | 52,000

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in areas other than the CBD and North Adelaide. Includes Port Adelaide and Glenelg.
Message
Author
Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 666 times
Been thanked: 152 times

[DEF]

#16 Post by Will » Wed Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm

To calm your nerves Crawf, the $400 million bill, does not all have to be paid by SA taxpayers.

The developers could obtain a grant from the federal government (just like the Marion aquatic centre), the owners of the tracks (city council or Transport SA) could donate the land, just like the Marion council did for the pool. The naming rights of the stadium could be sold, and the stadium could be developed in a private/public partnership. The city council could also provide a grant, and the SANFL could also provide some money. The SANFL could raise some more money by selling AAMI stadium and the neighbouring reserves for residential development, and apartments can be built alongside the Torrens, which would also deliver some profits.

User avatar
rogue
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:45 am
Location: Over here
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 4 times

[DEF]

#17 Post by rogue » Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:42 pm

From today's 'Tiser

AAMI Stadium wish list leaves many questions
By PAUL STARICK
September 20, 2006 12:15am

AAMI Stadium is at risk of becoming a monument to the SANFL's one-track mind. Rather than widely considering the best interests of football fans, the SANFL seems determined to, first and foremost, preserve its hard-won asset.

Presumably in response to relatively gentle prodding from The Advertiser, SANFL executive commissioner Leigh Whicker on the weekend outlined plans for AAMI Stadium's redevelopment.

There were some praiseworthy measures, particularly $1.5 million for new toilet, kiosk and police facilities.

It is generally acknowledged AAMI Stadium needs an upgrade. But Mr Whicker's wish list poses as many questions as it answers.

Is it worth spending big sums of money on a stadium which, despite being an excellent football venue, has access and location problems?

Would it be better to investigate a combined effort, involving governments and other major sports, for a centrally located stadium, near transport and city entertainment venues?

The obvious hurdle is cost, yet the benefits would include adding much needed life to the city.

There are many questions about the latest plan for AAMI Stadium's upgrade.

Where will the money come from? When will construction start? Will sections of the stadium need to be closed during the football season for the construction? Why was it considered necessary to add 2000 seats to the members area when the existing ones rarely, if ever, are filled to capacity? The list goes on.

Mr Whicker has declined to respond to these questions. SANFL president Rod Payze explains the plans for "a modest capital upgrade" are a mix of "funded" and "unfunded" measures. It seems the "$70 million facelift" is a wish list, that does not add concrete measures to the $35 million upgrade reported by The Advertiser in late June.

Crucially, the wish list does not tackle the biggest problem facing the stadium – access difficulties posed by the lack of a rail link. Admittedly, this is no fault of the SANFL. Premier Mike Rann has ruled out discussion of a rail link. It is understood the SANFL's bid for preliminary talks with the State Government was firmly rebuffed at the first approach.

Clearly, however, the prospect of a rail link to AAMI Stadium is remote and distant, at best. As petrol prices steadily rise, this lack of a rail link poses a risk to the stadium's future. SANFL administrators are being responsible by pushing for a rail link. But what is the contingency plan if their lobbying fails?

There appears to be a stubborn refusal to consider the option of starting afresh at a new, central, easily accessible stadium.

Seemingly without consulting the football supporters who are the game's lifeblood, SANFL administrators have decided to throw all their eggs in AAMI Stadium's basket.

Perhaps a new stadium would be too expensive. But this is hard to determine without any debate, consultation or investigation.

Mr Payze politely explains the SANFL does not want to conduct a debate "through the media".

With all due respect to Mr Payze, it seems the SANFL wants to dictate, not debate.

User avatar
tidus0
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 35
Joined: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Seaford

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium to recieve a $70million facelift

#18 Post by tidus0 » Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:16 am

crawf wrote:$70m footy boost

He dismissed calls for a to build a new "superstadium" in South Australia and said the spectator experience at AAMI was the best in Australia.
yes that may be true but the MCG can hold way more spectators than football park that is why they have grand finals in melborne they make more money out of it.

But with the finals thing is host it at the city of the main team eg it it was sydney and west coast if sydney had won e.g. 13 games and west coast 12 it would be at sydney but if it was sydney 12 and west coast 13 it should be in perth if you get my drift but the MCG holds more people so they use that for grand finals

User avatar
rogue
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:45 am
Location: Over here
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 4 times

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium to recieve a $70million facelift

#19 Post by rogue » Tue Oct 03, 2006 11:35 am

The reasons behind the AFL holding Grand Finals at the MCG are a bit more complex than the spectator capacity of a venue.

Some years ago, the AFL signed a contract with the MCC to hold Grand Finals at the MCG for the next 50 years. Not only was the contract for GF’s, it also included a set number of elimination, semi and preliminary finals.

The contract has now been amended to balance the “nationalâ€

User avatar
Mants
Legendary Member!
Posts: 990
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 12:40 am
Location: City of Burnside
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 10 times

[DEF]

#20 Post by Mants » Tue Oct 03, 2006 1:06 pm

the MSG is the home of footy

the grand final should always be played there

it also means that neither team has an advantage over the other

crawf
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5417
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 181 times
Been thanked: 320 times

[DEF]

#21 Post by crawf » Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:07 pm

the MSG is the home of footy

the grand final should always be played there

it also means that neither team has an advantage over the other
what is the msg?

JAKJ
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 2:29 pm
Location: KTA/ADL ex PER/CNS/LA/SH
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 38 times

[DEF]

#22 Post by JAKJ » Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:51 pm

crawf wrote:
the MSG is the home of footy

the grand final should always be played there

it also means that neither team has an advantage over the other
what is the msg?
The stuff that makes asian food taste so good :D

User avatar
rogue
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 604
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:45 am
Location: Over here
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 4 times

[DEF]

#23 Post by rogue » Wed Oct 04, 2006 11:54 am

Mmmmmm... all this talk about MSG is making me hungry.

User avatar
Mants
Legendary Member!
Posts: 990
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 12:40 am
Location: City of Burnside
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 10 times

[DEF]

#24 Post by Mants » Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:17 pm

ahahaha, i think i missed a key

its the MCG hehehe

gregrogers257
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:16 pm

[DEF] AAMI Stadium

#25 Post by gregrogers257 » Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:44 pm

In regard to what's happening in Perth, they're still debating whether they should build a new stadium or upgrade subiaco.

Here in adelaide we are in a much better situation than what they are. Unlike Subiaco, AAMI stadium has been designed so that further expansion can be accommodated easily. Although it is not part of the latest proposal, a new stand could easlily be added on the eastern side of AAMI staduim.

This is not the case in Subiaco as they have high grand stands all around the ground. If they decide to upgrade the oval they will have to knock down the stands and re-build them. I think they'd be better off building a whole new stadium

Getting back to adelaide, we already have to very good arena's in adelaide oval and AAMI Stadium. It would be stupid to waste money on a whole new stadium.

JAKJ
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 209
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 2:29 pm
Location: KTA/ADL ex PER/CNS/LA/SH
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 38 times

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium

#26 Post by JAKJ » Fri Oct 13, 2006 12:05 am

gregrogers257 wrote:In regard to what's happening in Perth, they're still debating whether they should build a new stadium or upgrade subiaco.

Here in adelaide we are in a much better situation than what they are. Unlike Subiaco, AAMI stadium has been designed so that further expansion can be accommodated easily. Although it is not part of the latest proposal, a new stand could easlily be added on the eastern side of AAMI staduim.

This is not the case in Subiaco as they have high grand stands all around the ground. If they decide to upgrade the oval they will have to knock down the stands and re-build them. I think they'd be better off building a whole new stadium

Getting back to adelaide, we already have to very good arena's in adelaide oval and AAMI Stadium. It would be stupid to waste money on a whole new stadium.
AAMI is an appaling arena... and it would be tragic if they did just tack on stands and not level the thing... it was an awful idea in the first place... they should leave it/level it and relocate the stadium to the city..

gregrogers257
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:16 pm

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium

#27 Post by gregrogers257 » Fri Oct 13, 2006 10:04 pm

JAKJ wrote:
gregrogers257 wrote:In regard to what's happening in Perth, they're still debating whether they should build a new stadium or upgrade subiaco.

Here in adelaide we are in a much better situation than what they are. Unlike Subiaco, AAMI stadium has been designed so that further expansion can be accommodated easily. Although it is not part of the latest proposal, a new stand could easlily be added on the eastern side of AAMI staduim.

This is not the case in Subiaco as they have high grand stands all around the ground. If they decide to upgrade the oval they will have to knock down the stands and re-build them. I think they'd be better off building a whole new stadium

Getting back to adelaide, we already have to very good arena's in adelaide oval and AAMI Stadium. It would be stupid to waste money on a whole new stadium.
AAMI is an appaling arena... and it would be tragic if they did just tack on stands and not level the thing... it was an awful idea in the first place... they should leave it/level it and relocate the stadium to the city..
JAKJ - You are an idiot. Can you please justify why the government should spend 400 million on a new stadium when this money could be much better spent on health, education, transport, etc.

Also AAMI is a good stadium.......what's wrong with it ?

Furthermore, why not build a stand on the eastern side........it would fit in well and could potentially increase the capacity to 65-70,000 - that would be great !!!!

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium

#28 Post by AtD » Sat Oct 14, 2006 12:56 am

gregrogers257 wrote:JAKJ - You are an idiot.
Good first impression.
gregrogers257 wrote:Can you please justify why the government should spend 400 million on a new stadium when this money could be much better spent on health, education, transport, etc.
The private sector should be contributing the majority of the cost.
gregrogers257 wrote:Also AAMI is a good stadium.......what's wrong with it ?
Location, location, location.
gregrogers257 wrote:Furthermore, why not build a stand on the eastern side........it would fit in well and could potentially increase the capacity to 65-70,000 - that would be great !!!!
Which in itself would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and would only worsen the problem of lack of transport in the area.

gregrogers257
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:16 pm

[DEF] Re: AAMI Stadium

#29 Post by gregrogers257 » Sat Oct 14, 2006 9:10 pm

AtD wrote:
gregrogers257 wrote:JAKJ - You are an idiot.
Good first impression.
gregrogers257 wrote:Can you please justify why the government should spend 400 million on a new stadium when this money could be much better spent on health, education, transport, etc.
The private sector should be contributing the majority of the cost.
gregrogers257 wrote:Also AAMI is a good stadium.......what's wrong with it ?
Location, location, location.
gregrogers257 wrote:Furthermore, why not build a stand on the eastern side........it would fit in well and could potentially increase the capacity to 65-70,000 - that would be great !!!!
Which in itself would cost hundreds of millions of dollars and would only worsen the problem of lack of transport in the area.
Firstly you are way off the mark with this hundreds millions of dollars statement directly above. Do you really think its that expensive just for a new grandstand ?? The northern stand only cost 12.5 million !!

The location of West Lakes is not bad. It's twenty minutes to the city what's wrong with that ???? I go to AAMI stadium all the time and the traffic is not that bad.

Finally in regard to the private sector funding the development - the same argument applies. Why would any business organisation spend $400 million on a new stadium when AAMI could be
upgraded for $100 million??

It's not going to happen. Stop dreaming guys.

gregrogers257
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 82
Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 10:16 pm

[DEF] Subiaco

#30 Post by gregrogers257 » Sat Oct 14, 2006 9:28 pm

Be grateful for the situation that we have here in adelaide. I think they've really stuffed things up in Perth over the last few years.

In 1999 they spent $35 million at subiaco on an eastern stand, which brought the capacity to just 42,000. These days both the eagles and dockers sell out the stadium most weeks and they need something bigger. There is no space for extra grandstands to be added, (due to poor planning back in 1999.) As a result to make the stadium bigger they will have to spend a massive $235 million to rebuild the whole stadium. That's a lot of money to spend on an existing stadium !!!!!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests