[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.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

[DEF]

#61 Post by AtD » Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:48 am

pushbutton: http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... .php?t=602

That's what they were talking about in the 'Tiser a while ago. It's just a vision with no substance, but I think it's a good idea. You can't get closer to the train station than that!

Ben
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6774
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 278 times
Been thanked: 1117 times

[DEF]

#62 Post by Ben » Thu Feb 08, 2007 4:25 pm

From Adelaide Now

New lights for AAMI

GREG KELTON, STATE POLITICAL REPORTER

February 08, 2007 02:30pm

MAJOR development status has been granted to a plan by the SANFL to install new lighting at AAMI Stadium.

The move will speed up the development and approval process for the plan to replace the head frames on the light towers at the stadium.

Originally switched on in 1984, the head frames on the existing four towers have become severely corroded and must be replaced.

SANFL executive commissioner Leigh Whicker said the proposed new installation would direct maximum light on to the playing surface, substantially reducing the light "spill" into the adjacent neighbourhood.

He said the league had advice from its engineers that while the existing tower sections were in good condition, the head frames should be replaced before 2008 in the interests of public safety.

The light fittings also need replacing as they have deteriorated during more than two decades of operation.

Mr Whicker said the 52m height of the existing towers and head frames had caused a number of problems including uneven illumination across the stadium playing surface, potentially dangerous glare to motorists on West Lakes Boulevard and excessive light spillage onto nearby homes.

He said the work would involved increasing the tower height by adding an extra two mast sections to each tower.

New headframes on each tower would support 136 2000-watt light fittings.

"They will be designed to minimise the effects of corrosion from salt spray and to direct maximum light onto the playing surface," Mr Whicker said.

"Since the installation of the current light towers, we have seen the popularity of night football grow and substantial technological advances have been made in the area of stadia sports lighting.

"The new lighting system will also be more aesthetically pleasing to the eye and bring AAMI into line with every other sporting stadium in the country where night sport is played."

Urban Development Minister Paul Holloway said the scale of the lighting project and its environmental, economic and social significance meant major development status was warranted.

He said this triggered a comprehensive and co-ordinated assessment path that must be followed by the SANFL, including stringent assessment of the proposal and public consultation.

"This decision does not indicate the Government's support or otherwise for the proposal," Mr Holloway said.

"It simply kick-starts the stringent assessment process."

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2279
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 825 times
Been thanked: 90 times

[DEF]

#63 Post by Ho Really » Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:17 pm

Mr Whicker said the 52m height of the existing towers and head frames had caused a number of problems including uneven illumination across the stadium playing surface, potentially dangerous glare to motorists on West Lakes Boulevard and excessive light spillage onto nearby homes.

He said the work would involved increasing the tower height by adding an extra two mast sections to each tower.
Originally the four towers where going to be a full head frame taller, but you guessed it, the (stupid) locals went against those recommendations saying, it would pollute their vision. :lol:

Cheers

pushbutton
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1425
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:01 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 18 times

[DEF]

#64 Post by pushbutton » Fri Feb 09, 2007 8:18 pm

Ho Really wrote:
Mr Whicker said the 52m height of the existing towers and head frames had caused a number of problems including uneven illumination across the stadium playing surface, potentially dangerous glare to motorists on West Lakes Boulevard and excessive light spillage onto nearby homes.

He said the work would involved increasing the tower height by adding an extra two mast sections to each tower.
Originally the four towers where going to be a full head frame taller, but you guessed it, the (stupid) locals went against those recommendations saying, it would pollute their vision. :lol:

Cheers
Yes, I did guess it! This is of course perfectly routine in Adelaide. Whenever anyone has a visionary idea to improve the amenity of the city for the majority of its people, you can always rely on those "stupid locals" to whinge so much that the proposal invariably ends up being either watered down to the point where it's no longer all that special, or dropped altogether by the developer, in favour of an interstate or overseas development where there's not so much red tape and backwards, anti-development thinking.

The simple solution to this of course is that whenever anyone wants to propose a development in Adelaide, they just need to ensure that their initial plan is deliberately far more impressive than the one they really want to build (say add about 60% in size and cost, as a guide).

That way once they compromise for the whingers and the councils, they might just still be able to build something like what they REALLY wanted to build in the first place!

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

[DEF]

#65 Post by Cruise » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:56 pm

I think an upgrade of Adelaide Oval would be more appropriate than a new stadium on the rail yards, yes i do agree AAMI is better off as a houses then a sporting ground, as to Hindmarsh Stadium. Adelaide Oval is in a great spot as it is, a short walk to the city (if the once brought up north adelaide tram ever happens i would then be vaible for our tram eccentric premier to want) and Adelaide then would have one stadium used all year round for Australian rules, Soccer and Cricket making the investment vaible.(and all with only one oval to water)

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

[DEF]

#66 Post by gregrogers257 » Sat Mar 31, 2007 1:32 pm

Good news. That second video screen at the southern end of the or the stadium is currently being constructed. According to the Advertiser the screen will be operating half way thru the season.

They've also installed new benches on the members wing for the players & trainers to sit in.

Great to see they are continuing to improve AAMI !!!

It could really become a great venue in 10 years time

Brando
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 759
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 3:11 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 70 times
Been thanked: 60 times

[DEF]

#67 Post by Brando » Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:18 pm

gregrogers257 wrote:
It could really become a great venue in 10 years time
....and continue to leave the CBD devoid of activity and vibrance after each game.

.::G!oRgOs::.
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 83
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:01 am
Location: City of Unley

[DEF]

#68 Post by .::G!oRgOs::. » Wed Apr 11, 2007 6:35 pm

gregrogers257 wrote: Great to see they are continuing to improve AAMI !!!

It could really become a great venue in 10 years time
No, in 10 years time it will be 10 years out of date.
The thing with AAMI is, well...it has never been a great venue to begin with.

User avatar
shuza
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:13 pm

[DEF]

#69 Post by shuza » Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:57 am

.::G!oRgOs::. wrote:
gregrogers257 wrote: Great to see they are continuing to improve AAMI !!!

It could really become a great venue in 10 years time
No, in 10 years time it will be 10 years out of date.
The thing with AAMI is, well...it has never been a great venue to begin with.
Excactly right there Giorgios. New stadium on North Terrace please!

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]

#70 Post by crawf » Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:08 am

AAMI Stadium upgrade plea to PM
MICHAEL McGUIRE, SPORTS EDITOR

April 20, 2007 11:30pm
Article from: The Advertiser

THE South Australian National Football League has written to the Federal Government seeking a multimillion-dollar contribution to help fund its $70 million redevelopment of AAMI Stadium.
SANFL executive director Leigh Whicker has confirmed that the league had made a funding submission to the Prime Minister's office and was awaiting an answer.

Mr Whicker refused to divulge how much the SANFL was bidding for but the Sunday Mail understands it could be between $20 million and $30 million.

"The State Government has been supportive of AAMI Stadium and we have had some discussions (with the Federal Government) but we have not pinpointed any particular project or sum of money," Mr Whicker said.

"We have sent a business case to them and given them a full appraisal of what we are doing at AAMI Stadium to build it to an international standard, so South Australia can host international events like the Commonwealth Games."

The Sunday Mail revealed last September that the SANFL was undertaking the $70 million redevelopment over the next five years, making it one of the biggest facelifts of the arena since it opened in 1974.

A spokesman for the Prime Minister said the Government received the proposal on Friday and it would respond appropriately in due course.

The Federal Government has previously supported funding sporting arenas, most recently committing $25 million to help refurbish the western grandstand at Adelaide Oval.

The contribution is part of an overall $70 million oval redevelopment, but is contingent on the State Government providing matching funds.

The State Government has previously promised $16 million to the redevelopment and is expected to announce whether it will provide an extra $9 million in the June Budget.

The Federal Government has also contributed $25 million to the new $70 million stand on the old Hill site at the Sydney Cricket Ground and $8 million for the $25 million redevelopment of Whitten Oval in Melbourne.

Mr Whicker said the redevelopment at AAMI would continue even without Federal Government funding but conceded it would make life more difficult for the SANFL.

The league has already budgeted to spend $22 million to improve a range of facilities at AAMI in the short term.

It has spent more than $1 million improving change rooms for visiting teams and umpires, $1.5 million on a new public address system, $1.63 million for a new video screen at the southern end and $1.32 million on new public kiosks.

Other improvements scheduled for the next year include a $4 million security upgrade, a $1.5 million refurbishment of the members' entry and foyer, and a $3 million replacement program of the light-tower head frames.

In the longer term, the SANFL is also planning to spend $14 million building a new corporate facility above the eastern grandstand, which would be similar to the Medallion Club at Telstra Dome, and a further $30 million to extend the main members' grandstand to bring it to the same height as the northern stand.

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

[DEF]

#71 Post by Cruise » Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:49 am

How big will this eastern grandstand coporate faclitity be (any pics to?) and will this make the now coporate boxes defunct?.
the money spent extending the members (western stand) to the hieght if the northern stand will give it a much needed classy look

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

[DEF]

#72 Post by gregrogers257 » Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:13 pm

I think the SANFL is being very optimistic in trying to get funding for this.
Why should the federal government give money to the SANFL when they have just given 20 - 30 million to the SACA to upgrade adelaide oval.

To all the wankers who complain about AAMI being in a bad location, west lakes is a good location. If the stadium was near the city there would be a lot of traffic problems after the games.

User avatar
Pistol
Legendary Member!
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 33 times

[DEF]

#73 Post by Pistol » Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:29 pm

^^ Wasted opportunity in injecting money into AAMI. Move the bloody stadium to the city. Oh and Gregrogers257, I think that there are already traffic problems after the games, centralising the stadium would allow traffic to flow in all directions thus reducing traffic problems.

I know that this has all been said previously in this thread, but it seems that Gregrogers has forgotten.

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]

#74 Post by rogue » Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:58 pm

gregrogers257 wrote:I think the SANFL is being very optimistic in trying to get funding for this.
Why should the federal government give money to the SANFL when they have just given 20 - 30 million to the SACA to upgrade adelaide oval.

To all the wankers who complain about AAMI being in a bad location, west lakes is a good location. If the stadium was near the city there would be a lot of traffic problems after the games.
Pistol78 wrote:^^ Wasted opportunity in injecting money into AAMI. Move the bloody stadium to the city. Oh and Gregrogers257, I think that there are already traffic problems after the games, centralising the stadium would allow traffic to flow in all directions thus reducing traffic problems.

I know that this has all been said previously in this thread, but it seems that Gregrogers has forgotten.
More people would likely use public transport if moved to the city. Therefore reducing congestion...

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

[DEF]

#75 Post by Cruise » Sun Apr 22, 2007 7:19 pm

Personally, i would catch PT to a stadium in town rather now i drive to west lakes and afterwards, just drive home.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests