Proposed new Adelaide Stadium

[RUNVS]

Im not sure if this is the right section for this but i'll post it anyway.

Hamilton-Smith's grand vision for Adelaide

PLANS for a city sports stadium, a Federation Square-style plaza and an entertainment centre have been unveiled by the state Opposition as its vision for Adelaide's city fringe.

The Riverside West plan leaves virtually no area unchanged in a swath of public land and parklands bounded by North Terrace, King William Rd, War Memorial Dr, Port Rd, Henley Beach Rd and West Tce.

The plan involves a new multipurpose sports stadium as its centrepiece, two pedestrian bridges across the Torrens Lake, a relocated entertainment centre, amphitheatre at Elder Park, a science and technology centre, a large plaza and also a second Torrens weir.

Along with the Liberal Party plan to rebuild the RAH at its existing site, the new concept will draw the battlelines for the state election in March next year.

It will compete directly against the State Government's planned $1.7 billion hospital at the railyards, which lie at the heart of the Riverside West site.

"Adelaide needs its `mojo' back and this is the way to do it," Opposition Leader Martin Hamilton-Smith declares in a copy of the policy document supplied to The Advertiser. "South Australians will have the opportunity to have their say (at the election) on March 20, 2010.

"The State Liberals will rebuild and renew the Royal Adelaide Hospital at its existing site and we will put in place more exciting plans for Riverside West.

"This is the other half of the hospital debate – let the debate begin."

If elected in 2010, Mr Hamilton-Smith would begin work on his plan in 2013; the stadium would not be ready until 2018 or 2022, depending on the World Cup soccer bid.

An international competition to design the redevelopment would begin immediately, with the winner announced in 2011 and a master plan released later that year.

Critics will likely focus on the lack of funding and costing – the only money outlined is a $157 million commitment by the State Government for land works at the site.

Based on similar projects in other states, the plan could cost well in excess of $1 billion, but no total costing has been released for Riverside West nor any details of how the money would be raised from private developers.

The Advertiser understands up to four syndicates of private developers have pitched concepts to the Liberals which are compatible with the Riverside West vision and would provide a large component of the funding. Mr Hamilton-Smith said he expected private developers to provide about three-quarters of the funding for the city stadium and around a quarter of the costing for the remainder of the plan.

However, an updated plan, to be released after public consultation, could provide more private-sector opportunities.

Mr Hamilton-Smith said costings would change in the next six months as public consultation shaped the concept plan.

However, yesterday he gave a commitment to release "within weeks" costings and viability for the most significant aspect of Riverside West – the stadium. The Federal Government would be asked to contribute to infrastructure such as railway work and the Adelaide City Council to parks works.

A relocated entertainment centre, next to the Morphett St bridge, would be able to host both concerts and major exhibitions, capitalising on its proximity to the existing convention centre.

Mr Hamilton-Smith said now was the time to plan for the years following the economic downturn and likened the Riverside West redevelopment to Melbourne's Docklands, Sydney's Darling Harbour and Brisbane's Southbank.

"Now is the time for vision and excitement about where we are heading in the next period of growth," he said.

"Too often governments get paralysed by economic downturns, or miss opportunities from upturns.

"Now is the time to plan and begin a project that will deliver pride in our city, jobs in our city and a legacy for our city

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25294338-5006301,00.html

 

[King Elvis]

Hell yes!

 

[Cap]

won't happen

 

[KUNG FU]

Love the stadium. Don't like the location of Rann's hospital. But the RAH is a complete quagmire for redevelopment.

 

[aneale]

it's called an 'election promise'. Grandiose plans with pretty pictures and zero obligation to follow through with it if elected.

The stadium itself would nudge a $1B by the time the proposed finish would be 2018-22 without all the other stuff. The State Govt would be forced to hand it over to the SANFL as custodians of the game here and the holder of the two greatest sporting assets that will bring in the most money.

It looks wonderful, but can't see how they'd pay for it.

 

[magtrev]

Hell yes!

this, but

won't happen

this

 

[Cap]

Lets face it, once they have the tram network down to AAMI and the facilities there are brought up to standard ,there is no reason why we wouldn’t keep using that stadium for a number of years. Coupled with the upgrade of Adelaide Oval which will eventually be to FIFA standard why on earth would we waste our money on a new stadium. I like the idea of upgrading the rail yards, maybe make it a federation square style or even like the parkland in Sydney were they do all the concerts. But for me the most important thing is the upgrade of the hospital. It’s not about old people it’s about basic facilities on offer to South Australians who get sick. No one wants to get sick but once you do you do not want to be stuck in some parts of the RAH. I am not having a go at Doctors or nurses they are pretty much all brilliant but they are let down by the facilities which in some parts would be worse than what would be found in some 3rd world countries.

 

[johnnypanther]

Father Christmas come early.... must be an election due

now lets see:

world economic downturn + lower state taxes (land tax cuts etc) promised + hospital upgrades new stadium etc etc expenditure promised
= fantasy land

 

[King Elvis]

Lets face it, once they have the tram network down to AAMI and the facilities there are brought up to standard ,there is no reason why we wouldn’t keep using that stadium for a number of year.

There is only so much you can polish a ****.

 

[relapse]

Even if the trams do go there, it will be still poorly supported public transport wise. The trams (especially the ones we have) arent really made for mass transit of people. They certainly wouldnt hold anywhere close the same about of people as a train plus it is only going one way so people end up in the city anyway.

There will never be an adequate answer for the public transport delima at AAMI just like there wasnt at Waverley.

 

[Cap]

There is only so much you can polish a ****.

agreed

but the RAH has been polished for much longer than AAMI stadium

 

[aneale]

Even if the trams do go there, it will be still poorly supported public transport wise. The trams (especially the ones we have) arent really made for mass transit of people. They certainly wouldnt hold anywhere close the same about of people as a train plus it is only going one way so people end up in the city anyway.

There will never be an adequate answer for the public transport delima at AAMI just like there wasnt at Waverley.

True, but lets face it our trains aren't the most reliable things either. Just means more people get stuck on some tracks somewhere.

 

[Vantz]

Did anyone else hear Roo's comments on MMM on Friday?

He believed It was inevitable and that Football Park would remain as a training base.

However I highly doubt the Liberal Parties plans of building a sporting/cultural district will go ahead. Would like to see how they plan on financing all of these plans.

 

[aneale]

I say any knew CBD stadium becomes solely ours as the 'Adelaide' club and Port get Footy Park as the 'Port' club and that will serve themselves right for whining about their deal constantly.

 

[Ozzie]

Lets face it, once they have the tram network down to AAMI and the facilities there are brought up to standard ,there is no reason why we wouldn’t keep using that stadium for a number of years. Coupled with the upgrade of Adelaide Oval which will eventually be to FIFA standard why on earth would we waste our money on a new stadium. I like the idea of upgrading the rail yards, maybe make it a federation square style or even like the parkland in Sydney were they do all the concerts. But for me the most important thing is the upgrade of the hospital. It’s not about old people it’s about basic facilities on offer to South Australians who get sick. No one wants to get sick but once you do you do not want to be stuck in some parts of the RAH. I am not having a go at Doctors or nurses they are pretty much all brilliant but they are let down by the facilities which in some parts would be worse than what would be found in some 3rd world countries.

That is a great take on it all, especially the RAH part.

 

[James23]

Absolutely no chance in todays economic climate. Australia will be in a recession for years to come, a new stadium will be put on the back burner.

I can see it now, liberal gaining power and then stating, "oh yeh we wanted to build but we didnt anticipate the economic crisis to get as bad as this, therefore our plans will be put on hold"

 

[King Elvis]

Absolutely no chance in todays economic climate. Australia will be in a recession for years to come, a new stadium will be put on the back burner.

I can see it now, liberal gaining power and then stating, "oh yeh we wanted to build but we didnt anticipate the economic crisis to get as bad as this, therefore our plans will be put on hold"

And this is the stupidity of the 'Stimulus Package.'

We've put ourselves in a massive hole of debt, we're spending obscene amounts of money - and yet things which will actually provide real short term benefits and long term returns are being delayed or written off.

Take the new Prison planned near Murray Bridge - cost was something like $300M, yet they've delayed it due to the Financial Crisis.

And yet another $12B is pissed away on 'stimulus payments,' - on top of the $10B that's already been thrown away.

 

[relapse]

And this is the stupidity of the 'Stimulus Package.'

We've put ourselves in a massive hole of debt, we're spending obscene amounts of money - and yet things which will actually provide real short term benefits and long term returns are being delayed or written off.

Take the new Prison planned near Murray Bridge - cost was something like $300M, yet they've delayed it due to the Financial Crisis.

And yet another $12B is pissed away on 'stimulus payments,' - on top of the $10B that's already been thrown away.

The only people that would claim a stimulus package is a bad one is the opposition party.

So you think sitting there doing nothing and watching the country go into a massive recession is the right course of action ?? It doesnt matter if you have a surplus if the country goes into a massive recession tax dollars begin to dry up because of their reliance on the economy.

England are doing one, China are doing one and the US are doing one. The Libs have hinged their bets both ways by saying that the country needs one, but maybe not as much as Labor are doing. The Libs would be doing the same thing if they were in power.

 

[Crow-mo]

The only people that would claim a stimulus package is a bad one is the opposition party.

or anyone with a basic understanding of economics

England are doing one

no they're not

China are doing one

no they're not

the US are doing one

no they're not.

its one thing to use targeted fiscal stimulus to get the economy moving, its another to just hand out cash to people directly. these are fundamentally different, and the channels of distribution are crucial. government spending to boost jobs is one way pure keynesian, there is quantitative easing to pump cash in the business sector to prompt activity - something happening in the UK and the US. they are also tying lending criteria to small/med business as a condition for bank infusions.

giving cash to the electorate is another - but widely rejected and discredited for not likely to be successful. tax cuts are thought to be a more effective and controlled way if you want to go straight for trickle up economics.

as far as I am aware australia is the only economy to directly make a handout to the electorate. the problem, and why others have not done this is the belief that in times where there are deflationary pressures people will just pocket it and save. lower interest rates for example have put considerably more money in people's hands as it is - its confidence that gets people to spend. and confidence is not stimulated by borrowing large amounts of government debt, and just raining it from the sky.

however, what I will say in the defence of Rudd and co. is that Australia's national debt to GDP is relatively low compared to other G20 countries, so you could make the argument that the down side from increased borrowing is slightly softer as a result.

oh, and as for the stadium thingy. can only be a good thing. put it on the political agenda, and let the debate be fought out appropriately in the public arena.

ps. they'll claim poverty if they do get elected on that platform and won't build it, talking about how the previous government squandered more than they realised blah blah blah... but at least it will establish if there is a majority mandate on the issue which will move it forward considerably.

 

[Redline]

There has been some big developments in the last week after meetings between the two levels of Government and the AFL.

The AFL want football played in the city, make no mistake about that, the Federal Government (Kate Ellis) do not want to give money to do up AAMI and the State Government have realised supporting AAMI just isn't going to work for them. They won't lose the election over it but know its a major issue and want a more popular alternative.

The solution which is nothing new is now for both levels of government to put their money towards upgrading Adelaide Oval and get that to 50,000 and improve the facilities further to the proposed changes.

The tram line to AAMI is off the table so you can forget about that and the SANFL won't get any funding for AAMI. Demetriou is happy with the proposal but Whicker is not but he is facing enormous pressure. No doubt the ACC will get in the way too but I guess we wait to see what happens in the next month.

Of course the SANFL could go against everyone and go it alone at West Lakes but without the tram line and any state government fiunding they are going to find it very difficult but could do it.

 

[Crow-mo]

adelaide oval has always been the sensible alternative. however, there is no way to force any of the parties to accept that. including the adelaide oval trust, or the sanfl.

 

[Redline]

adelaide oval has always been the sensible alternative. however, there is no way to force any of the parties to accept that. including the adelaide oval trust, or the sanfl.

Very true, money will only get them so far. The AFL will continue to lean on the SANFL but obviously don't want to direct them but they have a fair bit of influence. Not sure the AAMI can survive at a satifactory level without government funding and no tram line. They will be fine for the next five years but unsure of the next 10.

 

[DaveW]

giving cash to the electorate is another - but widely rejected and discredited for not likely to be successful. tax cuts are thought to be a more effective and controlled way if you want to go straight for trickle up economics.

There's no substantial difference. Tax cuts also mean giving cash to the electorate.

 

[SellarStardom]

Siting over here in Perth it looks like Adelaide has taken a leaf out of Melbourne's books and realised that a City stadium may actually attract non die hard football followers, well done to the Libs.....

But yeah its Radelaide, won't happen

 

[Pietmans]

The plan sounds fantastic - too good to be true in fact. Therefore it probably is.

Very light on detail. Nowhere does it say that this stadium will be suitable for AFL football - it's mulit-purpose but is it the soccer stadium that Adelaide United have been lobbying for?

If it was for AFL use it will cost a real packet. We have only two teams so it will be used only once a week unlike Telstra Dome with multiple weekly use. With private investment comes expectations of a decent return and I wonder whether the cost of using the place would be just uneconomic for the clubs, especially Port.

They are complaining already about the cost of using AAMI which has little debt and for which the SANFL is getting a small return on their overall investment.

Oh and how many seats are we looking at here anyway?

Any less than AAMI would be lost income to the Crows, and the new 'shed' facilities will be poorly used after matches if fans have to move to West Lakes afterwards - especially those living north, south and east of the city.

Will it have a roof like Testra Dome?

I believe that the SANFL gained the right to play at AAMI with their licences (does anyone know for sure?). If so, then the new facilities here would likely only be used by soccer, because the SANFL won't use them no matter how much pressure the AFL puts upon them. ( And of course it may never be built without a guarantee of the income from AFL football).