Perth Stadium (Optus Stadium)

[brisbane13]

The east-west tunnel is a morally bankrupt project that was used as a means to win votes from constituents in marginal seats. Infrastructure Australia even has Melbourne Metro and WestLink as higher priorities.

I understand Perth needs a new stadium, and yes it will generate millions. Will the public that paid for the stadium ever see a ROI though? You realise not everyone attends sporting events.

Federation Square actually makes money for the state government with a number of the tenants there being government owned. So when public funds are used to build a sports stadium for a team, they sell tickets and make money from it. Where is the benefit to the public that will never visit that stadium?

You keep pointing out how stadiums put us on the world stage and events are held there. I'm not disputing that, I'm disputing the fact that we are using public funds to build these stadiums with no ROI to the public purse. Fund them through private investment.

isnt the East west tunnel part of the Westlink? from the easten freeway through to the western ring road?
alot of the funding for the east west, has been from private inverters. so thats why its being built first
when the current citylink tunnels where first built there was alot of people posting saying it wasn't needed as well. the railways are state owned, no private funding could be used.
the metro sysetm is needed,and will be built will be the next project after the East west link & that new train line being buit from deer park to werribee
the majorty of people that whinge about out rail system are the left winged idiotse that have been to the larger more populated cities, eg London, New yorks, tokyos,& get all excited because they have trains running every 3 minutes 24 hrs a day. it will not work here due to Melbourne having only a very small population to those cities, Melbourne spans over a longer land mass than most other cities in the world.

the state government would make peanuts from federation square to what it spent on it to build it! and not many people even know what is there
as i originally said, a tax funds along with private investments would be the the best scenario. for s company to spend so much money on a project the government usually throws some incentives in it

 

[arkie]

I'm not even going to bother responding to you anymore -- good day sir.

 

[cammo78]

alot of the funding for the east west, has been from private inverters. so thats why its being built firsit

Considering they are yet to release a business case, how do you know where the funds are coming from?

 

[Admiral Byng]

From philosophical standpoint, taxpayers don't owe anything to sports teams and or franchise owners. Profit generated from the stadium isn't coming back to us, it's being held privately.

If you're okay with this then why don't we start subsidising skyscrapers? Build a 400m tower in Melbourne, then hand it over to a corporation who reap the benefits. Hey, it adds a lot to a city!

I can link you to dozens of studies showing sports stadiums to not improve local economies if you like. The evidence is quite clear at this point.

I understand the general philosophical argument, but I think the boat has already sailed on this one. The new stadium will be built with public funds.

But, to complicate your argument a little bit, the sports teams and franchises aren't privately owned, they are publicly owned through the WA Football Commission. They exist sort of in a sort f category pf their own outside of public and private. Technically they are public, but they are independent effectively. The profits of the two WA-based AFL teams don't go to private shareholders. There's not any private investors that can be asked to fund the stadium themselves.

 

[arkie]

I understand the general philosophical argument, but I think the boat has already sailed on this one. The new stadium will be built with public funds.

But, to complicate your argument a little bit, the sports teams and franchises aren't privately owned, they are publicly owned through the WA Football Commission. They exist sort of in a sort f category pf their own outside of public and private. Technically they are public, but they are independent effectively. The profits of the two WA-based AFL teams don't go to private shareholders. There's not any private investors that can be asked to fund the stadium themselves.

But the profits don't go to the government whose taxpayers money will be used to built the stadium and therein lies the problem.

And yep, the ship has sailed on this one.

Look at what's transpired in the US.

 

[Admiral Byng]

But the profits don't go to the government whose taxpayers money will be used to built the stadium and therein lies the problem.

And yep, the ship has sailed on this one.

Not really an issue for me as long as the AFL clubs pay a reasonable rent to use the stadium. In a way that reduces the commercial risk the public.

It depends where that rent is set of course, which we don't yet know.

 

[brisbane13]

Considering they are yet to release a business case, how do you know where the funds are coming from?

Dennis napthine said on breakfast radio,said the most of the funding for the tunnel had come from private inverters, considering roads can be privately owned but the Rail system is owned buy the state

 

[brisbane13]

I'm not even going to bother responding to you anymore -- good day sir.

good dont then

 

[brisbane13]

But the profits don't go to the government whose taxpayers money will be used to built the stadium and therein lies the problem.

And yep, the ship has sailed on this one.

Look at what's transpired in the US.

and that is from where?
your a fair dinkum moron with no understanding what so ever.
can i ask what you do for a living? involved with government? or still at uni?

 

[Spearhead]

Let's get this back on the topic of the New Perth Stadium hey fella's ..I for one couldnt give a flying **** about Melbourne's transport problems!!

 

[Eastern Rangers]

A CONSORTIUM led by Brookfield Multiplex has emerged as the frontrunner for the contract to build a $1 billion sporting stadium in Perth.
Brookfield Multiplex's bid is being bankrolled by Brookfield Financial Australia Securities with John Laing Investment, Brookfield Multiplex Constructions, Brookfield Johnson Controls also party to its Westadium consortium.
A win by Brookfield Multiplex for the lucrative contract will come as a blow to the other two consortiums vying for the rights to build the Perth stadium on behalf of the Western Australian state government.
The rival consortiums are Confidem, which is made up of Lend Lease's financial arm Capella Capital, construction contractor John Holland and services provider Spotless and Evolution Stadium, which is led by Plenary in conjunction with French contractor Bouygues Construction, local builder ProBuild and Honeywell.

FULL ARTICLE
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...or-perth-stadium/story-fn9656lz-1226745467049

 

[Freofalcon]

Not up to date with specific details but has the new grounds dimensions been revealed ?

 

[Bacon Warrior]

Not up to date with specific details but has the new grounds dimensions been revealed ?

165m x 130 I think. Similar to Footy park.

 

[Freofalcon]

165m x 130 I think. Similar to Footy park.

Oh. I would have thought they would have made the ground similar to Subi ( Advantage Freo/WCE ) or more of a MCG sized ground seeing we play stuff all games there and would be helpful to our teams come finals times.

 

[Bacon Warrior]

Oh. I would have thought they would have made the ground similar to Subi ( Advantage Freo/WCE ) or more of a MCG sized ground seeing we play stuff all games there and would be helpful to our teams come finals times.

The only problem with a Subi sized ground is that it'll be terrible for cricket, especially if the ground runs east-west. They could have gone down the MCG dimension route too but probably wanted to keep some form of a home ground advantage for the WA clubs.

 

[Admiral Byng]

The short dimension has been chosen specifically to accommodate cricket, based on the ICC's minimum dimensions to host ODIs. It's the minimum length plus 2-3m each side to allow the rope. The short boundaries will be straight, the long boundaries will be square.

 

[mightymouse75]

So are those dimensione similar to the scg, I had heard that they were aiming for the g dimensions originally.

 

[holybishop]

So are those dimensione similar to the scg, I had heard that they were aiming for the g dimensions originally.

Hardly. It's still significantly longer and a tad narrower than the SCG.

 

[Rob]

But the profits don't go to the government whose taxpayers money will be used to built the stadium and therein lies the problem.

Where would the profits go then? It would seem likely that the stadium will be run by a government body, who will charge tenants for the use of the ground. If they do make a profit, are you suggesting it will be given away?

 

[TommyVercetti]

Surely, the stadium will hold more then 60,000. What's going to happen in 20 years?, you'll have the same problems that Subiaco suffers from today. Are they going to future proof it like they did with Metricon?

 

[Admiral Byng]

Surely, the stadium will hold more then 60,000. What's going to happen in 20 years?, you'll have the same problems that Subiaco suffers from today. Are they going to future proof it like they did with Metricon?

What's the story at Metricon?

The design brief is for a future upgrade to 70,000+ seats, but starting at 60,000 for the initial build. My guess would be the designers come up with a plan for a 70-75,000 seater but then scale back the initial proposal. Something like a three-tier stand all the way around for the complete design, but for the initial build they build three decks only along the wings and two decks at the goal ends. If demand dictates, they can add the third decks all the way around later. That's sort of the impression I get.

 

[holybishop]

What's the story at Metricon?

The design brief is for a future upgrade to 70,000+ seats, but starting at 60,000 for the initial build. My guess would be the designers come up with a plan for a 70-75,000 seater but then scale back the initial proposal. Something like a three-tier stand all the way around for the complete design, but for the initial build they build three decks only along the wings and two decks at the goal ends. If demand dictates, they can add the third decks all the way around later. That's sort of the impression I get.

That's similar to Metricon. One of the goal ends doesnt have a 2nd tier to keep the capacity at 25000, but that can be built easily to increase capacity to 40000. Would be the easiest way to have an upgradeable stadium. The Metricon Stadium upgrade for the Commonwealth games is discussed here if you're interested.

 

[TommyVercetti]

What's the story at Metricon?

The design brief is for a future upgrade to 70,000+ seats, but starting at 60,000 for the initial build. My guess would be the designers come up with a plan for a 70-75,000 seater but then scale back the initial proposal. Something like a three-tier stand all the way around for the complete design, but for the initial build they build three decks only along the wings and two decks at the goal ends. If demand dictates, they can add the third decks all the way around later. That's sort of the impression I get.

This is a quote from the guys who built Metricon:

The stadium’s capacity was set at 25,000-seats. A further challenge was to future proof it to ensure capacity could be increased to 40,000 seats to host larger events. Since it was built, the Gold Coast has won the bid to host the 2018 Commonwealth Games, and Metricon Stadium will stage the opening and closing ceremonies as well as the track and field events.

You'd hope the architects have incorporated that idea. Something that can be built now, but can efficiency & cheaply be upgraded later on.

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Courtesy of Nearmaps and ekul444 @Skyscrapercity.com

 

[wadistance]

all hail SSC