The WACA - Downfall

[Admiral Byng]

Yes, that is what I said. The plan stalled and eventually the government cheaped out on other options.
Football sold the houses that it had been planned to use for the extension. Roberts Road has been a cul de sac for as long as I can remember.



We've ended up with a great stadium at much greater expense than it should have been.
We've ended up with a great stadium with no thanks to cricket.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 600 million on transport infrastructure.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 300 million on additional ground preparation and design.
We've ended up with a great stadium that requires an army of helpers on match day to manage dispersion.
We've ended up with a great stadium that has dispersion problems proportional to the attendance.
We've ended up with a great stadium that is biased towards corporate needs over outright capacity.

Nah. We've got a great stadium and we paid what are the costs for a great stadium. All the other options would have been a compromise.

 

[holybishop]

Yes, that is what I said. The plan stalled and eventually the government cheaped out on other options.
Football sold the houses that it had been planned to use for the extension. Roberts Road has been a cul de sac for as long as I can remember.



We've ended up with a great stadium at much greater expense than it should have been.
We've ended up with a great stadium with no thanks to cricket.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 600 million on transport infrastructure.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 300 million on additional ground preparation and design.
We've ended up with a great stadium that requires an army of helpers on match day to manage dispersion.
We've ended up with a great stadium that has dispersion problems proportional to the attendance.
We've ended up with a great stadium that is biased towards corporate needs over outright capacity.

I'm seeing a lot of ranting from you but nothing about what the alternative ought to have been (at least nothing remotely coherent)

 

[Eastern Rangers]

Cricket absolutely refused to have anything to do with the proposed "super-stadium" and stated that they were happy not to play there.
The government should have pressured them like they did football and Subiaco.
Taxpayers should have pressured the government because the same stadium at the WACA would have saved about $ 1 billion.
But there it stands. The budget is supposedly in surplus. I say, let cricket pay through the nose.

What are you talking about?

The lack of fixed public transport at the WACA would have required more money spent to alleviate than the entire stadium build.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Victorian]

I think getting the WACA up to standard will be good for both cricket and footy able to have a second venue to use.

It allows greater flexibility if there are any schedule clashes. Lower expected crowd matches such as women’s cricket, football, pre season men’s, domestic cricket and even Big Bash can all be played at the WACA with the big matches played at Optus. You could even potentially play international cricket at the WACA against mino teams like Ireland, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and the Windies.

 

[RedV3x]

We've got a great stadium and we paid what are the costs for a great stadium.

The Western Australian people paid at least $1billion of unnecessary outlay.

All the other options would have been a compromise.

So you are saying the WACA would be a compromise ? Then why are we spending money on it if it is no good.
I don't see how a stadium in the CBD would have been a compromise - it would have been an asset.

 

[RedV3x]

I'm seeing a lot of ranting from you but nothing about what the alternative ought to have been (at least nothing remotely coherent)

You have a strange definition of ranting and coherent.
Now the stadium is built. We cannot change that.
It's quite pointless to debate all the options but the WACA was a potential option.
It was never a real option as cricket said they had absolutely no interest in a super-stadium.
The advantages of the WACA site over Burswood where quite obvious - site builds and transport.

 

[RedV3x]

What are you talking about?

The lack of fixed public transport at the WACA would have required more money spent to alleviate than the entire stadium build.

What are you talking about?

The WACA is a major stadium and has been used for elite cricket and AFL.
It worked before and could be easily improved upon.
There's Claisebrook, existing CAT services and walking.
You have have the whole city for people to disperse.
You could have built a tram along the Esplanade and used it as a tourist route.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

Yes, that is what I said. The plan stalled and eventually the government cheaped out on other options.
Football sold the houses that it had been planned to use for the extension. Roberts Road has been a cul de sac for as long as I can remember.



We've ended up with a great stadium at much greater expense than it should have been.
We've ended up with a great stadium with no thanks to cricket.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 600 million on transport infrastructure.
We've ended up with a great stadium that needed $ 300 million on additional ground preparation and design.
We've ended up with a great stadium that requires an army of helpers on match day to manage dispersion.
We've ended up with a great stadium that has dispersion problems proportional to the attendance.
We've ended up with a great stadium that is biased towards corporate needs over outright capacity.

We don't need these people at all, they just make dispersion and arrival harder. Event management must be worst company in Perth. Need closing down.

 

[greatwhiteshark]

You have a strange definition of ranting and coherent.
Now the stadium is built. We cannot change that.
It's quite pointless to debate all the options but the WACA was a potential option.
It was never a real option as cricket said they had absolutely no interest in a super-stadium.
The advantages of the WACA site over Burswood where quite obvious - site builds and transport.

The WACA have themselves to blame, as a WACA ground admirer I will miss it greatly. Maybe knock it all over and call the new stadium the WACA? Yankee stadium did it.

 

[Admiral Byng]

The Western Australian people paid at least $1billion of unnecessary outlay.



So you are saying the WACA would be a compromise ? Then why are we spending money on it if it is no good.
I don't see how a stadium in the CBD would have been a compromise - it would have been an asset.

Bloody oath it would be a compromise. The available land is too small to fit Optus Stadium without taking up a part of Queens Gardens and some of the northern carpark too, not to mention closing Nelsen Ave. Get our your Google Maps or something and transpose the outline of Optus Stadium over the WACA, it don't fit. To make it fit the build would have to be a compromise - steeper and shallower seating without any toilets or catering on the upper decks.

Also, there is not the same public transport access. Too far from the railway station. Have you ever gone to the WACA and tried to get there with public transport? I have, and I can tell you it is a long walk from Claisebrook Station to the WACA. Driving is not much better. Back in the day when they still had domestic D/N 50 over games with a crowd of 5-6000 it was not so bad, but trying to get in and out of there after a sellout Scorchers game with a 22,000 crowd was a bit of traffic jam and a long wait. Can't imagine what it would be like with 55,000 trying to get in and out - just unworkable. The ideal capacity for the surrounding road network would be not more than about 10,000 I reckon.

So yeah, it would be a compromise on design and amenities, plus a nightmare to get there either by car or by public transport.

 

[RedV3x]

We don't need these people at all, they just make dispersion and arrival harder. Event management must be worst company in Perth. Need closing down.

The ongoing running costs must be phenomenally high.
The re-organisation of buses each week alone must logistically tough compared to just adding more buses to regular routes.
Hopefully we are aiding unemployment in Perth.

 

[RedV3x]

The WACA have themselves to blame, as a WACA ground admirer I will miss it greatly. Maybe knock it all over and call the new stadium the WACA? Yankee stadium did it.

Yes, the WACA are in a no-mans-land of their own making.
All other states managed to build a combined all year use stadium.

 

[RedV3x]

The available land is too small to fit Optus Stadium

There's plenty of land to the North - only a car park FFS.

Too far from the railway station. Have you ever gone to the WACA and tried to get there with public transport? I have, and I can tell you it is a long walk from Claisebrook.

I went there when the Eagles were a sellout. I used to walk from central station. Claisebrook is closer.
And the dispersement was good - everybody walking and talking about the game.
I think you need the exercise to get the old brain working Admiral.

 

[Admiral Byng]

There's plenty of land to the North - only a car park FFS.



I went there when the Eagles were a sellout. I used to walk from central station. Claisebrook is closer.
And the dispersement was good - everybody walking and talking about the game.
I think you need the exercise to get the old brain working Admiral.

I don't think so. Lots of urban planing literature around on what is considered convenient walking distance. In North America it is a quarter mile (400m), in Europe up to 1 km. We in Australia would fall somewhere in between. Claisebrook is outside of that range for the average person, Perth central even further. For people with mobility issues forget it.

if public transport options are unavailable then people will drive and park. There isn't enough space in the general vicinity for enough cars if you have a 50-60,000 seat stadium. Destroying carparks to build the stadium on that land will only make it worse.

Buses won't help transport people if the roads are jammed with cars.

 

[RedV3x]

I don't think so.

You don't seem to think at all.
The WACA is closer to the heart of Perth CBD than Burswood so more people would walk to the stadium located at the WACA than currently walk to Burswood.
There is lots more parking surrounding the WACA than at Burswood so drivers would be much better off than the people currently driving to Burswood.
Burswood is designed for public transport access - buses and trains.
Yes, public transport would have to upgraded to the WACA to cater for the lazy Admiral types but there are plenty of options.

 

[Admiral Byng]

You don't seem to think at all.
The WACA is closer to the heart of Perth CBD than Burswood so more people would walk to the stadium located at the WACA than currently walk to Burswood.
There is lots more parking surrounding the WACA than at Burswood so drivers would be much better off than the people currently driving to Burswood.
Burswood is designed for public transport access - buses and trains.
Yes, public transport would have to upgraded to the WACA to cater for the lazy Admiral types but there are plenty of options.

I can do logical argument well enough. Your propositions are not logical.

I have walked from the WACA to Claisebrook quite a few times. It was fine for me, but it is much further than most normal people would want to walk. I am happy to be an outlier on that, but I can't apply my eccentric tendencies to all normal people.

 

[kranger]

I think getting the WACA up to standard will be good for both cricket and footy able to have a second venue to use.

It allows greater flexibility if there are any schedule clashes. Lower expected crowd matches such as women’s cricket, football, pre season men’s, domestic cricket and even Big Bash can all be played at the WACA with the big matches played at Optus. You could even potentially play international cricket at the WACA against mino teams like Ireland, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, Sri Lanka and the Windies.

They moved the WAFL grand final down to Freo Oval this year. Not the best of facilities, but a great atmosphere being in close with each other compared to being dispersed throughout Optus Stadium.

The upgraded facility with reduced capacity at the WACA Ground, could be perfect for hosting the WAFL GF each year as a sell-out event.

 

[The Victorian]

They moved the WAFL grand final down to Freo Oval this year. Not the best of facilities, but a great atmosphere being in close with each other compared to being dispersed throughout Optus Stadium.

The upgraded facility with reduced capacity at the WACA Ground, could be perfect for hosting the WAFL GF each year as a sell-out event.

100% similar to how the VFL GF is now at Ikon Park. Fantastic atmosphere at a smaller venue

 

[RedV3x]

I have walked from the WACA to Claisebrook quite a few times. It was fine for me, but it is much further than most normal people would want to walk.

It's not about you or I is it - it's about the stadium attendees.
People walk to Burswood - fact.
People walked to the WACA - fact.
It is LOGICAL to presume more people would walk to the WACA (for the same crowd) because it is a SHORTER DISTANCE.
People walk to the WACA and to Burswood from central station - fact.
More people would walk from Claisebrook than Central if it was convenient and publicised because it is a SHORTER DISTANCE.
Isn't that basic logic Admiral ?
There is limited parking at Burswood and poor dispersement.
There is much more parking in the Perth CBD than Burswood and the dispersement is a factor of many times better.
Isn't that basic logic Admiral ?

The part we haven't discussed is the ongoing boost to the Perth CBD economy by having 50,000 extra people a week as potential clients.
Then there is the ongoing saving of not having to employ all those management staff, road staff, bus staff and train staff.

 

[Admiral Byng]

It's not about you or I is it - it's about the stadium attendees.
People walk to Burswood - fact.
People walked to the WACA - fact.
It is LOGICAL to presume more people would walk to the WACA (for the same crowd) because it is a SHORTER DISTANCE.
People walk to the WACA and to Burswood from central station - fact.
More people would walk from Claisebrook than Central if it was convenient and publicised because it is a SHORTER DISTANCE.
Isn't that basic logic Admiral ?
There is limited parking at Burswood and poor dispersement.
There is much more parking in the Perth CBD than Burswood and the dispersement is a factor of many times better.
Isn't that basic logic Admiral ?

The part we haven't discussed is the ongoing boost to the Perth CBD economy by having 50,000 extra people a week as potential clients.
Then there is the ongoing saving of not having to employ all those management staff, road staff, bus staff and train staff.

Your previous post was complaining that nobody walks to Burswood because there is a public transport option, whereas everyone would have to walk to the WACA because there is no public transport. As if having to walk was a positive thing and having public transport options was the negative. This is not logical.

Secondly, you made it sound like walking distance to the CBD was important. The Perth metro area has 1.8 million people spread out between Alkimos to Mandurah, to Mundijong, to Bullsbrook. This is area could be a small country in its own right. Walking distance from the CBD means nothing in the overall scheme of things because so few of the attendees at the stadium will come directly from the CBD area. Not many people live there relative to the rest of the metro area, and since the AFL actively avoid Friday night games in Perth there won't be a big number coming in from work on a Saturday or Sunday - they'll be coming from the suburbs.

 

[RedV3x]

Your previous post was complaining that nobody walks to Burswood because there is a public transport option, whereas everyone would have to walk to the WACA because there is no public transport. As if having to walk was a positive thing and having public transport options was the negative. This is not logical.

Of course it's not logical because I said nothing of the sought. You should really give up if you have to descend to deliberately misquoting me.
I said said more people were likely to walk to the WACA than Burswood because it was a shorter distance and that is logical.
I said that Burswood was designed as a public transport stadium and that WACA has parking options due to it's position
and much greater dispersement.That is again logical.

Secondly, you made it sound like walking distance to the CBD was important.

Of course it is important. Public transport is centred on Perth and it is a ready made transport hub.
Perth is also a ready made social hub with parking and dispersement options.
People will come from central CBD to outer CBD if the distance isn't too great.

Friday night games in Perth.

Will be even more attractive for fans and the AFL.

Now, when you start being rational and not reactive, read what I say, you will see that the same stadium at the WACA as Burswood would mean:
More people walking.
More people parking.
Less of a demand on public transport.
The uptake of public transport could be achieved in various ways for the WACA.
Overall the benefits of the WACA over Burswood were:
Cheaper build cost.
Cheaper transport cost.
Substantial economic boost to the Perth CBD.
Cheaper ongoing cost w.r.t. ground staff.
Much simpler transport logistics.

 

[Admiral Byng]

Of course it's not logical because I said nothing of the sought. You should really give up if you have to descend to deliberately misquoting me.
I said said more people were likely to walk to the WACA than Burswood because it was a shorter distance and that is logical.
I said that Burswood was designed as a public transport stadium and that WACA has parking options due to it's position
and much greater dispersement.That is again logical.



Of course it is important. Public transport is centred on Perth and it is a ready made transport hub.
Perth is also a ready made social hub with parking and dispersement options.
People will come from central CBD to outer CBD if the distance isn't too great.



Will be even more attractive for fans and the AFL.

Now, when you start being rational and not reactive, read what I say, you will see that the same stadium at the WACA as Burswood would mean:
More people walking.
More people parking.
Less of a demand on public transport.
The uptake of public transport could be achieved in various ways for the WACA.
Overall the benefits of the WACA over Burswood were:
Cheaper build cost.
Cheaper transport cost.
Substantial economic boost to the Perth CBD.
Cheaper ongoing cost w.r.t. ground staff.
Much simpler transport logistics.

You're still putting the facts together to wrong way around to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

You can't integrate a major sports stadium in a grid pattern neighbourhood. Road networks on a grid pattern with lots of intersecting streets with controlled junctions suffer from a particular form of traffic congestion when there are too many cars - it is called grid-lock - look it up. It cannot be solved except by having fewer cars using the streets. You can't dump so many cars in the streets of East Perth before and after a game without causing major traffic problems. This is why the location was deemed unsuitable. It was looked at and assessed. The only option is to get cars off the streets and get people into some other form of transport, but you can't do that in East Perth. That is why the location is compromised. A compromise is just another word for a stuff-up. A stuff-up should not be considered a cost saving. The WA government decided to get it right, and paid what it cost to do so. None of the transport solutions to the Burswood location are a waste of money, they are just what it cost to do things properly. They made the train network polycentric with the stadium as one hub.

It's not that hard when you put things in the proper order.

 

[kranger]

On this discussion, I thought I would refer to the 2007 report prepared by the Major Stadium Taskforce.

Available here: https://web.archive.org/web/2008072...rstadiataskforce.com.au/default.aspx?menuID=7

The relevant section is from Volume 2 of The Stadium and the City.

They eventually resigned to investigating the WACA Ground as a Rectangle Sport and Cricket Oval with a capacity of 35,000, as a secondary stadium, as the location would struggle with any larger of an attendance.

They surmised that the location had limited public transport capacity to go any larger. And the road and footpath network would struggle with any more pedestrians and vehicles.

 

[RedV3x]

You're still putting the facts together to wrong way around to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

You're still putting the fanticies together to wrong way around to arrive at the wrong conclusion.

You can't integrate a major sports stadium in a grid pattern neighbourhood. Road networks on a grid pattern with lots of intersecting streets with controlled junctions suffer from a particular form of traffic congestion when there are too many cars.

So now you're admitting that there is heaps of parking and great dispersion.

You can't dump so many cars in the streets of East Perth before and after a game without causing major traffic problems.

I'd by dumping a lot of cars on whole Perth CBD.
If you're so protective about East Perth WTF are the WACA looking at development ?

This is why the location was deemed unsuitable.

No - it was the WACA princesses who wanted to live in their backward cocoon.
Where was the report made on the WACA ?

That is why the location is compromised. A compromise is just another word for a stuff-up. A stuff-up should not be considered a cost saving.

So Subiaco was a stuff-up and now you're saying get rid of the WACA as it is a stuff-up also ?

None of the transport solutions to the Burswood location are a waste of money,.

They can only be used for stadium events FFS. Logic fail from you their Admiral.

It's not that hard when you put things in the proper order.

Let's for argument sake say Burswood was the only real alternative the fact is and it is a huge fact that the WACA wanted to nothing to do with the new super stadium. The WACA didn't get up their home ground to share Burswood - they wanted NO PART of the super stadium. The more you argue about the merit of Burswood over other sites then the more you can criticise the WACA for not participating. Pretty simple Admiral.

 

[kranger]

I wonder if the upgrade to the WACA Ground to cater for footy, will result in the traditional pitch being replaced by a Drop-In-Pitch.