other sites for a new stadium?

[cleverick]

We have heaps and heaps of parklands because for 150 years, people like me have been keeping people like you off them. It's the salami (slice by slice) approach that I will not countenance, and I'm prepared to use resources out of proportion to the problem to prevent further inroads into the parklands. Of course there would be plenty left over if we build a new stadium. But if you build a new stadium, a Guggenheim Museum, a new hospital, a new road, a new soccer stadium, suddenly our oodles of park looks more like Melbourne than a genuinely unique thing in the world.
Sure, the parklands got a bit dry during the drought. But so did everything north of Gawler. Perhaps more so.
That's a spruious argument anyway, because Australia was never meant to be the lush green on European valleys, it is sparse and bare, which has its own beauty. My personal preferred option for Victoria Park is a great urban forest- native forest as was here before we were. It would include a billabong, and pathways, but be treated like a national park. There would be people hired to clean the paths and remove litter/weeds, but otherwise no human intervention.
An enormous waste of land, you might say, but imagine what foreign visitors would think. Imagine the joggers in the early morning- not just rich inner-eastern suburbs, but people living in council flats in the city itself. Imagine the wildlife- the birds and frogs so close to the city centre.

Then tell me you would prefer a stadium and car race on the site.

[Shuz]

I prefer a stadium and mult-storey pit docks & grandstands.

[Cruise]

I prefer a stadium and mult-storey pit docks & grandstands.

[monotonehell]

no probs .. I just personally think we have heaps and heaps of parklands .. so much so that even if a stadium was built there would still be plenty left over .. they are everywhere fro crying out loud, taking up valueable prime realestate .. we are no longer living in the 1800's!!!! .. plus from the pic provided, it (and the other parklands) don't look that 'green' for most of the year anyway and they have nothing on or around them to get people there .. again, wasted land. I'm not saying get rid of them all but surely utilise some of them. If people want greenery, move to Gawler and beyond!

While I agree with your sentiment I have to disagree with your arguments.

Victoria Park isn't a good location for a stadium (or a race course, or a car race for that matter) it's in the middle of a residential area. The concept behind an inner city stadium is to have it handy for a good, multi destination, high capacity public transport system (like trains); and to allow some of those that attend the games to make use of the city's after match entertainment (cafès restaurants and etc). The only nearby area like that to Vic Park is Hutt street and that just doesn't have the capacity or the right kinds of businesses.

So a city stadium would be best placed on the railyards or very nearby.

Saying that we have loads of Parklands that take up valuable real estate is all well and good, but what makes that real estate valuable? A good part of the marketing of Adelaide living is the access to parklands. If we are to increase the population density of Adelaide's square mile by building more high rise, we also need to have more parklands available for recreation. If a family isn't able to have a backyard, they need public greenspaces. Higher population leads to the need for more greenspace.

Also the parklands are one of Adelaide's iconic features. We need to protect their integrity. Does this mean we cant build public structures on them? No. But it's not a good reason to bring up as an argument. That's like saying, we have cake so let's eat it. It's true that during this latest water shortage the Park's management have decided to let the grasses dry on the southern parks, and that's a good decision as we just don't have the water. But this also means we don't have the water to support a stadium. This is a temporary situation brought about by short sightedness and should be remedied by better water management, the Glenelg pipeline and hopefully wetlands for run off catchment.

People who say that the Parklands aren't being used obviously haven't visited any of them. The only section that is used for "nothing" is about 50% of the area bordered by South Tce, Goodwood, Greenhill, and Peakcock Roads. Everywhere else is used by sporting groups, schools and universities, dead people (lol the cemetery) or for festivals circuses, parking or other temporary events.

"It's not the 1800s", no it isn't. So what's your point? We shouldn't build slaughter houses, rubbish dumps and shanty towns on them? Because that's what was there in the 1800s.

"If people want greenery, move to Gawler and beyond!"
All I can say to that is: "f%$# off." Sorry to be blunt, but living in the city doesn't - and should not - mean that we have only concrete and steel to look at. Greenspaces are an integral part of ALL metropoli. They serve the residents who live in little boxes, give them some green to live in and help with the heath and well being of the population.


By all means argue for an inner city stadium, but please provide some decent reasoning.

[cleverick]

Thank you monotonehell. I can see from your name you don't want just concrete and steel to look at, and more power to you.
Before I say this next thing, I need to reiterate (as though you didn't know) my complete and utter opposition to any proposal to build any stadium in the parklands whatsoever. And most buildings bigger than a toilet block, for that matter!
However, your assertion that Victoria Park is a bad place for a stadium because it is in a residential area is also poorly reasoned. You forget that West Lakes is a residential area, and while I appreciate that that is part of the problem, it's a heck of a lot easier to get public transport to Victoria Park than to West Lakes. (And extend its capacity, if they build the stadium there.)
The other point you fail to take into account is the changing nature of the city. Just as where once were slaughterhouses are now railyards, so where once was a suburb called in my mind "South Adelaide" will soon be the southern tentacles of the CBD. If the city is to grow as you anticipate, I see no reason to expect that in 10-20 years, certainly long before the viable life of the stadium is finished, East Tce might not offer precisely the sort of businesses you think are required by a stadium.

Having said all that, I hope it never comes to pass; I have my own proposal for Victoria Park: http://cleverick.blogspot.com/2008/05/v ... -park.html

[monotonehell]

Thank you monotonehell. I can see from your name you don't want just concrete and steel to look at, and more power to you.

You interpret much and see nothing. The name is based on my flat, which has the constant hum of a refrigerator, my PC when it's on, a heater sometimes or a fan in the extremes of weather. All these add up to a constant monotone which took me a few weeks to get used to living in.

Before I say this next thing, I need to reiterate (as though you didn't know) my complete and utter opposition to any proposal to build any stadium in the parklands whatsoever. And most buildings bigger than a toilet block, for that matter!

That's an unfortunate extreme position to take. I prefer to take all ideas on their individual merit, with a big picture in the back of my mind. Some public use developments on the parklands can be completely justified. Although I'm not a fan of any of the brands of football (round, oval or square!) and would never attend such a facility, I can see the merit of an inner city stadium (as long as it's not a white elephant or negatively affects the city as a whole).

Why so close minded?

However, your assertion that Victoria Park is a bad place for a stadium because it is in a residential area is also poorly reasoned. You forget that West Lakes is a residential area, and while I appreciate that that is part of the problem, it's a heck of a lot easier to get public transport to Victoria Park than to West Lakes. (And extend its capacity, if they build the stadium there.)

Rethink that statement, Footy Park is bordered by, West Lakes Shops, a huge Golf Course and a hotel/retail precinct. Where as Vic Park is bordered by the Hutt Street residential precinct, Norwood, Rose Park and Dulwich. The only public transport that you could get to Vic Park would be bus based, short of building high capacity tram/train lines out that way - and just for a sporting ground? not going to happen. You need existing PT able to handle the extra capacity a stadium rush causes.

The other point you fail to take into account is the changing nature of the city. Just as where once were slaughterhouses are now railyards, so where once was a suburb called in my mind "South Adelaide" will soon be the southern tentacles of the CBD. If the city is to grow as you anticipate, I see no reason to expect that in 10-20 years, certainly long before the viable life of the stadium is finished, East Tce might not offer precisely the sort of businesses you think are required by a stadium.

Again Hutt Street is a residential area - the kinds of businesses we are talking about here are late night pubs, large supermarket style cafès and so on. Hutt Street provides niche restaurants and so on. If you were to build a stadium on Vic Park, the nature of businesses in the area would change, as would the residents' opposition to the stadium and its patrons grow. NIBYism at its most justified.

Having said all that, I hope it never comes to pass; I have my own proposal for Victoria Park: http://cleverick.blogspot.com/2008/05/v ... -park.html

Sounds a bit like what already exists at the Beaumont road corner of the parklands - albeit on a bigger scale and better maintained. I wouldn't have any major problems with such a scheme. Crime might become a problem, but crime can become a problem anywhere.

[Shuz]

Just to clarify on my position at present -

If the Port Adelaide tramline goes ahead, with a spur to West Lakes - AAMI Stadium has my support for its redevelopment (alongside continued investment into the surrounding region)

We do not need a new 'city' stadium - Adelaide Oval already serves as our premier city venue, which is already earmarked for an upgrade and possible North Adelaide tramline and Torrens footbridge proposals to support its viability.

Hindmarsh Stadium - honestly can do as it is - Again, with the Port Adelaide tramline proposal, just a 300m walk away. There is still room for capacity increases (with relevant property acquistion on southern boundary). Upgrading the facilities at present (which are already better than AAMI) will be cheaper than any new soccer stadium at the old police barracks. However, if they go ahead with this. I'm happy with that too.

Sports Park is already present in West End (Santos, ETSA stadiums) Again, a tramline extension and investment in facilities would suffice.

My opinions change over time of course, pending relevant factors of influence.

[cleverick]

Monotonehell, you are right. I have a dirty little secret with regards the parklands. Like everybody else, I want to preserve it for my own use, and I have a plan to build a second major train station "Adelaide South" at Unley Rd/South Tce intersection. Southern and eastern heavy rail would be routed here (Belair/Noarlunga lines, and any new ones we build). However, the rail would go straight up Unley Rd, thus minimising damage to the parklands.
Aside from that though, and let's agree- it's probably a pipedream, I believe in the integrity of the parklands and anything larger than a toilet block detracts from their use as open space. Why so close minded? I have been to Europe, every Australian capital and a good many cities besides, and I love Adelaide with its parklands. I hope they are never built on. We are truly unique and we need someone (me) to stand up for that.
Shuz, I largely agree.

[Ho Really]

While I agree with your sentiment I have to disagree with your arguments.

[...and all the rest here in the midle...]

By all means argue for an inner city stadium, but please provide some decent reasoning.

Well said monotonehell.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

Just to clarify on my position at present -

If the Port Adelaide tramline goes ahead, with a spur to West Lakes - AAMI Stadium has my support for its redevelopment (alongside continued investment into the surrounding region)

We do not need a new 'city' stadium - Adelaide Oval already serves as our premier city venue, which is already earmarked for an upgrade and possible North Adelaide tramline and Torrens footbridge proposals to support its viability.

Hindmarsh Stadium - honestly can do as it is - Again, with the Port Adelaide tramline proposal, just a 300m walk away. There is still room for capacity increases (with relevant property acquistion on southern boundary). Upgrading the facilities at present (which are already better than AAMI) will be cheaper than any new soccer stadium at the old police barracks. However, if they go ahead with this. I'm happy with that too.

Sports Park is already present in West End (Santos, ETSA stadiums) Again, a tramline extension and investment in facilities would suffice.

My opinions change over time of course, pending relevant factors of influence.

Fair enough.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

...I have a dirty little secret with regards the parklands. Like everybody else, I want to preserve it for my own use, and I have a plan to build a second major train station "Adelaide South" at Unley Rd/South Tce intersection. Southern and eastern heavy rail would be routed here (Belair/Noarlunga lines, and any new ones we build). However, the rail would go straight up Unley Rd, thus minimising damage to the parklands...

You might see trams up Unley Road, but that's about it. If you want heavy rail it would have to go underground somewhere through the city, is that what you want? Better we discuss this in the appropriate forum and not here...

Cheers

[bluecurtainsarenice]

The site is probably not big enough for an AFL sized pitch, but a stadium bordered by West Terrace, Grote, Gouger and Blenheim St (site of Australia Post building, Freedom furniture, et al) would be a nice size for a smaller (relatively) rectangular stadium.

Let's face it, the reticence of the SANFL and the AFL to release funds for a new multi-purpose stadium is not going to change, so why not build a stadium for the growth sports in SA - football (soccer) and rugby. No research is going into this, but a gradual approach to any development, could keep the one-off costs down, and allow for major investment pending a successful world cup bid, which is ultimately what the stadium would be suited to.

[Cruise]

I prefer red curtains