[VIS] New inner-city stadium

[mattwinter]

Adelaide Oval may never meet FIFA standards unless some big coin changes hands. Thinking outside the square for World Cup though... a rogue move might be to carefully remove AO's top soil and drop the oval surface down 10metres, then add 28,000 seats around the perimeter of the pit, lay a rectangular pitch in the middle and host the cup final.

.

Haha I'd like to see it but it'd certainly have an odd look to it. I think in the Australian bid for 2022 there was talk of temporary seating being built in front of the Adelaide Oval hill, sort of pushing the field up towards the Southern Stand a bit more, which I think would be a more realistic option.

In thinking about a rectangular stadium for Adelaide, I wouldn't think too much about potential world cups... as much as we'd love to get games in Adelaide if Australia ever won the hosting rights there's no guarantee we'll have a world cup in Australia any time soon. 2034 would be the absolute earliest but there looks like there'd be strong competition for that one and so every chance we won't be hosting one before 2050. Perhaps you'd build a stadium that looks like a bit like the new one in Townsville wwhich looks like it could pretty easily add extra seating to one end to boost capacity.

Of course the 2023 womens world cup is looking like a real chance and I wonder if we'll hear more in this space if Australia wins that bid (announced in a few months I think). Without that though I'd be surprised if there's enough political momentum to make this happen while A-league crowds remain low. Unless of course they think selling Hindmarsh can make the whole thing a cheap project.

[madelaide]

Yeh..

https://www.fiveaa.com.au/sport/United- ... g-The-Club

And there's so much more out there on it..most fans are aware.
You do realise the Dutch guy is just the frontman, the public face of this "group of investors"..?

There's a crappy player from that same crappy 4th div Chinese club on AU's roster. Ever wondered why? They want to improve their domestic league, so want to send players abroad to improve.

“We can send a 28-year-old who will not improve a lot, but we think this player (Chen) has the quality and the potential to improve a lot.

Chen, who captained the Red Lions’ second side and can play on both wings, will be joined by several countrymen training with Adelaide this summer.

Dont kid your selves that the new owners with Chinese money & interests, want to make United a powerhouse in the HAL. For them the focus is on China, as they say its going to become the biggest league money wise. This 4th div side needs to improve hard, so thats where Adelaide United comes into for them.

You would have seen significant investment in the club by now.
One of the old owners even had a small model of a proposal for a new stadium.

Don't take offence, this isnt a dig at China or Chinese.
I was in earlier posts just pointing out part of the problem is the club it self and its owners, as well as the FFA/league in general regarding low/declining crowds.

You fix the league and clubs, and crowds will grow.

Not taking offence. I never thought this was a dig at China till you said it might be.

I completely agree with you about the FFA. The league wants Sydney FC v Melb V grand finals every year. The rest of the clubs are cashflow and warmups before the main event. That has nothing to do with China.

If a new stadium is going to be built, legit backers will need to put their cash on the table. Greg Griffin, Bruno Marveggio and Rob Gerrard never did. Right now, the money is coming from international investors. If that bothers you, than Hindmarsh Stadium will remain 17,000 capacity.

If you've been a member of AUFC since the NSL season, like I have, you'd know that Val Migliaccio is a turd. He's a turd on the page and in person. As a 'journalist', he's never supported Adelaide United, has proven this on many occasions. He loves a good headline and spin. His opinion in a tweet, declaring unsubstantiated information, is a turd in a toilet. Nothing more. Nowhere in that article does Greg Griffin even mention China.

In my post I called Piet van der Pol (the Dutch guy) the club's 'chairman' and the investors his 'partners'? That kind of makes him the 'frontman'. No arguments there. That's his job. I trust his decisions so far. I have no problem with Yongbin Chen playing in the youth or NPL side. The club's owners are taking necessary risks with their own money. If Yongbin Chen becomes a first team player, AUFC will have done their job...

Adelaide United is and will be for a the foreseeable future, a youth development club. And we are the best at it. We will make our money selling homegrown talent to whoever is buying in Asia or elsewhere. I don't know anyone who's got a major problem with that in the current Aussie sporting landscape. I've got every confidence Bruce Djite knows what he's doing and that Piet van der Pol and whoever is funding their plan know that return on their investment relies on this plan's success.

Our commitment to local talent is already proving successful, as seen in the two examples below. South Australia representing...

FFA CUP FINAL - AUFC won 4-0
Oct 2019 Squads:

AUFC
11 local players
2 aussie players
3 international players

MELB CITY
3 local players
9 aussie players
4 international players

...

ORIGINAL RIVALRY - AUFC won 3-1
Nov 2019 Squads:

AUFC
12 local players
2 aussie players
3 international players

MELB VIC
4 local players
8 aussie players (2 from adelaide)
6 international players



.

[A-Town]

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-11/ ... s/11951632

This article exemplifies why a 30,000 seat or potentially even a 25,000 seat rectangular stadium would probably be too big. imo it should be about 20,000 seat with a safe standing area and scope for expansion should ongoing large crowds require it.

A-League crowds are mostly down across the competition with Adelaide United recording their worst home crowd average ever. Is it really Hindmarsh Stadium that's keeping crowds down, or is it the declining popularity of the A-League? I'm sure a shiny new 20-30k seat stadium will see an initial spike while the novelty factor's still there, but once the shine wears off, I can see crowds going back to similar numbers as they are today. Even AFL crowds are starting to decline, although a lot of that can be contributed to the poor form of both teams.

I'm not against a new rectangular stadium altogether, I just think the Govt should prioritise a new 15k multi-purpose arena hosting basketball, tennis, netball, and concerts as I think this is the more viable option.

You're right, crowds are down, because the FFA runs the A League like shit. Chinese money bought Adelaide United, they own a crappy 4th div club in China. Why would the FFA approve such crap? There's your problem with Adelaide United, and the stupidity of the FFA rolled into one example.

Here's two scenarios.

1. They build a small rectangular stadium on the edge of the city near Adelaide Oval, to cater for smaller crowds.
FFA finally gets their shit together running the league, and crowds start pouring in. Will the stadium be upgradable and look like a coherent design still?

2. They build a bigger rectangular stadium, say capacity between 25,000-35,000. Draws bigger crowds for a short while before the novelty wears off.
FFA gets their shit together and bigger crowds are maintained, or FFA takes longer to get their shit together and crowds drop off but at least there's a stadium with large enough capacity.

People are thinking inside the box on this, just about Adelaide United and the A League.
What about rugby? What of the International Rugby Sevens, if we were to get that back? How about as a smaller outdoor concert venue?
How about if Adelaide United make a grand final or cup final, capacity is needed. They're not going to host a grand or cup final in a 15k venue.
What about the next time Australia bids for the World Cup, Australia will host a World Cup it's inevitable I guarantee it. Does Adelaide want to be part of the biggest single sporting showcase on the planet, or do we want to miss out? How do you upgrade a 15k stadium to meet FIFA requirements without making it look like either a construction site because of all the scaffolding, or end up demolishing it and rebuilding it anyway?

They need to build something that meets all FIFA requirements from day one, with the exception of capacity, but so that capacity can be increased without being detrimental to the design of the venue.

If I'm not mistaken, stadiums must hold at least 40,000 as per FIFA World Cup requirements.

Edit: madelaide beat me to it.

[Ho Really]

If I'm not mistaken, stadiums must hold at least 40,000 as per FIFA World Cup requirements.

Edit: madelaide beat me to it.

Or we'll miss out.

Cheers

[ml69]

If I'm not mistaken, stadiums must hold at least 40,000 as per FIFA World Cup requirements.

Edit: madelaide beat me to it.

Or we'll miss out.

Cheers

So make it expandable. Doesn’t mean we have to build a 40,000 seat stadium now.

[gnrc_louis]

From this article: https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/02/13/ ... t-reveals/

Preferred city stadium options fail to measure up, report reveals
News

EXCLUSIVE | The two major locations being considered for a prospective new city stadium complex were ranked at the bottom of a list of options for a similar plan presented to the former Labor Government, InDaily can reveal.

Tom Richardson
@tomrichardson
Print article
An option for a new arena at Memorial Drive did not rank highly in a report to the previous Labor Government. Photo: Tony Lewis / InDaily

A second city sports and entertainment hub was officially placed on the policy agenda last week with confirmation the Marshall Government was “actively planning additional major inner-city and sporting entertainment infrastructure”.

It’s understood plans for a covered stadium have been prepared for consideration but a specific site has not been earmarked, with competing proposals for an arena on either side of the River Torrens.

The first would be adjacent the existing Adelaide Oval and would include a major revamp of the Memorial Drive Tennis hub, while the second would involve a more complex build above the railyards on the river’s southern bank.
Advertisement

The same precinct must also house the promised new Women’s and Children’s Hospital.

But InDaily can reveal options for a similar plan were presented to the former Weatherill Government in the lead-up to the last state election, in a report prepared by Adelaide engineering consultants Aurecon and obtained by InDaily.

The report detailed a vision “to build on South Australia’s strategic competitive advantage through the further development of a vibrant riverbank precinct by adding a world class contemporary live entertainment and sporting events facility to assist SA in achieving its economic priorities”.

The analysis details options for six prospective sites “for an entertainment facility to cater for 15,000 patrons” – around the current seating capacity of Coopers Stadium at Hindmarsh.

However, the brief sought “flexibility to host sporting events – namely tennis and court based sports”, with parking provisions for a minimum of 300 cars.

The Arena footprint was “not based on a detailed functional brief” but rather “based on benchmarking of similar facilities for Entertainment, Tennis, Netball and Basketball through Aurecon and our partners’ significant experience with similar facilities globally” .

The analysis is “based on an initial high level assessment only for the purpose of facilitating a shortlisting of potential site options and progression into next phases”, noting that “no demand analysis has been undertaken to confirm the suitability” of the plan, which “should be undertaken as part of the business case”.

A second city stadium proposal was never adopted as policy by Labor.

The six Riverbank precinct sites considered were:

Expanding Memorial Drive Tennis Arena
Building on the corner of Montefiore Road and War Memorial Drive
Pinky Flat
West of Morphett Street Bridge, South of the River
West of Morphett Street Bridge, North of the River
North Adelaide’s Par 3 Golf Course

The Memorial Drive upgrade appears closely aligned to the existing concept currently being proposed, while there was only one option contemplated on the Torrens’ south bank, a build west of Morphett Street Bridge – the location believed to be favoured by the Adelaide Venue Management Corporation, which runs the Convention Centre, Entertainment Centre and Coopers Stadium.

The latter two are expected to be sold off if the south-bank option gains favour.

Unused land west of Morphett St and south of the river. Photo: Tony Lewis / InDaily

Aurecon also briefly examined a further option at the Government’s request – an expansion of the existing Adelaide Entertainment Centre facility “to consider potential of additional seats without the synergies of a multipurpose entertainment venue”.

However, that option was given little weight as it did “not comply with the requirements of the rest of the options, for example, accommodation of world’s best practice in contemporary entertainment event facilities [and] other sports to the required standards”.

The six other options were assessed against various site comparison criteria and given a weighted score, which saw the proposal to expand Memorial Drive ranked sixth, and the proposal to build on the south bank west of Morphett St ranked fifth.

The highest-ranked option was west of Morphett St Bridge on the north side of the Torrens, with a new build on the corner of Montefiore Road and Memorial Drive coming second.

An extract from the report.

The expansion of the existing Tennis arena was summarised as having insufficient site geometry, and “significantly impacting” the existing Adelaide Oval and Next Generation facilities.

The authors warned of a “congested feel” within the existing urban environment, noting “concurrent events with other existing facilities [would be] extremely difficult to manage”.

However, the site was deemed to have “good pedestrian access with [the potential for] grade separation of pedestrians and transport”, although it has been reported that the current plan could see the road thoroughfare closed altogether instead.

The south-bank proposal was deemed to have the potential to “continue place-making south of the river and optimise the integration potential with existing entertainment [and] hospitality facilities”, with “excellent proximity to existing public transport facilities”.

A summary of the options.

However, the report warned pedestrian access was “challenging to navigate” and would require “event overlay” to ferry attendees safely over busy transport corridors.

“Site geometry [is] constrained by Rail corridor, Montefiore Road (i.e. Morphett street bridge) and River Torrens (it is noted that spanning over the rail corridor may be possible),” the report details, further warning that the potential for alternate land uses such as hotels, retail and mixed use “could be limited due to [the] Arena being incorporated”.
Advertisement

There was also the potential for contaminated soil and groundwater requiring remediation.

The site would also require the acquisition and demolition of the existing Rowing Club, causing “possible heritage issues”.

Interestingly, at the time, the south-bank proposal was deemed the less expensive, estimated at $561 million, compared to $613 million for the Memorial Drive expansion.

The option west of Morphett St on the north bank was deemed to have “optimal use of existing land potential for urban place-making” and was considered the “most balanced entertainment and sporting precinct location with excellent 
place-making ability”.

“The site strengthens [the] urban precinct north of the river to build and further leverage the
 existing Riverbank entertainment precinct south of the river [including] full utilisation of Pinky Flat as a community space between existing facilities and [the] new facility,” the report reads.

It also has “excellent flexibility for Goods, Patrons and Transport Access”..

[SRW]

Also:
'Bid to bring city stadium proposals into light' as reported by InDaily

[Norman]

On a tangent, I think a stadium at the golf course would be a great catalyst for better pedestrian facilities at Morphett Road and a footbridge across the river towards the hospital.

[ozisnowman]

From this article: https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/02/13/ ... t-reveals/

Preferred city stadium options fail to measure up, report reveals
News

EXCLUSIVE | The two major locations being considered for a prospective new city stadium complex were ranked at the bottom of a list of options for a similar plan presented to the former Labor Government, InDaily can reveal.

Tom Richardson
@tomrichardson
Print article
An option for a new arena at Memorial Drive did not rank highly in a report to the previous Labor Government. Photo: Tony Lewis / InDaily

A second city sports and entertainment hub was officially placed on the policy agenda last week with confirmation the Marshall Government was “actively planning additional major inner-city and sporting entertainment infrastructure”.

It’s understood plans for a covered stadium have been prepared for consideration but a specific site has not been earmarked, with competing proposals for an arena on either side of the River Torrens.

The first would be adjacent the existing Adelaide Oval and would include a major revamp of the Memorial Drive Tennis hub, while the second would involve a more complex build above the railyards on the river’s southern bank.
Advertisement

The same precinct must also house the promised new Women’s and Children’s Hospital.

But InDaily can reveal options for a similar plan were presented to the former Weatherill Government in the lead-up to the last state election, in a report prepared by Adelaide engineering consultants Aurecon and obtained by InDaily.

The report detailed a vision “to build on South Australia’s strategic competitive advantage through the further development of a vibrant riverbank precinct by adding a world class contemporary live entertainment and sporting events facility to assist SA in achieving its economic priorities”.

The analysis details options for six prospective sites “for an entertainment facility to cater for 15,000 patrons” – around the current seating capacity of Coopers Stadium at Hindmarsh.

However, the brief sought “flexibility to host sporting events – namely tennis and court based sports”, with parking provisions for a minimum of 300 cars.

The Arena footprint was “not based on a detailed functional brief” but rather “based on benchmarking of similar facilities for Entertainment, Tennis, Netball and Basketball through Aurecon and our partners’ significant experience with similar facilities globally” .

The analysis is “based on an initial high level assessment only for the purpose of facilitating a shortlisting of potential site options and progression into next phases”, noting that “no demand analysis has been undertaken to confirm the suitability” of the plan, which “should be undertaken as part of the business case”.

A second city stadium proposal was never adopted as policy by Labor.

The six Riverbank precinct sites considered were:

Expanding Memorial Drive Tennis Arena
Building on the corner of Montefiore Road and War Memorial Drive
Pinky Flat
West of Morphett Street Bridge, South of the River
West of Morphett Street Bridge, North of the River
North Adelaide’s Par 3 Golf Course

The Memorial Drive upgrade appears closely aligned to the existing concept currently being proposed, while there was only one option contemplated on the Torrens’ south bank, a build west of Morphett Street Bridge – the location believed to be favoured by the Adelaide Venue Management Corporation, which runs the Convention Centre, Entertainment Centre and Coopers Stadium.

The latter two are expected to be sold off if the south-bank option gains favour.

Unused land west of Morphett St and south of the river. Photo: Tony Lewis / InDaily

Aurecon also briefly examined a further option at the Government’s request – an expansion of the existing Adelaide Entertainment Centre facility “to consider potential of additional seats without the synergies of a multipurpose entertainment venue”.

However, that option was given little weight as it did “not comply with the requirements of the rest of the options, for example, accommodation of world’s best practice in contemporary entertainment event facilities [and] other sports to the required standards”.

The six other options were assessed against various site comparison criteria and given a weighted score, which saw the proposal to expand Memorial Drive ranked sixth, and the proposal to build on the south bank west of Morphett St ranked fifth.

The highest-ranked option was west of Morphett St Bridge on the north side of the Torrens, with a new build on the corner of Montefiore Road and Memorial Drive coming second.

An extract from the report.

The expansion of the existing Tennis arena was summarised as having insufficient site geometry, and “significantly impacting” the existing Adelaide Oval and Next Generation facilities.

The authors warned of a “congested feel” within the existing urban environment, noting “concurrent events with other existing facilities [would be] extremely difficult to manage”.

However, the site was deemed to have “good pedestrian access with [the potential for] grade separation of pedestrians and transport”, although it has been reported that the current plan could see the road thoroughfare closed altogether instead.

The south-bank proposal was deemed to have the potential to “continue place-making south of the river and optimise the integration potential with existing entertainment [and] hospitality facilities”, with “excellent proximity to existing public transport facilities”.

A summary of the options.

However, the report warned pedestrian access was “challenging to navigate” and would require “event overlay” to ferry attendees safely over busy transport corridors.

“Site geometry [is] constrained by Rail corridor, Montefiore Road (i.e. Morphett street bridge) and River Torrens (it is noted that spanning over the rail corridor may be possible),” the report details, further warning that the potential for alternate land uses such as hotels, retail and mixed use “could be limited due to [the] Arena being incorporated”.
Advertisement

There was also the potential for contaminated soil and groundwater requiring remediation.

The site would also require the acquisition and demolition of the existing Rowing Club, causing “possible heritage issues”.

Interestingly, at the time, the south-bank proposal was deemed the less expensive, estimated at $561 million, compared to $613 million for the Memorial Drive expansion.

The option west of Morphett St on the north bank was deemed to have “optimal use of existing land potential for urban place-making” and was considered the “most balanced entertainment and sporting precinct location with excellent 
place-making ability”.

“The site strengthens [the] urban precinct north of the river to build and further leverage the
 existing Riverbank entertainment precinct south of the river [including] full utilisation of Pinky Flat as a community space between existing facilities and [the] new facility,” the report reads.

It also has “excellent flexibility for Goods, Patrons and Transport Access”..

Outdated report based on Labour's preferred sites - For example it notes limited ability to expand on current Memorial Drive footprint when its been detailed that the new proposal is looking at buying out Adelaide City Councils lease for Next Gen. If you factor in Memorial Drive and Next Gen that should be enough space for a 15,000 seat basketball/tennis/netball/entertainment stadium. They can also have some extra courts on land west of AO. But what is silly in all of this, when the upgraded the other courts behind and west of NEXT GEN is when they should have built any underground carparking under those. Typical short sited planning/thinking.

[SRW]

On a tangent, I think a stadium at the golf course would be a great catalyst for better pedestrian facilities at Morphett Road and a footbridge across the river towards the hospital.

Tbh, although I'm fairly tepid on the idea of a new stadium overall, this would be the worst option in my view. Better pedestrian facilities to what end? There's nothing proximate. At least the Memorial Drive and Railways site would overflow crowds more directly to the Riverbank and West End, thus providing critical mass for better amenities.

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

[bits]

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

Government owned sports facilities are not an issue on the parklands.
There is endless examples of existing structures that have been built.
People are against generic business in particular private generic business being on parklands.

[SRW]

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

Government owned sports facilities are not an issue on the parklands.
There is endless examples of existing structures that have been built.
People are against generic business in particular private generic business being on parklands.

Debatable.
It's the 'endless' part that becomes the problem.
Yes.

[Ho Really]

On a tangent, I think a stadium at the golf course would be a great catalyst for better pedestrian facilities at Morphett Road and a footbridge across the river towards the hospital.

Tbh, although I'm fairly tepid on the idea of a new stadium overall, this would be the worst option in my view. Better pedestrian facilities to what end? There's nothing proximate. At least the Memorial Drive and Railways site would overflow crowds more directly to the Riverbank and West End, thus providing critical mass for better amenities.

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

Government owned sports facilities are not an issue on the parklands.
There is endless examples of existing structures that have been built.
People are against generic business in particular private generic business being on parklands.

The golf course should NOT be touched in all circumstances! It should be retained in its entirety not because it is parklands but because of its location. Adelaide is one of a few cities in the world that has a metropolitan golf course only minutes from the CBD and major hotels. I've said this before, this is a jewel that has not been marketed well enough and has potential to attract more tourists.

Cheers

[ml69]

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

Government owned sports facilities are not an issue on the parklands.
There is endless examples of existing structures that have been built.
People are against generic business in particular private generic business being on parklands.

There was a lot of angst when the government proposed permanent Clipsal grandstands in the parklands about a decade ago.

[ml69]

On a tangent, I think a stadium at the golf course would be a great catalyst for better pedestrian facilities at Morphett Road and a footbridge across the river towards the hospital.

Tbh, although I'm fairly tepid on the idea of a new stadium overall, this would be the worst option in my view. Better pedestrian facilities to what end? There's nothing proximate. At least the Memorial Drive and Railways site would overflow crowds more directly to the Riverbank and West End, thus providing critical mass for better amenities.

And this is to say nothing of parklands violation.

I’m leaning more and more to a city stadium location where the current University of Adelaide oval is, with a new footbridge over the Torrens connecting to Kintore Ave.