Subi Stadium Dramas + Beer etc

[shasta]

Claremont has been raised a few times in the studies but, as with Cockburn, it doesn't meet their requirement of being close to the CBD.
I think this is stupid as really, the CBD has nothing to do with sport and few people really live there either.

Snipped!

People aren't going to stop living in traditional areas and then you have the two growth expansions to the North and South. To me it makes the most sense to find the best location in the centre that has the best access to all parts.

Stop making sensible arguments please Burgs. On reflection I have to put away my personal preference for Cockburn. I also work about 5 mins from there and woulda been handy when i'm rostered on But I hadn't really considered people from all down the South-Eastern suburbs. Anywhere CLOSE to the CBD would be fairer all-round I've gotta admit. How much room for redevelopment would there be around Leederville Oval, anyone know?

BTW I lived in regional WA for 15 years and I agree about "Grizzleguts" completely. I think he may be getting a touch dotty in his autumn years though. In the past six months I've heard him claim to be a rugby fan and ex-player from his uni days AND praising up Rugby League ( well the round one match between Saints/Tigers anyway ) as being more exciting than "mundane like Aussie Rules". Unbelieveable but there you go

[The EnForcer]

When I think about it I don't really care where the stadium is as long as it's suitable for rugby and it's not too far from a train station.

[Burgs]

Stop making sensible arguments please Burgs.

Sorry mate, terrible habit that I must break
Not sure of potential around Leederville, I imagine they will be feeling the squeeze being an inner city suburb though?
That's the most important criteria for mine too TEF, rail access.
Followed closely by ample car parking.

[The EnForcer]

Sorry mate, terrible habit that I must break
Not sure of potential around Leederville, I imagine they will be feeling the squeeze being an inner city suburb though?
That's the most important criteria for mine too TEF, rail access.
Followed closely by ample car parking.

Oh forgot, serves alcohol efficiently.

[Burgs]

Should be a tap on the back of every second seat

[niggle]

Has anyone thought of redeveloping Belmont Park? Its got a bit going for it:
- Lots of land
- On the Farmer Freeway
- On the Armadale train line. I think it already has a train station
- Not much housing around there
- Walking distance to Burswood
- 3 minute train journey to Perth
- They are already planning a big redevelopment of the Burswood penninsula including bars and entertainment

[Burgs]

I think that is one of the second string of options being considered niggle, have certainly heard it mentioned before anyway.
I'm not sure if it is there or Gloucster Park (?trots next to WACA anyway) that the owners have decided to do their own project rather than allow the Government to redevlope it.

[The EnForcer]

Yeah Belmont park has been mentioned but it doesn't meet the citeria of being CBD. Still can't get my head round why it has to be CBD. With the infrastructure we have in Perth that needn't be a primary restriction.

[shasta]

There's a propsal to redevelop Belmont and locate a "new" metro racetrack at the current Lark Hill training complex just south of Rockingham. That land must be worth squillions.

But, according to an aquiantance who trains horses at Ascot, the majority of the city people in the industry are opposed. They favour redeveloping the track and including a track for harness racing as well. This would free up Gloucester Park/ WACA, I suppose but that's where it gets a bit messy. Too many intersets involved there. Anyway it misses out on the rail transport so it's a loser on that alone.

[Mambo No. 5]

Leederville would never be an option.

Way too many big buildings all around it. Tafe, Council Offices, Rec Centre, Government buildings.

[htbd]

Loads of great feedback and suggestions... IMHO - I generally don't care where it is as long as...
1) It actually happens sometime soon!;
2) The ground respects the code and is preferably rectangular;
3) The ground allows enough seating capacity to cater for international test matches (what a great draw card that would be!); AND
4) The ground incorporates smart, cutting-edge design to allow fast track access for ALL supporters to get to the bar and back in record time
Am I asking too much? LOL

[Burgs]

Stadium Update
Thursday, 30 March 2006
from: RugbyWA

There has been much speculation, most of it erroneous, as to RugbyWA's position on a future playing venue for Tooheys New Super 14 and 'block buster' rugby fixtures. Hopefully, the following will clarify our position:

RugbyWA is likely to support the development of a 60,000 capacity multi purpose stadium that can accommodate AFL, athletics and 'block buster' rugby, cricket and soccer fixtures.

Our members have clearly expressed their desire for a rectangle stadium. Accordingly, RugbyWA and the WACA have held discussions into the prospect of a redeveloped WACA ground with a 35,000 capacity stadium and movable stand to cater for sports played on a rectangle pitch like rugby and soccer.

RugbyWA has also held discussions with other venue operators including the WA Football Commission and Allia (Members Equity).

It is incumbent on us to consider all options.

We are currently involved in negotiations with the WA Football Commission for the use of Subiaco Oval over the next two years.

There have been no discussions as to the use of the WACA for games next year at this time.

Ultimately, we are awaiting the Langoulant Review's recommendation to the State Government and the State Government's response. The fine detail of our submission to the Review is confidential.

[shasta]

Our members have clearly expressed their desire for a rectangle stadium. Accordingly, RugbyWA and the WACA have held discussions into the prospect of a redeveloped WACA ground with a 35,000 capacity stadium and movable stand to cater for sports played on a rectangle pitch like rugby and soccer.

I just don't see how the WACA could be made good enough by using a "moveable stand".
I think the record in current configuration is 28,000 - odd. Not unless they mark the playing area lengthwise between the Lillee Marsh and Members with moveable stands (and by this I suppose they mean those scaffold type stands they used to have at ME) along the touchlines.
This would certainly piss the WACA members off, not to mention the corporates. I went to enough Rugby League matches at the WACA to understand just how unsuitable it was. It was a big factor in their dwindling crowds, for sure.

[Egan]

Well, what wasn't included in the press release was the discussions between the Force and the Town of Vincent and State Government for the MES upgrade that I reported some time ago

O'Meara stated " We are in discussions with the Town of Vincent and the State Government about increasing the capacity of Members Equity but those discussions are ongoing and have yet to reach a conclusion".

The current configuration of the WACA means the stadium can only hold 20,000 and 22,000 with temporary stands.

Shasta - The WACA is much different and the square wicket area is rectangular...the WACA is much better suited to rectangular sports these days.

Most of it Erroneous speculation? The people I have talked to knew exactly what I was talking about...I hope they weren't inferring to my articles.

Retractable Seating at the WACA I reckon they are touting, It would probably mean the demolition of the Inverarity, Prindiville Stands and a new 15-20,000 grandstand being placed on that site (and movable for cricket)

[shasta]

Just had a look at the WACA seating plan to refresh my memory. Looks the same as 10 years ago to me. Demolishing the Prindiville and Inverarity stands would work, but in the context of ending up with only capacity for 35000? It's a massive undertaking and would not likely be in the ballpark of $25 mil that the State committed for a stadium upgrade. Something like this or the ME upgrade may be on the cards if those wankers at the AFL stick with their line. Matter of fact hope the Govt tells them to stick it and the AFL can fund any redevelopment of Subi and redirect funds to Rugby/Fudbol