Building a new stadium in perth... at last.

[Egan]

Well a new site and another front page of stadium news hits our paper

What dissapoints me is that 55,000 is the figure being touted as the capacity needed...60,000 would be far more appropriate.

New plan to build 55,000-seat stadium in city

Wellington St Square site...the homeless will be in depression upon hearing their home is about to be ripped up...close enough to claisebrook and Mciver Train Stations...is a bit of a shock so will assess the suitability in a day or two.

JESSICA STRUTT

Perth's proposed 55,000-seat stadium should be built in the heart of the city and not at Subiaco Oval, official guidelines adopted by a State Government task force have revealed.

Documents obtained by The West Australian reveal possible sites for the stadium will be judged on whether they are within a 1.5km walk of the central business district and a 1km walk of Perth train station. Wellington Square in East Perth is being touted as a preferred site of consultants employed to assist the stadium task force.

Groups lobbying to determine the stadium's location said yesterday they were concerned about the new criteria and that it contradicted the task force terms of reference.

The task force is examining whether the WACA Ground or Subiaco Oval should be redeveloped to meet the needs of Perth's sporting community over the next 20 years, or whether a new, shared stadium should be built from scratch at a cost of about $500 million.

The task force consultants, international architecture company HOK, developed the site evaluation criteria. Potential sites will receive a rating based on a "criteria scorecard" and the consultants will then provide a shortlist of preferred sites.

The scorecard puts the future of Subiaco Oval under a cloud as it is located at least 3km from Perth's CBD.

Subiaco Oval, the WACA Ground, Claremont Showground, Belmont Park racecourse and Cockburn central were sites identified early on for Continued on page 4Stadium team favours CBD consideration. The consultants have since identified other possible sites, including Wellington Square, Members Equity Stadium and Gloucester Park.

Task force head John Langoulant said sites in the CBD had much merit but the task force would still consider sites more than 1.5km from the CBD. The scorecard was only one of the factors that would determine the successful site, he said.

Royal Agricultural Society of WA president Ivan Solomon was disappointed there appeared to be a desire to have the stadium in Perth's CBD. The society will still make a submission to the consultants addressing the criteria by mid-January.

"I personally feel it's a very retrograde step having all these sporting facilities . . . within such a short distance of the CBD," he said.

City of Cockburn mayor Stephen Lee said it was clear the new criteria thrust upon proponents would disadvantage his city's bid.

WA Football Commission chief executive Wayne Bradshaw would not comment.

Members Equity Stadium manager Peter Bauchop said his preference was for a multi-purpose rectangular stadium.

www.thewest.com.au

[Egan]

Looking at a road map...it is only 250m from McIver Train Station...which has the luxury on also being on both the Armadale, Thornlie and Midland Train Lines...

I fear about the traffic congestion in that area though...

Claisebrook Train Station is only 400m away as well...

[RobertHeatleyStand]

What dissapoints me is that 55,000 is the figure being touted as the capacity needed...60,000 would be far more appropriate.

I would rather see a modern 55k stadium now that can be extended to 70+ in the future.

[Egan]

What dissapoints me is that 55,000 is the figure being touted as the capacity needed...60,000 would be far more appropriate.

I would rather see a modern 55k stadium now that can be extended to 70+ in the future.

Hmm the problem is that 60,000 would be a capacity that could be viably constructed...mainly because of the current strength of the West Coast Eagles...but it just supports the claim that the Government only look at the present...not into the future...but 55,000 will be a good start.

Eagles would sell it out...tips are that 5000 bandwagoners are on the waiting list and they would easily sell remaining tickets...

Even the Dockers have 1000 more members then this time last year...and if they have a successful start to the season, they could sell out more non-derby games next year...at present the capacity at Subiaco is perfect for the Dockers...

[quidgybo]

I think the point RHS is making is based on the ultimate capacity. If you build a Telstra Stadium style "one-piece" stadium at 60,000 up front you're pretty well stuck at that capacity (with minor extensions). But if you work with a design with built in expansion to 70,000 or 80,000 then we won't be repeating this exericse of building a new ground from scratch in 20 years when 60,000 is regularly selling out. That said, I agree that 55,000 in itself seems too small and even with built in expansion you've got to wonder whether building something bigger to start with would be cheaper than having to fund an expansion five to ten years early.

Leigh.

[Rob]

Wellington Square? FFS, where are the cars going to go?

It's not like Perth has a first class train network that everyone uses. The fact of life is that most people still drive cars, and unless you give a stadium good car access, then it's going to suck.

Belmont Park is a far better option.

[Egan]

Wellington Square? FFS, where are the cars going to go?

It's not like Perth has a first class train network that everyone uses. The fact of life is that most people still drive cars, and unless you give a stadium good car access, then it's going to suck.

Belmont Park is a far better option.

Perth has a pretty damn good train service I think.

I think Wellington Park is disastrous...but I think what they are trying to do is make people use public transport...when I went to the press conference they were saying about the low rate of public transport users that go to Subiaco Oval...getting a site like Wellington Square will force people to use the great train and bus services that run along wellington st and McIver and Claisebrook Train Stations.

My vote is Cockburn...has and always will be...Belmont Park is probably not even a consideration now with the billion dollar redevelopment about to take place...

[yob]

I am very interested by the Wellington Square idea.

[Egan]

It is interesting...and if successful not only could it become a notable stadium closer then any other major stadium in the country...it would change a culture of how Perth goes and watches its sport...

But a stadium that close to the CBD would get an amazing amount of walkup supporters...it is literally 5mins walk from the CBD malls.

But anyways, exciting times ahead for stadium fanatics...the latest development throws a spanner in the works.

[Rob]

Wellington Square? FFS, where are the cars going to go?

It's not like Perth has a first class train network that everyone uses. The fact of life is that most people still drive cars, and unless you give a stadium good car access, then it's going to suck.

Belmont Park is a far better option.

Perth has a pretty damn good train service I think.

I think it's ok given the southern service, but Perth people still rely heavily on cars, and it's ridiculous to think that anything less than 60-70% of people going to a football match are going to drive there. And Wellington Square is simply atrocious for those people.

I think Wellington Park is disastrous...but I think what they are trying to do is make people use public transport...when I went to the press conference they were saying about the low rate of public transport users that go to Subiaco Oval...getting a site like Wellington Square will force people to use the great train and bus services that run along wellington st and McIver and Claisebrook Train Stations.

Which is insane ideology. You create stadiums for people, not the other way around. Otherwise you end up with a white elephant.

My vote is Cockburn...has and always will be...Belmont Park is probably not even a consideration now with the billion dollar redevelopment about to take place...

I wouldn't mind Cockburn, but it would appear to be a bit far out. And the toast would never go for it, you're not going to find too many locations deeper in Dockers territory.

And while Belmont Park is not perfect (the road access could be a tad better - 1 road leading to it will surely create massive traffic jams), I think it's probably the best we've got.
Although has anyone considered the space between the Esplanade and Barrack Square? Good road access from the freeway, lots of parking, a train station within spitting distance.

[Egan]

Which is insane ideology. You create stadiums for people, not the other way around. Otherwise you end up with a white elephant.

Is one of the key ideology that HOK Sport is seeking to implement into a taskforce recommendation...it states anti-social behaviour is also reduced if a stadium has good access.

The prospect is that they want to make a similar success story to Suncorp Stadium, which has apparently 75% go to a sporting event on public transport compared to Subiaco's 25%.

Whether we disagree or agree with it is not something we have a choice behind...I am 100% sure a new Multi-purpose stadium will have public transport as its major priority to get Perth people using a system...that is greatly ignored, despite the funding that is provided for it.

I think with all of the major stadiums in the eastern states, MCG, Telstra Stadium, Suncorp Stadium...they all use public transport far more effectively then what we do here...and one of the ways it can do this, is to get a location close to the CBD, but with no car parking facilities for miles around...

The Weagles fans will still want to be seen, so thus the crowds won't go down...and you add to the massive walk up crowd due to the accessibilty of being able to walk 5mins from shopping in the CBD to attending a Dockers v Essendon match...I know it will be attractive to me attending more sports events if I was in the city at the time...

Anyhow the next briefing will be in March, we will find out more then.

[Rob]

Which is insane ideology. You create stadiums for people, not the other way around. Otherwise you end up with a white elephant.

Is one of the key ideology that HOK Sport is seeking to implement into a taskforce recommendation...it states anti-social behaviour is also reduced if a stadium has good access.

The prospect is that they want to make a similar success story to Suncorp Stadium, which has apparently 75% go to a sporting event on public transport compared to Subiaco's 25%.

Which might explain why it's generally half empty.

Whether we disagree or agree with it is not something we have a choice behind...I am 100% sure a new Multi-purpose stadium will have public transport as its major priority to get Perth people using a system...that is greatly ignored, despite the funding that is provided for it.

Without question, proximity to a train line is absolutely critical. But that doesn't mean you build a stadium with no access for cars, thereby locking out over half your customers. It's like building a new Maccas without a drive thru.

I think with all of the major stadiums in the eastern states, MCG, Telstra Stadium, Suncorp Stadium...they all use public transport far more effectively then what we do here...and one of the ways it can do this, is to get a location close to the CBD, but with no car parking facilities for miles around...

Sydney and Melbourne also have far superior train systems in that they are far more extensive and frequent. Ours isn't, and in the areas in which it is there are so few stations that 95% of the people that would use it have to drive at least to the train station anyway. And if you're going to drive to the train station you may as well drive to the ground.

The Weagles fans will still want to be seen, so thus the crowds won't go down...and you add to the massive walk up crowd due to the accessibilty of being able to walk 5mins from shopping in the CBD to attending a Dockers v Essendon match...I know it will be attractive to me attending more sports events if I was in the city at the time...

I don't really rate that as a major attraction. In a 55,000 seat stadium, a huge majority of the patrons attending a football match will be season ticket holders, and most of the remaining patrons will have pre-purchased a ticket. Unless the plan is to build an 80,000 seat stadium, walk up crowds will be virtually nil as there won't be the seats available.

Perth sporting culture is not comparable to Melbourne sporting culture which is all about getting a ticket on the day, and Sydney sporting culture which is about never getting a ticket and going home to watch it on the TV.

[quidgybo]

Surely it is a truth of any city over a million people or so that any stadium with good car access can only be situated well outside the city hub. ie. either deep into the suburbs or on the periphery of the greater metropolitan area. Either way the stadium becomes a real pain to access for those on the opposite side of town and in reality only accessible to those with a car and living on the same side of the city (and not wishing to drink).

Once you start talking cities this big, the primary focus has to be public transport access. The car is a distant secondary consideration and an option that should be actively discouraged. Regardless of how you cut it, any stadium that is built in the centre (within 1km to 2km of the CBD) of an existing major metropolis is going to create traffic chaos whenever a large crowd turns up. But as I've pointed out above, any stadium not built in the centre is going to greatly disadvantage large parts of the catchment area and hurt crowds. These are directly competing factors leading to the question - what is the primary purpose of the stadium - easy traffic access or large attendances?

IMO the aim has to be to fill the stadium and you just need to live with the traffic consequences of that. It is the nature of a big city. The only mitigation you can take is to situate the stadium in such a way that public transport access from all parts of the greater metropolitan area is as easy as possible and likewise the car access is so bad as to make it an option that for most just isn't even a consideration. IMO that means an inner city site with little or no parking provision.

Leigh.

[Egan]

The critics are coming out strongly...and really no surprise that they are...

www.thewest.com.au

Perth's proposed 55,000-seat stadium should be built at either Gloucester Park or the WACA Ground before Wellington Square is considered, according to Perth City Council.

Wellington Square in East Perth has been identified by consultants to the State Government's stadium task force, joining sites including Subiaco Oval, Claremont Showground and Cockburn Central as possible locations for a new stadium.

A criteria scorecard developed by the consultants, international architecture company HOK, favours sites that are within 1.5km of the CDB and 1km of Perth station.

Wellington Square satisfies the criteria and is also close to McIver and Claisebrook stations but there are concerns that surrounding streets would not be able to cope with vehicle traffic and parking, a major bugbear of residents near Subiaco Oval.

Lord Mayor Peter Nattrass said he supported locating the stadium close to the CDB but he doubted there was sufficient space at Wellington Square.

He had no objection in principle to a stadium being built at Wellington Square, but if the WACA Ground or Gloucester Park were available, they would be better sites.

The council was yet to address the issue and had not been approached by task force chairman John Langoulant.

"In principle, the council believes it is good, not only for the city but for the public, to have these entertainment and sporting stadiums in the central city," Dr Nattrass said.

Deputy Lord Mayor Michael Sutherland said Wellington Square was a terrible suggestion. A stadium would clash with neighbouring housing and the Education Department headquarters.

The problems that Subiaco residents had experienced with Subiaco Oval would simply be transported to East Perth. "It's a semi-suburban area," he said. "There is going to be much more housing in that area in the coming years and that park is going to be a necessary lung."

[Simmo79]

On the traffic issue and Wellington Square, if its to be as close to the city as made out, wouldn’t the driving fans parking (whatever proportion) be sorted by the CBD’s already existing car parking capacity?