Perth's new stadium and unicorns

[St James]

It seems to be progressing nicely.

[Egan]

New WA Treasurer said he doesn't agree with a billion dollars being spent on the stadium, but that the government has made its decision on this.

[Rob]

New WA Treasurer said he doesn't agree with a billion dollars being spent on the stadium, but that the government has made its decision on this.

He's a seppo, therefore his opinion on anything to do with sports in this country is void.

[yob]

http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western ... fd38b2b828

New football stadium will end up costing taxpayers $3 billion: WA Opposition

[gyfox]

0.05% of the size of the annual economy when annualised over a design life of 50 years.

I'm interested in the management arrangement that they finally end up with.

[yob]

Better choose some neutral colours for the decor if they want to get 50 years out of it.

Show me a 50 year old top tier stadium in Australia that hasn't "required" - structurally, economically, culturally - redevelopment during its life.

The MCC is jumping up and down for a $100 million+ renovation of the Great Southern Stand. The flagship stadium has only just made it past 20 years old.

[gyfox]

Been a long time since I worked in the field but for concrete structures AS3600 required a design life between 40 and 60 years so I went half way. Each part of the asset has a different design life and its normally expected that there will be major refurbishments every 20 years or so. Minor refurbishments are normally funded from reserves accrued over the life of the asset. Major refurbishments may require capital injections if not enough has been accrued. All this is beside the point. The point I was making is that you can make a figure look big or small. The value of a project to the community needs to be part of the justification of it and once it is approved and started hysterical comments, like these from the Opposition, about cost are irrelevant.

[yob]

Been a long time since I worked in the field but for concrete structures AS3600 required a design life between 40 and 60 years so I went half way. Each part of the asset has a different design life and its normally expected that there will be major refurbishments every 20 years or so. Minor refurbishments are normally funded from reserves accrued over the life of the asset. Major refurbishments may require capital injections if not enough has been accrued. All this is beside the point. The point I was making is that you can make a figure look big or small. The value of a project to the community needs to be part of the justification of it and once it is approved and started hysterical comments, like these from the Opposition, about cost are irrelevant.

I understand the middle ground you're aiming at. And yeah, it's a sound point.

But as sound a point as it is, it's also a little beside the overarching point of this thread - that this stadium, along with WA, is a complete muppet.

[Boba Fett]

The Opposition is also doing the usual trick of including estimated transport infrastructure costs and associated speculative borrowing costs to blow out the apparent cost of building the stadium itself.

It's inevitable a new stadium will be built - the longer they delay, the more expensive it will be. So get on with it already.

[Rob]

Using that logic you can triple the price of every single thing the government spends it's money on.

[budge27]

Found this observation over on Skyscrapercity
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost. ... count=4344
Some Interesting aspects if true

[yob]

There's enough unique identifiers in that post that the "junior" in question won't be getting another job in the sector.

[Egan]

This is the same opposition who claim that we should have upgraded subiaco oval...

Costs are already going down so this three billion dollar cost looks more ridiculous by the day...

[yob]

This is the same opposition who claim that we should have upgraded subiaco oval...

You would've had seats to sit in for 15 years, rather than creating fake urgency for instant gratification that has yielded 2 shovels of dirt. It's called opportunity cost.

Slow and steady wins the race. English football clubs own their stadium, have large capacities, and sell it out every week for a reason. They chip away at it, expanding as they go. It's actually beautiful to watch if you're a fan of stadiums, rather than a wrecking ball/construction enthusiast that loves stadiums for the same reason as the love of skyscrapers and bridges.

No doubt this will be a great stadium, if and when. But everything else about it disappoints.

[Egan]

As many said before Subiaco is a compromised site with hostile NIMBY's. Burswood actually rejuvenates a whole new part of town that wouldn't otherwise be activated.

Long term thinking, something that the state usually doesn't do won out in the minds of voters.

I am looking forward to taking photos for the forum, moving about 1.5km from the new stadium in the next few weeks