Subiaco Redevelopment

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 9:43 pm

It seems this development has been hurried along by the massive interest in a new stadium for Perth. This will result in the western end (three tier stand end) to be redeveloped, and I would think this would include the old two tier stand ends with the benched seating.

Calling for expressions of interest, they can expand that end incredibly in my mind. Hopefully it pushes the 60,000 mark with a development.

It seems the Eagles will have a major part in the development with a supporters club becoming part of the stadium. (They will now never ever move from Subiaco)

The West Coast supporter's club is expected to be a key component of the proposed redevelopment of the Western end of Subiaco Oval.

The WAFC has now called for expressions of interest on the redevelopment.

WAFC chairman Neale Fong said he believed the proposed dividend scheme helped guarantee the financial future of football while allowing
both clubs to retain funds.

http://thegame.thewest.com.au/20040729/ ... 28775.html

mikeyraw · Post by **mikeyraw** » Fri Jul 30, 2004 10:27 pm

Sounds great. Those benches are a blight on the ground.

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 12:14 am

Firstly, i personally think this is just another revival of "what ifs" etc. They've known about the problem for years, shortly after the last Subiaco redevelopment. Are these people thick? don't they realise that in another few years the 8,000 seats MAX that are added by creating a new 3 tier stand (to modern standards not cramping as many people in like the current old stands) in its place will not be able to cater for demand. Wasn't the SA mentality behind its footy park redevelopment "build it and they will come". It fits this perfectly, record WA memberships, everything practically selling out, heck they could just about schedule an under16's game and draw a decent crowd. The fact is once again this lacks foresight, after this where is there to go? (without massive infrastructure changes)

The revival of older visions has clearly been fuelled by the WAFC's recent decision to cut West Coast royalties. Bout bloody time, and now with the new eagles supporter HQ being proposed, or temporary investment facilities they plan to shove em together. I think that’s stupid. The supporter club should be near the venue, but not within it. I don't want my money going towards a facility which no doubt will end up being used by other teams and people who have nothing to do with our club.

this is annoying me to buggery. Don't they realise they're simply putting a patch on a huge gaping wound? Subiaco is not longer viable and they just don’t want to accept it.

mike

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 12:46 am

this is annoying me to buggery. Don't they realise they're simply putting a patch on a huge gaping wound? Subiaco is not longer viable and they just don’t want to accept it.

Theyve just spent 35 million on it and have a massive loan, so of course their delusional, the only sane option is to keep spending money on this open wound. Then maybe they may have some brilliant architect that can make a way of getting it to the stadium size we believe it should be.

I know Tom has done a few designs of a third tier around most of the ground and this looks very nice.

Just get the Footy Commission to look at your designs

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:02 am

Honestly, i think we would have a better idea of what to bloody plan and cater for. It frustrates me, these people at the WAFC going in circles then robbing eagles of their money to stay afloat.

Has Tom shown you these drawings before? what they look like. Where is Tom these days

I'd love to see them, although as far as even altering a light fitting at Subi i think is a complete waste of time and money

mike

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:08 am

It was previously posted on the forum.

Do some fishing

Anyways Im not against any stadium development even if it is only in the short term as long as the WACA get into more shambles Im happy and this is happening all the time now

Stadium developments of Stadiums that lack foresight mean nothing when you have a monster of a shamble in the WACA. We just have to be severely worried about what this bunch of twits throw up next.

Beware Perthsmike now Subiaco is getting bigger, watch for the twits to develop their stadium bigger, it happens all the time, constantly in competition.

Maybe they will decide to finish Stage 1 and start Stage 2, theirs about 5 stages left to be completed by this delusional bunch.

yob · Post by **yob** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 1:33 pm

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:07 pm

Well in thewest this morning Subiaco was planned to increase to 50,000 people and as I guessed the old three tier and second tier stand would be demolished with a brand new three tier stand, supporters club, a dockers merchandising area, and would be funded by local business's apparently as the Footy Commission look to get their debt to 8 million within 5 years.

Maybe the capacity is too small, but anyways 50,000 will be better then nothing, at least we have 7,000 extra seats and it will be comparative to Brisbanes largest stadium of 53,000 and it slashes the advantage that Melbourne has in Rugby Union circles.

We just need Thomsons Lake

yob · Post by **yob** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:34 pm

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 2:38 pm

Nah I quite like what Subiaco looks like, I dont personally like Football Parks design, but I like the fact it is actually not restricted like Subiaco is due to Subis inner city constraints, which would be easily averted if we went south.

Anyways Subiaco will say yes as this will make the stadium a fully modern stadium, last section of the ground that is over 9 years old.

Heritage listed gates, they will stay put, they will never leave the ground.

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 3:26 pm

yob wrote:Subiaco is friggin ugly. Sorry. Demolish the whole damn thing and start over.

Which parts are you referring to. 80% of the Stadium is beautiful; lots of glass, feature walls, excellent landscaping etc So I'd have to firmly disagree with it being "ugly" The only scabby section I can think of is the old 2 tier stand. I'll try take some pics at tomorrows game to show you what i mean.

yob wrote:WTF?

The SA mentality behind the last redevelopment was "build it because there's 7,000 people on a waiting list for a Crows membership!" I'd know, I was in it! (although I had ground membership in the SANFL member's reserve at the time).

Well if it wasn't it should have been. Its true anyway, with Perth's current demand building a larger stadium will pull larger crowds. simple.

Egan, any decision to redevelop Subi IMO is bordering on WACA mentality. And Thomson Lake will almost certainly not go ahead if this does, especially if the government assist financially. You don't seem to realise how big of a problem this is. Sure, getting a larger stadium is great and all but it is certainly not in the best interests of Perth or WA and when it somes to something like this, foresight is everything.

mike

PS. I can just see how successful the supporters club within the stadium will be when its an eagles away game (ie eagle fans at the venue) and docker home game on the same day. Ain't gonna work.

Egan · Post by **Egan** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 5:09 pm

Yeah, well I am sure the Government wont even lift a cent to pay for this development. They wouldnt even pay for the last redevelopment.

You will find Perthsmike that the Footy Commission will one day be no longer and you will have two different stadiums for the Dockers and the Eagles.

As I suggested in the Burswood Thread, the Eagles would develop their stadium to 50,000 or more hopefully the stands will be able to hold more then 50,000 and then the Dockers would play out of Thomsons Lake.

I can't see Subiaco ever going perthsmike, the Eagles have a multi-million dollar state of the art headquaters complex, have got offices and administration and it is basically their traditional home.

You would have to see that the Eagles will not be moving, so we have to move on and say well any development is good development even if it does lack foresight as in the future a new stadium for soccer world cup bid or commonwealth Games could see a new stadium for the team. When the WAFC see the Dockers averaging 35,000 this year, it seems feasible that the march south into a new stadium is very likely.

Egan, any decision to redevelop Subi IMO is bordering on WACA mentality

Are we being serious here Perthsmike

The grounds called Twitsville not the WACA

perthsmike · Post by **perthsmike** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 5:43 pm

We don't agree on much do we Egan lol. makes forum life more interesting

ok, i've thought about it from your perspective and it does make logical sense in theory, although it seems very risky in practise and would involve a lot of people coming together and agreeing (including the WACA)

Firstly, we would need private investors and developers willing to build a new 40,000 seat stadium (2 X 50,000 stadiums are out of the question) down south to be used as Fremantle's home, and another willing to redevelop Subiaco as West Coast heartland. Now don't get me wrong I would love it, but to be perfectly honest, it aint gonna happen.

Secondly, we would need a coming together and organisation of the sporting codes, AFL, cricket, and International events. Not so hard, apart from the WACA refusing to budge making the new Thomson Lake stadium unviable. 11 home games and if lucky, 1 final are not enough to support a 40,000seater stadium.

Going by this idea (ie the building of a new stadium and proposed redevelopment of Subiaco) how do you think it can work?

mike

stadiumking · Post by **stadiumking** » Sat Jul 31, 2004 8:24 pm

perthsmike wrote:Has Tom shown you these drawings before? what they look like. Where is Tom these days I'd love to see them, although as far as even altering a light fitting at Subi i think is a complete waste of time and money
mike

just to pipe up in the middle of your discussion with my two bob: could we maybe get a look at these pictures from tom....i remeber when he mentioned it before.

i think subi is a really nice-looking ground. the modern stuff is stylish and thoughtful.........i was surprised at the old benches still being there though when i was there.

tom · Post by **tom** » Sun Aug 01, 2004 12:01 am

I've never posted pictures before, I remember someone did but I don't know who. My pictures are just scale drawings (I'm only in first year Architecture) which show it is possible to have new 3rd tier on the northern wing but the ground would most likely suffer asthetically.