Future NRL Stadiums

[seanoff]

Von Nueman,

the northern side of the MCG cost $10,000 / seat in 2005. I can't see any major Australian stadium being built for less than that now, even if you cut some of the facilities. The Adelaide oval was $500M+ for 40,000 seats, so $12,500 / seat.

So at AO costs $600M gets you a 48,000 seater. Its a very nice place, go and have a peek at the website.

if you want it covered. Add many $$$$$. (the engineering and the amount of steel etc needed to build a span of 200m x 200m is not trivial) If you want a covered stadium with natural turf, add more.

educated guess is close to $800 - $900M for a retractable roof 48000 seater.

 

[The Mad Hatter]

For anyone coming from st george or cronulla area's it's 3 trains to ANZ. Not too many people want to catch 6 trains to watch a football match.

No offence to Saints or their fans but they've had a good slice of funding for Kogarah and Wollongong and it's not like those ardent fans fill those venues. All this money could have been used on either ANZ or Alianz to the benefit of all RL fans.

Cronulla own their own ground. Not sure if public money has been used there but if I was the NRL I'd be helping them grow their ground and facilities as part of this redevelopment. If the sharks are smart they might even share their ground with saints on the alternate weekends and get the revenue and give saints a small cut.

 

[The Elephant In The room]

For anyone coming from st george or cronulla area's it's 3 trains to ANZ. Not too many people want to catch 6 trains to watch a football match.

It's tough getting to places from Glenorie, Warragamba and Palm Beach too. Maybe we shouldn't have any stadiums anywhere.

 

[Von Neumann]

Von Nueman,

the northern side of the MCG cost $10,000 / seat in 2005. I can't see any major Australian stadium being built for less than that now, even if you cut some of the facilities. The Adelaide oval was $500M+ for 40,000 seats, so $12,500 / seat.

So at AO costs $600M gets you a 48,000 seater. Its a very nice place, go and have a peek at the website.

if you want it covered. Add many $$$$$. (the engineering and the amount of steel etc needed to build a span of 200m x 200m is not trivial) If you want a covered stadium with natural turf, add more.

educated guess is close to $800 - $900M for a retractable roof 48000 seater.

cheers seanoff.

http://indaily.com.au/news/2014/05/07/oval-costs-wrap-610m/

in my head I had something like 400 of so for that one. So I googled. came up with this site that said final cost was 600+ as you said. But some of that, like $70m was for other stuff.

Im not picking at what you wrote its essentially the same. But considering its a redevelopment and not a new one, Im not sure how costs would work out, but I am thinking the same or a bit more as you say

So in my own napkin-sheet calculations I'd have to increase that amount to the second option (70-80%). At 70% of the $1.2b thats 840m. But it still won't be enough, especially if Lucas Oil stadium in Indianna cost some $AU900m.

Maybe, then, the cheapish looking san fran stadium stands are looking pretty good right now. I'd imagine they'd go in looking at this with costs on their mind. That stadium probably has all kinds of superfluous nonsense, and the stands alone could be suitable.

Im guessing that will still be enough to do a great stadium+something at parra like a new main stand.

___

BUT I dont think they intend to build something like that somehow. As time goes on this is going to be something I suppose we'll all become interested in, stadium building. Im still confident you can get 65,000 seats for cheaper than $AU900M as of right now. That will probably alter. $AU700 is probably doable, surely. Thats assuming they go for an enclosed group of stands -- they may well build one massive stand and make others smaller or something. I guess there's plenty of setups they could do. I suppose too that is why I was highlighting Signal Iduna Park, seems you could build something similar (and its essentially just a larger Robina stadium) for 5-600M or less. There's a lot of cost involved in reinforcing these things, and the more weight, ect you go for, the higher the price because you will be using more materials/engeneering/construction work to get it happening.

The cost of Allianz, and it matches with your estimate, in germany would probably be about $AU7-800M here probably. Thats working on the 340m euros (total cost) converted and added to todays inflation, and then the surcharge that comes with major works here, with a 100m conservative (on the high side) buffer, and then other things added in.

Not apples to apples, because to get those 68k seats they had to spend 270m euro's, then finance it, ect. So construction was 268 euros in 2002 to build a mercedes in germany.

To build a mercedes here, its probably 600+. But as you say with the adelaide oval, it gets up there. Well, the addition of an extra 20k seats may not cost all that much if they do the design right. For instance, there's more distance in the adelaide oval stands, they are curved, so that would have added to price; the stands at adelaide oval are almost separate and on each tier, im guessing that would add to cost too somehow. Im guessing they did it like that because of efficiencies associated with how the stands are. It was a redev after all. But im not sure than translates to a modern stadium. Im not sure if its cheaper to build like that or more expensive. Was it a design quirk or a concerted effort on costs.

If you look at Suncorp - IIRC -- once they were up to that height on the top tier, yes you may have to adjust your foundations - but once you are up there at that height you can just add more materials and fill in the seat/corners (which they declined to do). You could have put in an extra 4,000 seats at suncorp on the ends. It requires a design re-jig, sure, but you could have done it. If you decided (hypothetically) at the last minute to fill in the corners, you could probably have done it. So the cost to put in 4,000 more seats in the corners over the original cost is minimal in comparison to having to do it from scratch.

In this sense, all im suggesting, is that if they do the design right, then while it will cost more to get an extra 14,000 seats perhaps -being that its a rectangle, and that they can work it into the design (a different design), it won't cost much more than what they paid down there. Its less distance/materials (perimeter of oval compared to rectangle), and the design will be different.

There's a bit of construction/housing/ect in my family. I remember someone telling me once you pour that concrete over a certain height and it becomes a certain weight, or something like that, it immediately changes all the materials and methods of what you do when you get higher up. The cost was not linear, it was exponential.



TLDR So thats why I innitially said my estimates. They are just estimates, but seanoff you are awesome. Cheers. Im going to read about adelaide oval more when I get a moment. You are probably right, and I don't fully endorse my quick re-work on my hypthetical

 

[cleary89]

It's tough getting to places from Glenorie, Warragamba and Palm Beach too. Maybe we shouldn't have any stadiums anywhere.

The question was "what's wrong with the public transport to ANZ". For close to a million people, it means catching 6 trains. If that's not bad then fair enough.

 

[Von Neumann]

The question was "what's wrong with the public transport to ANZ". For close to a million people, it means catching 6 trains. If that's not bad then fair enough.

That is simply not good enough

 

[seanoff]

First. In no world is Levis a cheap stadium. $1.3B.

Referencing the AO. The gaps were a design choice on the basis of retaining the character of thr venue. Had the added effect of allowing them to install screens in the gaps. The discrete stands and the curve had no effect on the cost of stadium. Many stadia, even rectangular field stadiums have a curve however soft. Google up nfl stadiums, Wembley etc.

AO is essentially a new stadium. They ripped out the old facilities, ripped out the surface down a couple of metres and basically started from scratch. It cost no more or less than a greenfield site.

Above about 40k the cost per seat doesnt really change. If its 12500 for 40k its probably that for up to 70 or 80. After that it starts escalating.

Regarding Suncorp, putting in extra seats would have required extra engineering and materials. It was designed and built for what it is, not what it could be. An extra 4000 seats would require large and more complex structure in that area adding 4000 seats of extra cost. + those 4000 need toilets, food and beverage, extra access as in stairs, escalators etc etc. At that point the per seat cost is the per seat cost.

 

[Von Neumann]

First. In no world is Levis a cheap stadium. $1.3B.

Referencing the AO. The gaps were a design choice on the basis of retaining the character of thr venue. Had the added effect of allowing them to install screens in the gaps. The discrete stands and the curve had no effect on the cost of stadium. Many stadia, even rectangular field stadiums have a curve however soft. Google up nfl stadiums, Wembley etc.

AO is essentially a new stadium. They ripped out the old facilities, ripped out the surface down a couple of metres and basically started from scratch. It cost no more or less than a greenfield site.

Above about 40k the cost per seat doesnt really change. If its 12500 for 40k its probably that for up to 70 or 80. After that it starts escalating.

Regarding Suncorp, putting in extra seats would have required extra engineering and materials. It was designed and built for what it is, not what it could be. An extra 4000 seats would require large and more complex structure in that area adding 4000 seats of extra cost. + those 4000 need toilets, food and beverage, extra access as in stairs, escalators etc etc. At that point the per seat cost is the per seat cost.

First, the bold here is to differentiate the text. And btw - we are here in "THE" world - Levi's is a fail. And I know you know that!



Second, Adelaide Oval is a compromised design, seanoff. The reason it probably would have cost the same is because they had to F[_]k around with it so much ----- but the reason they didn't knock it down is because it has so much cultural history and charm. They didn't even ditch the hill - it'd be like knocking down the SCG. And then the reason they went ahead with it, because they nearly canned it many times, is because the AFL wanted a city stadium and held numerous meetings to keep the thing on track.

AO is basically outside this new SFS discussion.

Third, Levi's is not a football viewing stadium. They could have put a roof on it like every other american stadium (practically) built for NFL has done for the past 15 years, but they didn't. And its super hot in the sun. Levi's is a stadium that panders (and fails) on so many levels. The crowds have spoken. The crap they asked for, if not, demanded, has not drawn them out of their homes. They wasted 1.3B dollars and failed to make it a decent football stadium.

So all in all what you said is 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.



I contest about Levi's: it looks cheap, it doesn't even have a roof and the lighting is sticking up with what looks like (but isn't) plain milled poles lol (im sure its galvanised/anodised whatever)....in relation to the price you get stands on 3 sides essentially - The other side has an exposed concrete structure of suits and what is pretty much a half-hearted section of seats. That thing goes practically the length of the field, sean! 1.3billion! for that!?

Looks cheap/crap, is my meaning. Just silly is another.

Suffice to say Americans take their tea different to europeans. Get a picture of the main stand from the side, and I swear you are looking at another cheap-looking stadium: the Gabba in Brisbane. Nothing worse than sitting down in that thing and feeling caged in, by comparison to the MCG which feels more airy and open underneath a stand - even Suncorp when you sit under the roofed area halfway up, say in the South Stand is far better -- they had the good sense too to powder coat the roof beams by the looks of it; while at the Gabba you can virtually see the wiring hanging out the thing, and the sound is boomy from the speakers, and your view sucky.

Looks cheap. much of the money/quality is elsewhere. Though Im not saying its using inferior materials, it just looks cheap.

Obviously the fans having a large say and stake in the stadium had a large effect on the superfluous things that had nothing to do with the actual stands.

When you goto suncorp - ha, we're talking about adding a few more stairs not extra beverage stands, whatnot. Its not a massive design re-jig to add and cater for 4k extra seats. For instance, even when full those bathrooms are more than enough. No one should expect to go straight in and out at half time. Thats expecting too much. And just the same about food/drinks, its usally good, rare to ever have to wait.

Thats not saying there's no cost - just that its not a big deal.

Slight curve to big curve versus rectangular pitch: love to see you build a house 30 meters long and one 80 meters long for the same price.

____



"Above about 40k the cost per seat doesnt really change. If its 12500 for 40k its probably that for up to 70 or 80. After that it starts escalating. "

This just proves my point, if anything, about suncorp in relation to the core of my argument/rationale.

This is a good segue into the point I actually want to talk about -- that if one is going to build a new SFS, they should take care to make it look, hear and feel like a quality stadium. And I went over the price escalation in my point, which you just cherry picked out: which was, IF the design is right then you can have a 65k stadium for well under the exorbitant 900m, maybe even 100m less. It may not be that much, note I say "may", but to overpay for something outside its intended purpose (to watch football) would be foolhardy of the NSW govt. If 5 football teams are not enough to sustain it, then wow. Why bother. It can take the odd different event, whatnot, no problem, but that should not be its intended purpose.

Lets remember that 1.3B "extravaganza" called Levi's Stadium only houses ONE (1) NFL team + any event it can get its hands on....

*SO its NOT really a football viewing stadium. And the poor buggers have to sit in the sun. Just grand. I repeat - its not a very good example of a football viewing stadium.



I dont consider the san fran stadium a real football (NFL) stadium. Its something they've designed for lazy fans to draw them to the game and act as if they are still in their lounge chair (and they still can't sell many tickets to it).....as compared to what a new SFS should be -- a football stadium first, and something to hold concerts and have a weekend junket in, a long distant second. And so, it should be a viewing stadium, not a stadium where you turn up and act like your'e down at the tavern having a pub meal and a drink before you fail to return to your seat and pretend like you're not at a game to watch it.

In closing, I think if they build on a new site, plus make it a simple (enough) design, they'll save some coin.

 

[alien]

yeah it might be a bit annoying having to change trains, but if you only have to wait 5 minutes for the next train, is it really THAT bad???

 

[Von Neumann]

yeah it might be a bit annoying having to change trains, but if you only have to wait 5 minutes for the next train, is it really THAT bad???

but 6 trains?

 

[alien]

but 6 trains?

i am talking 1 way

 

[Von Neumann]

i am talking 1 way

oh right. Have travelled sydney a fair bit, and melbourne slightly more in my time. Ofcourse I know mostly about brisbane as I live there.

Well even in brisbane we have to wait for a train often to get over to Suncorp. One of the benefits of brisbane is you just catch an express train back along the caboolture line/ipswich line AFTER the game. So I dont see why for big events at the new SFS/parra/ANZ if its not done already, you can have extra trains going specific ways. Does this happen already - surely it does?

Even in melbourne you can go from mcg, walk to to richmond then catch a train on the circuit and you may have to get a new train after a few stops. So no I dont see the big deal, especially when you factor in the knowledge that you are in a particularly big city like sydney.

Seanoff this is what I was wondering/intrigued me, no doubt you know your stuff -- if so much money spent on main stadium then what of parra and ANZ?

Guess we have an answer.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/anz-stadium-loses-out-under-plan-to-build-new-sports-stadiums-at-moore-park-and-parramatta/story-fnpn118l-1227333345777

And I guess I am prophetic as the story mentions $800m for the thing.

Yay for me! haha. I just deduced. Its not important, whats important is that I learnt some stuff from you. But the cool thing about that to me is that parra gets around 4-500M and the dudes over at ANZ won't be short changed. Its seriously in their best interests I think.

My major concern, that it would not be a real, and awesome football-viewing stadium as I mentioned above in my response to yours, is allayed. Phew. Forget a car park, they are building a purpose-built venue for concerts and things of that nature. Or so the paper reports at this stage.

ANZ should still be ok for the foreseeable future. Not everything can take place at a new SFS.

I personally urge Mr Baird to back this plan and double the funding. Its ticking all boxes. Im not concerned with traffic upon those limited times around the stadium - as its seen even residents around Suncorp stadium have grown accustomed to the brief altered conditions. The cost of this infrastructure will only increase if this is held off for 10 years. The goal of achieving a super stadium trust with the stadia that will be at its disposal is a victory for centralisation, and common sense. Only the govt can effectively oversee these kinds of mass-usage public buildings. An example of a chaotic situation is in london, where Chelsea are having a horrid time trying to get a new stadium. A city, mind you, that is peppered with stadia.

 

[applesauce]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...k-and-parramatta/story-fnpn118l-1227333345777

 

[andrew057]

Looks good AS. Can you post the article.

 

[The Elephant In The room]

Except the fact that our two/three biggest matches (Gf and SOO) will still be at the mercy of the weather at a stadium without a roof.

 

[Parra]

yeah it might be a bit annoying having to change trains, but if you only have to wait 5 minutes for the next train, is it really THAT bad???

Yes.

 

[Parra]

Except the fact that our two/three biggest matches (Gf and SOO) will still be at the mercy of the weather at a stadium without a roof.

Outdoor sports should be player outdoors. Conditions are a factor.

 

[duylm]

Outdoor sports should be player outdoors. Conditions are a factor.

But then we are just giving up on trying to increase crowds for our winter sport played during the wet season.

 

[applesauce]

Looks good AS. Can you post the article.

ANZ Stadium loses out under plan to build new sports stadiums at Moore Park and Parramatta
John Lehmann
The Daily Telegraph
May 04, 2015

SYDNEY’S Olympic arena ANZ Stadium will lose out under a confidential plan to spend up to $1.3 billion building new state-of-the-art sports stadiums at Moore Park and Parramatta.

With Sydney’s biggest stadium set to miss new funding, high-level negotiations are being finalised for ANZ’s operators to be paid $135 million over the next 15 years to hand over control to a new government-appointed super stadium trust.

port Minister Stuart Ayres is expected to receive a report this month recommending a new 65,000-seat venue be built near Moore Park’s outdated Allianz Stadium on land presently controlled by the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust. It will also recommend the construction of a new 35,000- seat Parramatta Stadium, home to rugby league’s Parramatta Eels and soccer’s Western Sydney Wanderers.

The controversial plan will require Premier Mike Baird’s support to double the $600 million stadium fund he promoted at the March election.

Highly placed sources told The Daily Telegraph Mr Ayres believes the government will need to allocate about $800 million to build the new Moore Park stadium and $400 million for Parramatta Stadium.

Former Liberal leader John Brogden, who is writing the report for Mr Ayres, has also revealed to the Centennial Park and Moore Park Trust that a smaller multi-sports venue — believed to be worth about $100 million — would be built when Allianz is demolished in about five years.

Mr Ayres has told sports bosses, including NRL chief Dave Smith, he is determined to win the Premier’s backing to “future-proof” Sydney’s stadiums rather than adopt a smaller, piecemeal approach.

“It’s a once in a 50-year chance to get it right,’’ he has said. But the plan will create doubt about the long-term future of ANZ, with its bid for $350 million to move seats closer to the sports action being rejected.

Sources close to Mr Baird say the Premier will consider whatever plan is presented but they stress that “$600 million is what’s been allocated”.

The centrepiece of the plan is a hi-tech, 65,000-seat stadium to be built on the upper and lower Kippax playing fields at Moore Park East between Anzac Parade and Driver Avenue. Construction could begin in 2017 with the new venue expected to be hosting matches by 2020.

Mr Brogden has said in private meetings the development would include an underground carpark and training facilities. It would be serviced by the new light-rail service running from the CBD to Randwick.

But Centennial Park Trust chairman Tony Ryan has told Mr Brogden the trust has “significant concerns” over traffic management and land under its control being used for the stadium.

ANZ’s private-sector operator, Stadium Australia Group, is said to be in favour of a “management partnership” under which a new “super trust”, involving the Sydney Cricket and Sports Ground Trust, would take over the running of Allianz, the SCG, Parramatta Stadium and ANZ.

Stadium Australia Group would be paid annual annuities worth $135 million — a figure based on its projected earnings over the rest of its lease, due to expire in 2031.

It would also agree to waive its contractual rights which would limit the new Moore Park venue to 48,000 seats and Parramatta Stadium to 35,000 and prevent them from having roofs.

 

[duylm]

How does this advance the centralized Stadium policy that the state government has been pushing? We will still have the same geographical coverage, no roof added to any of them, but be $1.2b out of pocket.