Opinion New AFC HQ: Stalled Indefinitely

What should we do?


  • Total voters
    153

Remove this Banner Ad

It would be nice if the SANFL could move to the old Panther Park site at St Mary’s for their proposed development (displacing the Rugby League who would need to be compensated and found a new home). It has more development room and security than West Lakes and is no less convenient than Footy Park. Mitcham Council wins.

We keep Footy Park until 2048 (or more realistically until Thebby No. 2 becomes available) under a re-work of the existing SANFL lease, reconfiguring the oval to MCG dimensions and retaining adequate change rooms. Then only using it as an occasional 2nd training venue enabling significantly enhanced public access. Charles Sturt Council wins.

Finally we get hold of Thebby and turn the current sh.thole into an elite training facility and AFLW ground that adds economic and social value to the local community. West Torrens Council wins.
 
It would be nice if the SANFL could move to the old Panther Park site at St Mary’s for their proposed development (displacing the Rugby League who would need to be compensated and found a new home). It has more development room and security than West Lakes and is no less convenient than Footy Park. Mitcham Council wins.

We keep Footy Park until 2048 (or more realistically until Thebby No. 2 becomes available) under a re-work of the existing SANFL lease, reconfiguring the oval to MCG dimensions and retaining adequate change rooms. Then only using it as an occasional 2nd training venue enabling significantly enhanced public access. Charles Sturt Council wins.

Finally we get hold of Thebby and turn the current sh.thole into an elite training facility and AFLW ground that adds economic and social value to the local community. West Torrens Council wins.
Staying at west lakes is a horrible option, the port augusta oval and facility looks better.
 
Staying at west lakes is a horrible option, the port augusta oval and facility looks better.
Agree, staying at West Lakes is absolutely not an option.
The state gov. have to get involved if the SANFL proposal falls through at council level given the money involved (probably close to $150 million combined by the time this is resolved) and work these projects bring being held up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Code:
the SANFL has asked if it can return to Football Park when the land vests back in the City of Charles Sturt in 2026
.






Football Park".

Background


Code:
Football Park oval is to be vested with Council on completion of the West development, which is expected to occur as early as 2026. When Football Park is vested with Council, we are proposing that the land be retained as open space and designated as “community land”. Under the Local Government Act 1999 a Community Land Management Plan (CLMP) must be established to set out how the community land can be used, and how it must be managed by Council.




It becomes council land in 2026.


This is why we need to be out by 2026. Not 2048.

Sure we have a lease for 2048, but in 2026 it becomes open use.


Which, somewhat, works for the SANFL given they only need the actual oval a few hours a week.

But not an AFL club.



On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Makes you wonder where all the talk about ca$hing in million$ of dollar$ when exiting the lease came from.
 
Code:
the SANFL has asked if it can return to Football Park when the land vests back in the City of Charles Sturt in 2026
.






Football Park".

Background


Code:
Football Park oval is to be vested with Council on completion of the West development, which is expected to occur as early as 2026. When Football Park is vested with Council, we are proposing that the land be retained as open space and designated as “community land”. Under the Local Government Act 1999 a Community Land Management Plan (CLMP) must be established to set out how the community land can be used, and how it must be managed by Council.




It becomes council land in 2026.


This is why we need to be out by 2026. Not 2048.

Sure we have a lease for 2048, but in 2026 it becomes open use.


Which, somewhat, works for the SANFL given they only need the actual oval a few hours a week.

But not an AFL club.



On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app

How many hours a week do you think we use the oval now?

SANFL have asked for 90 hours per month - do you think we would use it that much now? I seriously doubt that - equals 3 hours per day every day of a 30 day month.

Use of the oval for 15 hours per week would be sufficient? Means 3 hours per day - Monday to Friday.

We wouldn’t need to use the oval on a match day (either here or interstate game) and it isn’t used the day after a match either.

Am ai missing something?
 
Last edited:
How many hours a week do you think we use the oval now?

SANFL have asked for 90 hours per month - do you think we would use it that much now? I seriously doubt that - equals 3 hours per day every day of a 30 day month.
For 1 team yeah thats fine but we have 3 teams
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What is this shit? Surely we are moving to Thebby whether or not SANFL move to footy park.

What will happen if SANFL is not granted a licence to use Footy Park oval from the City of Charles Sturt?​

If SANFL doesn’t secure a licence to use the oval, the Adelaide Football Club will remain at Football Park. The Adelaide Football Club has a legal right to use Football Park until 2048.
 
How many hours a week do you think we use the oval now?

SANFL have asked for 90 hours per month - do you think we would use it that much now? I seriously doubt that - equals 3 hours per day every day of a 30 day month.

Use of the oval for 15 hours per week would be sufficient? Means 3 hours per day - Monday to Friday.

We wouldn’t need to use the oval on a match day (either here or interstate game) and it isn’t used the day after a match either.

Am ai missing something?
SANFL are asking for 90 hours as part of this proposal.


Right now, whoever is using it will be capped below that after 2026.


For three teams, plus our NGA group that is unworkable.


On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
What is this shit? Surely we are moving to Thebby whether or not SANFL move to footy park.

What will happen if SANFL is not granted a licence to use Footy Park oval from the City of Charles Sturt?​

If SANFL doesn’t secure a licence to use the oval, the Adelaide Football Club will remain at Football Park. The Adelaide Football Club has a legal right to use Football Park until 2048.

The SANFL from what I am aware have a lease over Thebarton until 2031.

At worst we might stay at West Lakes and either look for another site or just wait until the lease opens up.

I suspect the SANFL won't just sit at Thebarton until the lease expires, they will be desperate to get their hands on that 9 million dollar payout from us so I suspect if Footy Park falls through that they'll be trying to arrange something else as soon as they can.
 
Last edited:
What is this shit? Surely we are moving to Thebby whether or not SANFL move to footy park.

What will happen if SANFL is not granted a licence to use Footy Park oval from the City of Charles Sturt?​

If SANFL doesn’t secure a licence to use the oval, the Adelaide Football Club will remain at Football Park. The Adelaide Football Club has a legal right to use Football Park until 2048.

Well the SANFL has lease until 2031 at Thebarton so they aren’t required to move.

I’ve sent an email to both the councillors covering my suburb to ascertain how they originally voted on SANFL moving back to West Lakes. Were they in favour or not.

This whole shit show has to end.
 
Back
Top