The next Melbourne stadium

[JohnZ]

If there is one thing I have learnt from my travels to stadiums all over the world, it is that building multiple large stadiums in the one precinct is a logistical nightmare. It means you can never have events at both sites at the same time, as moving 120,000 to 160,000 persons through the same area at the same time causes all sorts of issues.

Imagine 100,000 leaving the MCG and 60,000 arriving at the proposed Swan Street / Gosch's Paddock Stadium at the same time, the majority of which would be using Richmond station as driving in the area would be impossible.

Massive non-issue.

The beauty of the olympic park area is its walking proximity to multiple trian lines, as well as the CBD. 100k + 60k would be the absolute worst case for back to back sat/sun games. Reality is, if one game finishes at 4pm and the next starts at 4pm, then most people will have cleared 15min before first bounce, and before the first game's crowds come back.

 

[Freshwater]

The second stadium must be on the side of town that Docklands is now, not near the MCG. Melbourne’s massive now and getting to the East side of town is a pain for all those like myself who is rural and from the west. Marvel is extremely accessible for Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo line commuters. The AFL wants to push into western Sydney but to neglect its heartland area’s would be insanity.

 

[JPetro83]

Lets hope its a case of 3rd time lucky when they get the design and location correct.
VFL Park: built in the wrong area of Melbourne and ground surface way too big.. not sure why they didn't just copy the exact ground dimensions of the MCG.. they later on brought the boundary line in but then that looked ridiculous.

Docklands: Location was/is fine but design is a dogs breakfast, built facing the wrong way isn't it? the sun is an issue, the surface in the early days was terrible and probably next time have the stadium capacity around the 65-70k mark. the stadium is kinda hidden away now amongst the tall buildings.

You would think by 2040 a new stadium will be needed to replace Docklands. As for now Melbourne needs a boutique stadium30-35k to host the smaller vic clubs vs interstate clubs (as longs as the interstate sides still get a fair run of games on the MCG every year. there are no shortage of suburban grounds to upgrade. Victoria park, Junction oval, Princes Park, Punt Road and the Whitten Oval are all doable

 

[Roogal]

Lets hope its a case of 3rd time lucky when they get the design and location correct.
VFL Park: built in the wrong area of Melbourne and ground surface way too big.. not sure why they didn't just copy the exact ground dimensions of the MCG.. they later on brought the boundary line in but then that looked ridiculous.

Docklands: Location was/is fine but design is a dogs breakfast, built facing the wrong way isn't it? the sun is an issue, the surface in the early days was terrible and probably next time have the stadium capacity around the 65-70k mark. the stadium is kinda hidden away now amongst the tall buildings.

You would think by 2040 a new stadium will be needed to replace Docklands. As for now Melbourne needs a boutique stadium30-35k to host the smaller vic clubs vs interstate clubs (as longs as the interstate sides still get a fair run of games on the MCG every year. there are no shortage of suburban grounds to upgrade. Victoria park, Junction oval, Princes Park, Punt Road and the Whitten Oval are all doable

I don't have a problem with replacing Docklands if and when it becomes unfit for purpose. But the taxpayer ought not be footing the bill completely for the replacement of an AFL owned asset. The AFL should pay its fair share. That said, the AFL won't be advocating any time soon to replace Docklands because they still believe that it's one of the best facilities of its type in the country. It is certainly the best positioned stadium in Australia, sitting on the edge of the busiest railway station in Victoria where it is accessible to anybody who can catch a train or Vline bus into Melbourne. I reckon that it will likely get a major mid-life make over at some point in the future but I can't see it being demolished any time this side of the next 30-40 years.

 

[Freshwater]

I don't have a problem with replacing Docklands if and when it becomes unfit for purpose. But the taxpayer ought not be footing the bill completely for the replacement of an AFL owned asset. The AFL should pay its fair share. That said, the AFL won't be advocating any time soon to replace Docklands because they still believe that it's one of the best facilities of its type in the country. It is certainly the best positioned stadium in Australia, sitting on the edge of the busiest railway station in Victoria where it is accessible to anybody who can catch a train or Vline bus into Melbourne. I reckon that it will likely get a major mid-life make over at some point in the future but I can't see it being demolished any time this side of the next 30-40 years.

I reckon the roof will become permanent and will be translucent. Those 4 big pillars holding up the retractable roof won’t be needed and it will be very similar then to Perth stadium. The translucent roof will make daytime games in there so much more better visually and appealing. The grass will grow naturally. It won’t be as cold looking or feeling.
The accessibility is its number one asset now and into the future for everyone from metro to rural who is north or west of Melbourne.

 

[errant bounce]

I don't have a problem with replacing Docklands if and when it becomes unfit for purpose. But the taxpayer ought not be footing the bill completely for the replacement of an AFL owned asset. The AFL should pay its fair share. That said, the AFL won't be advocating any time soon to replace Docklands because they still believe that it's one of the best facilities of its type in the country. It is certainly the best positioned stadium in Australia, sitting on the edge of the busiest railway station in Victoria where it is accessible to anybody who can catch a train or Vline bus into Melbourne. I reckon that it will likely get a major mid-life make over at some point in the future but I can't see it being demolished any time this side of the next 30-40 years.

There has been a lot of negative attention on Southern Cross lately, especially in regard to its air quality (something becoming far more prominent in legislation; NABERS have a lot of influence on new builds and retrofits) and even anecdotally, people love talking about the diesel smell it has (I've never really noticed it. most train stations in Melbourne are pretty shit, for different reasons).

Genuinely get the feeling it'll end up a major point of discussion. the fact it's the V-Line hub and there are so many housing issues, I can see it become a real drama. people don't like getting off there because the tram links are so poor. in my experience, it also seems where the majority of dramas seem to happen. maybe it's nearby King Street or just confirmation bias, but maybe it's the massively long platforms and multi-level design that makes it harder to police.

No idea what it looks like in 50 years but I wonder if they almost downsize it and make it more of a regional / bus hub and have the metro train lines run a bit more like Flagstaff where it's only really served for peak hour.

They have tried with the bottom end of the city but it's just one of those things that'll never work. it's mostly a haven for rich Asian kids and transitional residents. all the food options are shit franchises so there's no need for people who don't live there to venture there. it just seems greyer and a bit spookier than the rest of Melbourne too.

The AFL obviously recognise this and have enough feedback from people in government and council as well as private sectors to see where the money's going. I didn't live in Melbourne for five years and returned and Richmond was pretty bewildered by just how many massive medium densities were popping up. those places will end up far more desirable than Docklands. people want to live in inner city suburbs more than the city itself. it's a connotation / association thing. Richmond will end up what Docklands was supposed to.

If the AFL abandons it and it goes to office space, it could be very interesting to see what happens with all those empty buildings. Australia has never been very good at rejuvenating dead former spaces, though.

 

[RedV3x]

But the taxpayer ought not be footing the bill completely for the replacement of an AFL owned asset.

You do realise that Docklands was built for the rectanguiar sports NOT AFL.

The AFL should pay its fair share.

The AFL bought the Docklands stadium and put it to good use.
Australian Rules Football has a history of making good with stadiums.
Australian Rules Football has financed their own major stadiums in Perth, Adelaide and Melbourne
and lesser stadiums around the country.
It's cricket that has been living off of the coat tails of Australian Rules Football and government money.
It's cricket that hasn't come to the party in Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Sydney and elsewhere.

If AFL is not paying it's fair share then how many sports are paying any share what-so-ever ?

 

[RedV3x]

The AFL wants to push into western Sydney but to neglect its heartland area’s would be insanity.

Anything else you want to link "AFL wants to push into western Sydney" with, because that is "insanity"..

 

[HBFlanker]

The second stadium must be on the side of town that Docklands is now, not near the MCG. Melbourne’s massive now and getting to the East side of town is a pain for all those like myself who is rural and from the west. Marvel is extremely accessible for Geelong, Ballarat and Bendigo line commuters. The AFL wants to push into western Sydney but to neglect its heartland area’s would be insanity.

Thats a good point, and one that i think will end up being a key factor.

West of Melbourne is the biggest growth area in Australia.

Id be looking at the land behind the royal childrens hospital

 

[Bunk Moreland]

If there is one thing I have learnt from my travels to stadiums all over the world, it is that building multiple large stadiums in the one precinct is a logistical nightmare. It means you can never have events at both sites at the same time, as moving 120,000 to 160,000 persons through the same area at the same time causes all sorts of issues.

Imagine 100,000 leaving the MCG and 60,000 arriving at the proposed Swan Street / Gosch's Paddock Stadium at the same time, the majority of which would be using Richmond station as driving in the area would be impossible.

It already happens on ANZAC Day. 100k at the G and 25k - 30k at AAMI Park for the Storm game. It’s fine, and that’s with Richmond Station being the ridiculously outdated disaster that it is now. It would get a major rebuild.

You stagger the events - day and twilight, twilight and night, day and night - so the bulk of either crowd isn’t coming and going at the same time.

The Storm do a ticket deal for people who want to hang around after the footy for their game. You could do the same with the footy and have double headers. Interstate teams would often be playing at the smaller stadium, so the offer of another game at the G is a nice add-on for travelling fans.

Docklands continues to be a mess. 25 years and they can’t make the surface work. It’s been an epic failure of design.

Almost certain it’ll be Gosch’s Paddock - it’s really the only place the makes sense.