Update on SCG redevelopment

[spiffy-dude]

The roof is way too high. Did it look like that in the final renders? If so why didnt the architects fix it? It might have all the modern facilities and accessibility standards but from an aesthetic POV it looks like terrible. The gap between roof and last row is way to high. I get what they were doing with how people view the action on the field, but its just looks awkward. Are they going to cover the back section?

Would hate to be caught in a Sydney storm up there with no protection except the roof.

What they did with the old hill is nice and i thought it would have been an extention of that, but it's not. It's just another grandstand wedged between two other stands, which is what used to annoy me about the SCG. I guess the tradition lives on. In 10 years when they demolish the next stand we might see whatever style is in at the time for a grandstand and yet another mismatch.

[chalbilto]

Hi Triple B,

With the new modifications, I believe that the surface area of the SCG playing field has been lengthened. From your observations do you think that this has occurred?

[Matt79]

Hi Triple B,

With the new modifications, I believe that the surface area of the SCG playing field has been lengthened. From your observations do you think that this has occurred?

This has definitely occurred. I was 4 rows from the fence on Sunday. It is clearly a little longer at the Noble Stand end now.

[goswannie14]

7 metres longer is what I read somewhere last week.

[liz]

What they did with the old hill is nice and i thought it would have been an extention of that, but it's not. It's just another grandstand wedged between two other stands, which is what used to annoy me about the SCG. I guess the tradition lives on. In 10 years when they demolish the next stand we might see whatever style is in at the time for a grandstand and yet another mismatch.

The new stand does look a little odd - at least on TV, I've not seen it in flesh and blood yet - and the roof looks out of all proportion. But I don't mind that the SCG is a mix and match set of stands. No doubt some Melbournites will jump on me for this, but I think the inside of the MCG is a soulless cavern. It all looks the same. Sure, it's great atmospherically when it is packed, but aesthetically I think it is really boring. I love the fact that each area of the SCG has it's own architectural personality.

[Xie Shan]

I'll reserve judgement until footy season starts but I imagine it will be a bit like the MCG in that you should have a good view no matter where you sit in the new stand. As for being gouged when buying food/drink at the footy, that is nothing new, but looking at the artist impressions on the redevelopment website I do like that they have tried to create more meeting spaces inside the ground, going to the footy or cricket is partly a social activity after all.

[swanwolf]

Stage 2 of the SCG Masterplan has been a fascinating project to watch evolve over the last five years. Below's the new stand as originally proposed:

noblebradman1.jpg
Best described as low-impact, in every sense of the term, the facilities within would also have been 2nd rate compared to other redeveloped grounds. I, for one, am heartened we didn't settle for such a nondescript design.

The revised plan was certainly more striking:

noblebradman2.jpg
So radical were the changes, you could be forgiven for thinking the original was little more than a Trojan Longmire. Apart from the substantially increased amenity and height, the revised submission also bangs on about the stand no longer encroaching on Studios, compensation issues possibly. Here's a late render that pretty much sets Noble-Bradman in stone.. or cast in bronze?

noblebradman3.jpg
I don't dislike it. At least it's distinctive which is as much as you can say of any stadium and more than you can say of most. Yes, for now it jars with all other stands but only till the Cricket World Cup is done and Brewongle/Churchill receive a similar makeover. The top tier gap doesn't bother me and besides, filled with seats we'd no doubt breach the dreaded Damoclean Stadium Australia Project Agreement Amendment Deed when stage 3 debuts.

Is it true the O'Reilly stand was named after its builder, banished from Torquay by a gnome weilding hotelier? It looks it. After the much maligned last stand gets the Trumper treatment in 2019, the SCG ought look something like this:

scg.jpg
Not too shabby, I should think. The vintage stands either shine like emeralds set upon a ring of white gold or stink like mould festering on a vanilla iced donut, depending on your point of view.

I choose the gems and not the germs.

[liz]

If the plan is to rebuild the Churchill and Brewongle stands to match the new MA Noble and Bradman, the design does look a lot more cohesive. Indeed, that last picture looks great.

Mind you, while I am resigned to it happening, this ongoing demolition and rebuilding, strategically designed by the Trust to disrupt two football seasons, is a tad tiresome. It would be nice to have a couple of seasons of the ground at full capacity to take advantage of our imminent on field domination!

By the way, does anyone know if access via Moore Park road via the back entrance has now been restored? Or are the only entry points still on Driver Avenue?

[DamY]

The new stand does look a little odd - at least on TV, I've not seen it in flesh and blood yet - and the roof looks out of all proportion. But I don't mind that the SCG is a mix and match set of stands. No doubt some Melbournites will jump on me for this, but I think the inside of the MCG is a soulless cavern. It all looks the same. Sure, it's great atmospherically when it is packed, but aesthetically I think it is really boring. I love the fact that each area of the SCG has it's own architectural personality.

I completely agree. I like the mismatchedness of the SCG. I find the MCG lacks the intimacy of the SCG.

[ernie koala]

When are they proposing to knock down the Brewongle and Churchill stand?...I was hoping for at least a few years/ seasons of non developement.

As for the aesthetic of the new stand....

To me, the attempt to round either end of the top tier, and in the middle, to create 2 sections looks clumsy. Hopefully the finished product will give a more fluent feel.

[Triple B]

Liz, we had breakfast in Paddo and came in via the Moore Pk Rd entry, so it's all good again

[j s]

When are they proposing to knock down the Brewongle and Churchill stand?...I was hoping for at least a few years/ seasons of non developement.

I believe this is a "refurbishment" rather than "replacement" but I haven't seen any details of what is proposed.

[Mountain Man]

The O'Reilly stand encroaches on the old Showground (now Fox Studios). When it was built (originally as the Pat Hills Stand) a lease was arranged for some footprint of Showground land so as to make the Stand deeper and higher. The trade off was that the ground floor was accessed from the Showground and converted into offices - the very offices that were allocated to the Swans.

I don't think the new stand would encroach onto the Fox land.

[YvonneH]

I decided to keep my seat in the Trumper stand as it is closer to the exit for the buses to Central. I was in Bay 314 in row U, but requested an isle seat this year. Hopefully I get. The only drawback for me was the sun, but we don't have many day games this season so shouldn't be a big issue.

[Matt79]

Gee I hope the O'Reilly gets the facelift next! Been sitting there since 1982 and it needs an upgrade of facilities!