Ballymore Redevelopment
- Thread starter Karl
- Start date
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
https://www.couriermail.com.au/ques...e/news-story/6a6611a910877caef28f1525ea3ae3e3
Looks like QRU are still planning on building some office blocks as part of the Ballymore Redevelopment, they’re pretty limited in who can use them though. Believe it’s restricted to sport/medical related tenants as per the approved DA.
Looks like QRU are still planning on building some office blocks as part of the Ballymore Redevelopment, they’re pretty limited in who can use them though. Believe it’s restricted to sport/medical related tenants as per the approved DA.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
If the QLD Govt were supportive of a stadium there then I would be to, but reality is the QLD Govrt released a report which made a recommendation against a stadium of scale at Ballymore, which essentially rule out any future government funding for upgrades to maintain it at a scale capable of hosting large events. Without government support they cannot maintain the or upgrade the facilities to the standard necessary.
In addition to the training facility, I think the plans for a small commercial development at Ballymore is the right option, some people mightn't like the loss of space but it will provide revenue to help offset the maintenance costs.
In addition to the training facility, I think the plans for a small commercial development at Ballymore is the right option, some people mightn't like the loss of space but it will provide revenue to help offset the maintenance costs.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
Lets not forget Peter Lewis was chairman of the QRU at the time the UQ rorts scandal took place, QRU had received $4.2 million for the development of a pool and training facility at Ballymore, but then it emerged that $200k of that was siphoned off to support a UQ scholarship grant. He mightn't have been directly involved in the scandal, but he was chairman at the time. In the fallout the grant was scrapped and QRU lost $4.2million in a funding grant.
That been said, Lewis was s significant driver in the original development application, and laid the foundations for tapping into some of the value the site.
Let's face it, Ballymore is just in the wrong place. Tens of thousands of people walking driving and busing through residential streets is never going to go down well.
I'd almost Think the Reds would be better off cashing in, sell the ground to a developer and set up some where else.
I'd almost Think the Reds would be better off cashing in, sell the ground to a developer and set up some where else.
The Nomad
Bob Davidson (42)
I know it’s not in an ideal position logistically for crowds , but have really enjoyed the last two QPR Grand Final days at Ballymore despite its poor condition , it’s a great place to watch rugby .
With the average Reds crowd of 10-15K the atmosphere and experience would be so much better than a barren Suncorp .
When the Reds first started using Suncorp think the break even point was around the 15000 mark. That number looks pretty bleak , but would be a hoot at Ballymore.
With the average Reds crowd of 10-15K the atmosphere and experience would be so much better than a barren Suncorp .
When the Reds first started using Suncorp think the break even point was around the 15000 mark. That number looks pretty bleak , but would be a hoot at Ballymore.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
QRU have released the new Ballymore Masterplan to the community for consultation, they have existing approval under the masterplan approved in 2011 however a lot has changed since then . New masterplan proposed below:
Masterplan Overview
– New high-performance centre
– New commercial buildings (3 storey)
– New training buildings (2 storey)
– New McLean Stand capacity increased to 3,010 supporters
– New pedestrian pathway connections
– New car parks and internal roads
– New swim school
– New Rock climbing centre (eastern stand)
– New Landscaped open space
– Existing Field 3 relocated
– Event day capacity 13,000 (unchanged)
– Flooding to be mitigated
– Game day traffic to be addressed
– 428 car parking spaces to be available
– Community access to internal green space.
Masterplan Overview
– New high-performance centre
– New commercial buildings (3 storey)
– New training buildings (2 storey)
– New McLean Stand capacity increased to 3,010 supporters
– New pedestrian pathway connections
– New car parks and internal roads
– New swim school
– New Rock climbing centre (eastern stand)
– New Landscaped open space
– Existing Field 3 relocated
– Event day capacity 13,000 (unchanged)
– Flooding to be mitigated
– Game day traffic to be addressed
– 428 car parking spaces to be available
– Community access to internal green space.
Ignoto
Peter Sullivan (51)
With ticket prices only going north every year along with better viewing from home, there's less appetite for people to spend money on 'just' going to the rugby. People want more bang for their buck and want to go to an event (especially when there's so few home games).
Before or after a game finishes, what is there for punters to do at Balleymore? Hang around the stadium bars Drinking $10 Golds until the lines for the buses dies down? Compare that to Suncorp and you can go have a meal pre game and a couple of drinks at multiple venues with different beverage offerings.
We look at Balleymore with rose coloured glasses that are heavily tinted by a pre 9-11 lense. The only thing I miss about Balleymore is the running onto the field after the game.
If we don't play at Suncorp, all I can hope is that 25-30,000 stadium at Bowen Hills gets built that was being tossed around for the Womens RWC pitch. That seems to be the next best thing.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
So i was wondering why it had gone quiet on the Ballymore upgrade front.
And some information i heard which i found interesting, 2 QRU life members and former members of ARU/QRU Boards; Dick McGruther and Lyn Crowley submitted an application in November to have the McLean stand heritage listed, this was around the same time the demolition was schedule to begin. If approved this would have had massive ramifications on the QRU redevelopment plan as they required the existing stand to be demolished. This isn’t the first time Lyn Crowley has been involved in a legal stoush with the QRU, he sued over the perpetual ground memberships he held when the Reds shifted to Suncorp Stadium.
Basically all development planning had to pause, and QRU had to make a submission about why the McLean stand shouldn’t be considered for heritage listing, whilst a determination hasn’t been made, the recommendation from the QLD Govt to the heritage council is that Ballymore shouldn’t be added to state heritage register.
Bit of a mess really, but that’s currently holding up the Ballymore development, which is a bit of an issue as part of the funding agreement from the government was that certain milestones had to be met, like demolition and construction timed deadlines.
Submissions are closed, but if you want to read up on it, its heritage application number 650264, https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/heritage/register/applications
And some information i heard which i found interesting, 2 QRU life members and former members of ARU/QRU Boards; Dick McGruther and Lyn Crowley submitted an application in November to have the McLean stand heritage listed, this was around the same time the demolition was schedule to begin. If approved this would have had massive ramifications on the QRU redevelopment plan as they required the existing stand to be demolished. This isn’t the first time Lyn Crowley has been involved in a legal stoush with the QRU, he sued over the perpetual ground memberships he held when the Reds shifted to Suncorp Stadium.
Basically all development planning had to pause, and QRU had to make a submission about why the McLean stand shouldn’t be considered for heritage listing, whilst a determination hasn’t been made, the recommendation from the QLD Govt to the heritage council is that Ballymore shouldn’t be added to state heritage register.
Bit of a mess really, but that’s currently holding up the Ballymore development, which is a bit of an issue as part of the funding agreement from the government was that certain milestones had to be met, like demolition and construction timed deadlines.
Submissions are closed, but if you want to read up on it, its heritage application number 650264, https://www.qld.gov.au/environment/land/heritage/register/applications
Jimmy_Crouch
Peter Johnson (47)
That is outrageous that a shitty stand built in the 1960s would be heritage listed. Hopefully sanity prevails and it isn't and everything can move ahead.
The replacement stand will also be named the McLean stand so it's not like the legacy will disappear.
Hard to imagine that there are any positive motives behind the request.
The replacement stand will also be named the McLean stand so it's not like the legacy will disappear.
Hard to imagine that there are any positive motives behind the request.
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
Yeah it’s a dogs breakfast, most of the argument for retaining the stand was about the sentimental/nostalgic value of Ballymore, not anything to do with the architectural/design merit of McLean stand itself.
Apparently Dick McGruther has since withdrawn his support for heritage listing the stand, but it’s hard to know what the motives are behind this. Maybe someone explained that QRU will lose Ballymore if they can’t make it financially viable by upgrading the facilities and getting rid of the old crap.
Apparently Dick McGruther has since withdrawn his support for heritage listing the stand, but it’s hard to know what the motives are behind this. Maybe someone explained that QRU will lose Ballymore if they can’t make it financially viable by upgrading the facilities and getting rid of the old crap.
Ignoto
Peter Sullivan (51)
Mate you seem to know more about the development process than I do, is the recommendation of the McLean stadium not being worthy of Heritage listing (found here - https://www.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0030/148674/650264-recommendation.pdf) the end of the saga as I note is dated 21-Dec-2020 ?
Adam84
Rod McCall (65)
Yeah so my understanding is that recommendation is made by the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection and submitted to the Queensland Heritage Council, its the Heritage Council who actually make the decision, this hasn’t occurred yet. It would be unusual for them to not agree to the recommendation of the department, but you never know.
kiap
Steve Williams (59)
Old has-been with a relevancy deprivation? Or maybe the two bob lifetime tickets from pre-decimalisation are still valid for the craptastic stand?