The State Government approved them.
PROJECT: Melbourne Convention Centre
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/04/18/1082226636118.html
New convention centre, bridge for city's west
By Royce Millar
City Reporter
April 19, 2004
A new footbridge over the Yarra linking Southbank and Docklands will be part of a $330 million convention precinct the State Government is expected to announce in its April statement tomorrow.
The precinct's centrepiece will be a 5000-seat convention centre, or plenary hall, earmarked for the former Mazda site next to the Exhibition Centre, widely known as Jeff's Shed.
Business groups have lobbied for years for a new convention venue, arguing that Melbourne's existing 1500-seat centre is hopelessly outdated.
The State Government has been tight-lipped about details of the April statement and has refused to confirm whether the convention centre project would be included.
Government sources said they expected the project to be a public-private partnership, with a private group building the centre and leasing it to the government.
The managers of the existing exhibition centre - a government-appointed trust - are likely to run the new centre.
But the project will hinge on support from the Melbourne City Council, which will be under intense pressure tomorrow to contribute $43 million, including about $15 million for the bridge.
Yesterday's Government announcement that it would return control of Docklands to the council was clearly timed to encourage the council to support the convention centre.
Yesterday a town hall source said the council had demanded it get Docklands back in return for a contribution to the convention centre.
A private town hall briefing today will be the first formal council discussion on the project. A special council meeting to vote on the contribution has been hastily called for tomorrow to coincide with the April statement.
Lord Mayor John So strongly supports the new centre. He will have the numbers to approve a council contribution.
But the council is split, with as many as four of the nine councillors possibly opposed to council involvement.
Finance committee chairman and former Labor Party member Kevin Chamberlin said yesterday the council administration had confirmed that a large contribution would result in service cuts, a rate rise, or both.
If the convention centre was to be a public-private partnership the council should not contribute, he said.
The Committee for Melbourne called on the council to back the project.
"People come to these conventions with millions of disposable dollars and this has a remarkable knock-on effect for business in the city," executive director Janine Kirk said.
State MPs and councillors have questioned whether Melbourne needs a new centre, when existing venues such as the Docklands football stadium can seat 5000.
But the chief executive of the existing Melbourne Exhibition and Convention Centre, Leigh Harry, said that to compete for international conventions, Melbourne needed a centre with a large plenary hall, a large exhibition space, and plenty of smaller meeting rooms.
He said no existing Melbourne venue provided all three.
Mr Harry said among world cities Melbourne had slipped from fourth to 25th in the number of international conventions hosted.
He said that Melbourne's lack of convention capacity made it ineligible for 320 major international conventions.
New convention centre, bridge for city's west
By Royce Millar
City Reporter
April 19, 2004
A new footbridge over the Yarra linking Southbank and Docklands will be part of a $330 million convention precinct the State Government is expected to announce in its April statement tomorrow.
The precinct's centrepiece will be a 5000-seat convention centre, or plenary hall, earmarked for the former Mazda site next to the Exhibition Centre, widely known as Jeff's Shed.
Business groups have lobbied for years for a new convention venue, arguing that Melbourne's existing 1500-seat centre is hopelessly outdated.
The State Government has been tight-lipped about details of the April statement and has refused to confirm whether the convention centre project would be included.
Government sources said they expected the project to be a public-private partnership, with a private group building the centre and leasing it to the government.
The managers of the existing exhibition centre - a government-appointed trust - are likely to run the new centre.
But the project will hinge on support from the Melbourne City Council, which will be under intense pressure tomorrow to contribute $43 million, including about $15 million for the bridge.
Yesterday's Government announcement that it would return control of Docklands to the council was clearly timed to encourage the council to support the convention centre.
Yesterday a town hall source said the council had demanded it get Docklands back in return for a contribution to the convention centre.
A private town hall briefing today will be the first formal council discussion on the project. A special council meeting to vote on the contribution has been hastily called for tomorrow to coincide with the April statement.
Lord Mayor John So strongly supports the new centre. He will have the numbers to approve a council contribution.
But the council is split, with as many as four of the nine councillors possibly opposed to council involvement.
Finance committee chairman and former Labor Party member Kevin Chamberlin said yesterday the council administration had confirmed that a large contribution would result in service cuts, a rate rise, or both.
If the convention centre was to be a public-private partnership the council should not contribute, he said.
The Committee for Melbourne called on the council to back the project.
"People come to these conventions with millions of disposable dollars and this has a remarkable knock-on effect for business in the city," executive director Janine Kirk said.
State MPs and councillors have questioned whether Melbourne needs a new centre, when existing venues such as the Docklands football stadium can seat 5000.
But the chief executive of the existing Melbourne Exhibition and Convention Centre, Leigh Harry, said that to compete for international conventions, Melbourne needed a centre with a large plenary hall, a large exhibition space, and plenty of smaller meeting rooms.
He said no existing Melbourne venue provided all three.
Mr Harry said among world cities Melbourne had slipped from fourth to 25th in the number of international conventions hosted.
He said that Melbourne's lack of convention capacity made it ineligible for 320 major international conventions.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
481 - 500 of 503 Posts
Cool. So the height increases are definitely a goer! Thanks Archi.
Love this one. The buildings just get bigger & bigger, not to mention it seems to be free of the farce that surrounds other 'major projects'.
Yep went past yeaterday and wow they are hunting along at a rate of knots. Good stuff.
Well if they are spending $1 billion on Southbank, ive always wondered why they don't spend this sort of money on sinking the rail line between Spencer and Flinders st, changing the current Northbank from rail lines to park lands and open spaces?
^^^ That would be significantly more than $1b I would think. Look at how close you are to the river, there are difficulties in tunnelling in such an area. Plus, love the viaducts 
Stu
Stu
Yes id be very interested in the cost of such a project.^^^ That would be significantly more than $1b I would think. Look at how close you are to the river, there are difficulties in tunnelling in such an area. Plus, love the viaducts
Stu
I kinda imagined that the ground water they would have to pump out could be pumped to the suface and made into say water features emptying into the Yarra; say a water fall which goes over the pathway along the Yarra.
They might be able to recover some of the cost of the project by selling of the land to the West of Northbank with the central areas being converted into open parkland.
Time and time again, people suggest this as a project for Northbank, but time and time again, people forget the engineering issues involved with such a project. To create a tunnel between Southern Cross and Flinders St, the train would have to plummet at an alarming decline soon after Collins St to get under Flinders St. The train would then have a very steep incline after Queens Bridge, and by that time, the Banana Alley vaults would have to be demolished, and the platforms would have to be extended under Fed Sq and we may even have to lose the Elizabeth St subway. Its not as easy as you may think, let alone the issues of water!Well if they are spending $1 billion on Southbank, ive always wondered why they don't spend this sort of money on sinking the rail line between Spencer and Flinders st, changing the current Northbank from rail lines to park lands and open spaces?
Why tunnel, why not used the same technology we use building basements. Bored Piers and shotcrete. Put a lid over the top and and hey presto no elevated train line, lots of development opportunity, great access to the river from the North bank and an ugly scar removed from the aerial shots!. The problem now is that they have spent way too much money on Southern Cross Station and that would all have to become redundant. Game over, it's not going to happen this century any rate!
Both Flinders St and Spencer St stations would have to be heavily modified if not partially demolished and rebuilt. As said above the geography is just not suitable, which is probably why they built a bridge in the first place. The cost would be in the billions and the benefits would be next to nil. It will never happen.
Trains are part of a well functioning city; the viaduct is no worse than a car strewn street.Why tunnel, why not used the same technology we use building basements. Bored Piers and shotcrete. Put a lid over the top and and hey presto no elevated train line, lots of development opportunity, great access to the river from the North bank and an ugly scar removed from the aerial shots!. The problem now is that they have spent way too much money on Southern Cross Station and that would all have to become redundant. Game over, it's not going to happen this century any rate!
I disagree. It blocks views, and it acts as a barrier for peoples movement. A tunnel would only have to be significantly undergound by the time it gets to northbank: as long as it is below ground in some way, shape, or form by queensbridge, it's ok. I think it's quite possible, but certainly expensive, and would require a government or council with very large balls...
Well, Steve has NO balls, so there you go. Undergrounding would be a huge inconvenience, not to mention so expensive, there just isnt the money available.
What they could do is improve the parks on the river side of the viaducts to screen it a bit better or just build to close the gap. Way cheaper & less inconvenience.
What they could do is improve the parks on the river side of the viaducts to screen it a bit better or just build to close the gap. Way cheaper & less inconvenience.
The potential benefits don't come anywhere near justifying the cost. The view isn't worth it. We aren't looking at snow capped peaks or crystal blue ocean. It's just the casino. Not a $1+ billion view IMO.
I was thinking from Southbank, so you can see the immigration Museum, etc.
I thought the Casino was a $2.5 billion view!
I don't think the view is the main point of it, rather the increased access visual and otherwise to the Yarra, Southbank and the South End of Docklands. Rather than take a low cost-short term view of things like this the state government should have undertaken this work a long time ago.
It's called the city loop except it doesn't actually join up! Maybe they should call it the City "C"!
Building ridiculous bridges over it like the collins street bridge and just trying to make things fit around and over it is not a great solution. Look at the way that 700 Collins Street interacts with its street frontage it is a disgrace.
I don't think the view is the main point of it, rather the increased access visual and otherwise to the Yarra, Southbank and the South End of Docklands. Rather than take a low cost-short term view of things like this the state government should have undertaken this work a long time ago.
It's called the city loop except it doesn't actually join up! Maybe they should call it the City "C"!
Building ridiculous bridges over it like the collins street bridge and just trying to make things fit around and over it is not a great solution. Look at the way that 700 Collins Street interacts with its street frontage it is a disgrace.
Back to the Convention Center, in all your opinions, how do you think the new CC will transform Melbourne into a business city? Will it make Melbourne rank towards the top among the most popular business cities?
481 - 500 of 503 Posts
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Join the discussion
SkyscraperCity Forum
A forum community dedicated to skyscrapers, towers, highrises, construction, and city planning enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about structures, styles, reviews, scale, transportation, skylines, architecture, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Katarzyna DJ
7540 Replies
calatravavx
2630 Replies
Srdjan Adamovic
1861 Replies
Recommended Communities
Join now to ask and comment!