DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**c6vkuNRg** · 01-30-2011, 06:50 PM

But I have always liked Belmont Park as a site. Like DD said it has enormous room for parking (much like the old Waverly in Vic). The East Perth powerstation site is laughable. I have spent alot of time down there with work and how they could ever expect a 70,000 seat stadium to work there is a joke. Getting Belmont Park off the racing industry would be a problem. But I would vote for it hands down.

Gas that clown John Langoulant was the one who got paid a fortune over about a year to come up with East Perth power station as the No 1 site. It's no surprise to read in today's Sunday Times he reckons Belmont Park is the "priciest option" to build a new stadium because the govt would have to purchase the land and he came up with all sorts of negatives about how it was limited by it's isolation blah blah blah. Yet then he says Burswood is a better option.

As i have said in here in response to faz, if a stadium was built on the Burswood site, it would be at the expense of the Burswood golf course (or most of it) and guess where that is? Right opposite Belmont Park and then you are competing with the 10 - 20 000 plus guests that flow in and out of Burswood every day. It is nothing more than short and narrow mindedness from a bloke paid a small fortune to say Belmont is the "priciest" option. Gee good english John!

Not only that, have you seen the amount of high rise units built at Burswood lately? There's another couple of thousand people coming in and out of there.

Cheap today is often more costly further down the track. Spend the extra money today at today's going rate and you can always look back down the track and say that's a pittance today, and particularly when you are talking about something involving real estate. Take the Perth entertainment centre site for example owned by Channel 7. I think they offered it to the govt for 1 million shortly after it was closed down. The govt knocked it back and i shudder to think what that land is worth today? 5 - 10 times that amount you would think. The govt probably consulted John Langoulant back then too and took his advice.

And if Belmont Park's isolation is a problem, HELLO, ever heard of bridges? Farken build another traffic bridge across to EP or Maylands and/or a couple of decent footbridges so people can park across the river and walk across and have extra lanes for buses or trams?

What ever you do Colin, don't waste another cent on that idiot Langoulant.

01-30-2011, 06:50 PM	#14
c6vkuNRg Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 361 Senior Member	But I have always liked Belmont Park as a site. Like DD said it has enormous room for parking (much like the old Waverly in Vic). The East Perth powerstation site is laughable. I have spent alot of time down there with work and how they could ever expect a 70,000 seat stadium to work there is a joke. Getting Belmont Park off the racing industry would be a problem. But I would vote for it hands down. Gas that clown John Langoulant was the one who got paid a fortune over about a year to come up with East Perth power station as the No 1 site. It's no surprise to read in today's Sunday Times he reckons Belmont Park is the "priciest option" to build a new stadium because the govt would have to purchase the land and he came up with all sorts of negatives about how it was limited by it's isolation blah blah blah. Yet then he says Burswood is a better option. As i have said in here in response to faz, if a stadium was built on the Burswood site, it would be at the expense of the Burswood golf course (or most of it) and guess where that is? Right opposite Belmont Park and then you are competing with the 10 - 20 000 plus guests that flow in and out of Burswood every day. It is nothing more than short and narrow mindedness from a bloke paid a small fortune to say Belmont is the "priciest" option. Gee good english John! Not only that, have you seen the amount of high rise units built at Burswood lately? There's another couple of thousand people coming in and out of there. Cheap today is often more costly further down the track. Spend the extra money today at today's going rate and you can always look back down the track and say that's a pittance today, and particularly when you are talking about something involving real estate. Take the Perth entertainment centre site for example owned by Channel 7. I think they offered it to the govt for 1 million shortly after it was closed down. The govt knocked it back and i shudder to think what that land is worth today? 5 - 10 times that amount you would think. The govt probably consulted John Langoulant back then too and took his advice. And if Belmont Park's isolation is a problem, HELLO, ever heard of bridges? Farken build another traffic bridge across to EP or Maylands and/or a couple of decent footbridges so people can park across the river and walk across and have extra lanes for buses or trams? What ever you do Colin, don't waste another cent on that idiot Langoulant.
	Quote