The SMA has until August 31 to refine the design concepts, but plans released on Friday depicted a 50,000-seat stadium linked to the Adelaide CBD by a pedestrian bridge that was part of the preliminary designs in December.
The aim of the design was to transform Adelaide Oval into a state-of-the-art stadium and entertainment precinct while retaining the iconic features of the world-famous ground.
The heritage-listed scoreboard has been retained in the latest plans, as well as the grassed ‘hill’ area at the northern end of the ground.
The current design also includes a 3000-capacity ‘shed’ or entertainment area similar to the Crows’ venue at West Lakes, a ‘live’ video site and a BBQ area, so fans can continue their pre-match car park tradition at the new venue.
The issue over onsite car parking is yet to be resolved, but the SMA aims to secure 3800 spaces before the state government’s August deadline.
SMA chief executive Leigh Whicker said the development was still at the proposal stage, but that the early signs were positive.
“An incredible amount of work has gone into these designs to ensure we meet the expectations not only of all cricket and football stakeholders but also the people of South Australia,” said Whicker.
“Although this is an iterative process and there is still some way to go, we believe these latest concepts show that we are developing Adelaide Oval as a truly world-class stadium in the city.”
The state government recently increased its commitment to the project from $450million to $535million, amid concerns over a cost blowout.
The SMA has scaled back the cost of the redevelopment by incorporating the ‘shed’ into the Oval itself, rather than building it at Memorial Drive.
The government has also helped out by absorbing the cost involved in building the pedestrian bridge, but there were suggestions on Friday that the current designs were still over budget.
SMA chairman Ian McLachlan maintained that neither the SANFL nor the South Australian Cricket Association would contribute any funds to the project, saying the design team would continue to cut back on features of the redevelopment until the cost came in line with the government’s $535million grant.
“If we got down to (a cost of) $535million we would stop (cutting back). The process is absolutely continual, so I’m not going to say what the cost is now because tomorrow, next week or whenever we have our next meeting, it’ll be changed,” McLachlan said.
“Some concepts are still sitting out there on the right that we’d like to do, but the question is how could we do those and still bring them into the ($535million) project?”
