News Gabba Upgrade & Olympics News

[Andyz]

This is true. It just seems like a big unforced error by Crisafulli to make himself a public liar within a few months of getting into office.

Oh well, I don't care as long as we get a good solution.

This is kind of my thinking too.....it was unnecessary to make a stadium commitment beyond holding the 100 day review.

However Tony Abbott said before an election no new taxes then immediately introduced a "debt levy" after victory....so it does happen....but you'd think he'd at least be softening his language about it by now if Vic Park was a possibility.

If he's planning on renovating the Gabba instead so it's not technically a "new" stadium, it will be money down the toilet & won't yield any significant capacity increase - not likely to be convincing CA to move a test back to Brissie either & the Lions/supporters all suffer missing games for the foreseeable future.

Saddest thing is both politicians treat us constituents as so dumb....they are trying to pretend they are "saving" the state money but all both are doing is ensuring we spend and waste oh so much more for less!

Dumb, Dumb & Dumber!

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I assume (image below) this is what you are talking about.

It is indeed.

As you mentioned the recent government announcement of rail to airport most likely stops this proposal.

I think you might have mixed two different things together here. There already is rail to the airport. What Brisbane City Council are now proposing is to extend their "Metro" (in reality a longer bus that uses busway or bus lanes) to the airport either through the Airport Link tunnel, or by converting the Doomben railway line to busway and connecting one end to the airport and the other end to the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital (though they haven't specified how this going to happen).

However, while Miles appeared with Schrinner at the press conference to announce the plans for the "Metro" extensions (which include other lines too), the Transport Minister later said "the state government does not believe these initially will be viable when you consider the existence of the current rail line and infrastructure. However as council is keen to consider these options, we are prepared to have them examined during the business case stage".

I view that as the state and the council putting on a united front to get federal funding for the "Metro" extensions as a whole, but the state doesn't think the airport extension is actually worth doing. I can't imagine they like the idea of spending money to dig up a functioning railway for conversion into a busway when they have a hundred other priorities to manage. It'd be much simpler and cheaper to run the airport service via Airport Link.

Regardless, I don't think the "Metro" extension proposal stops the idea of the Brisbane subway. The sheer amount of high-density residential property around West End and Teneriffe means there's a need for higher capacity services than what buses can provide between those areas and the CBD. The second and third most popular bus routes in Brisbane, the 60 and 199, run from West End to Teneriffe via the CBD. At some point it's going to be worth it to build underground rail between them instead of adding yet more buses.

And anything going to Teneriffe can also go to Hamilton. Whether it goes past Hamilton to the airport is another question.

That's one hell of a tunnel. Toowong to Newstead then Newstead to Hamilton
Not saying it is not worth doing but what would be the costs.

The costs would be very high, but so would the benefits. When it comes to moving lots of people frequently and reliably, there's no better mode of transport than a true metro, by which I mean a train line that is underground or elevated for its full length, and doesn't share tracks with other lines. (The state government prefers the term "subway" like in New York). There are rarely delays and it carries more people than our existing trains can.



In Sydney they just opened a new section of metro through the CBD. While it cost a staggering amount of money ($21.6 billion for 15.5km of line), in its first week, it carried 200 000 people a day and had 99% of services run on time. By comparison, SEQ's train system carries about 120 000 people a day. That's all lines combined. So it's worth the outlay if the population density is high.

Just looking at Cross River rail.
Costs now around $6.3 billion with just 6km underground.

View attachment 2098793

CRR had some complex issues, like the pandemic, huge increases in material costs, industrial action and having to integrate the line with tracks also used by other services. Hopefully the cost of construction starts to fall the further away we get from the pandemic, but who knows.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

The plan outlined was essentially kicking the can down the road so more 'delaying' end of life rather than actually fixing anything

True. At the end of the day, the Gabba stands were only designed with a 50 year shelf life. They all have to be replaced sometime, and the repairs Quirk talked about for that $1 billion didn't involve full replacement of the stands. But it will repair the stuff that's going to conk out within the next ten years.

However Tony Abbott said before an election no new taxes then immediately introduced a "debt levy" after victory....so it does happen....but you'd think he'd at least be softening his language about it by now if Vic Park was a possibility.

Crisafulli would do well to remember what happened to Tony Abbott after he immediately broke his word after winning the election. And what happened to Campbell Newman after he immediately broke his word after winning the election. So I am a little worried that he's talking so tough about it. But at least the stadium plans will be too far gone to change course by the time the 2028 election rolls around.

Saddest thing is both politicians treat us constituents as so dumb....they are trying to pretend they are "saving" the state money but all both are doing is ensuring we spend and waste oh so much more for less!

Dumb, Dumb & Dumber!

Modern politics is all about looking good. That's why although I have political leanings, I try not to put any faith in individual politicians.

 

[Perrip]

Crisafulli would do well to remember what happened to Tony Abbott after he immediately broke his word after winning the election. And what happened to Campbell Newman after he immediately broke his word after winning the election. So I am a little worried that he's talking so tough about it. But at least the stadium plans will be too far gone to change course by the time the 2028 election rolls around.

Schrinner backflipped on his Vic Park position after the LGA elections in March. So, it's not the wildest idea to think he'll change his position on it post-October election.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Schrinner backflipped on his Vic Park position after the LGA elections in March. So, it's not the wildest idea to think he'll change his position on it post-October election.

It's fundamentally not a council decision in the end, and people don't pay as much attention to council. I don't disagree he'll probably change his position, it's just a weird risk for him to take.

 

[Dalions]

It's fundamentally not a council decision in the end, and people don't pay as much attention to council. I don't disagree he'll probably change his position, it's just a weird risk for him to take.

I would hardly call it a risk.
The LNP are in the box seat to win the election and if he does, it won’t be the only backflip he does in his 4 year term.
It’s just Politics. They all do it.
And if we get a shiny brand new Stadium out of it in 7-8 years time then I for one won’t be complaining about his backflip.

 

[Section 5]

How can the LNP get out of a statement (promise) via the review.
You also have to remember you need to get the IOC on board as well as the Commonwealth.
He could say after the review (assuming they recommend a new stadium).
............................................................

I said on a few occasions i did not want a new stadium.
I did not give reasons at the time, but it was obvious to me we could not afford a $3 billion stadium when we only have $3.535 billion in total to spend. Of that total $935 million was agreed to co fund the minor events. So not possible.
Labor was probably looking at it this way too.
I also hated wasting $1.6 billion on the QSAC idea being the majority of funds available.
So was hoping the review will come up with alternatives and they have.

Today i announce that i and the LNP have accepted most of the review's recommendations.

The major recommendations we will go forward with are
Renegotiate the State and Commonwealth funding deal to 50/50 split. The total funding remains the same being $7 billion.
I have contacted the Commonwealth, and they are onboard as long as their contribution stays the same and minor venue agreement also stays the same.
By doing this it opens up where we can spend funds more efficiently and get what's best for Brisbane.
The proposed 2nd site of the Brisbane Arena has to many limitations and will still be extremely costly and not really viable according to the review.
Today i announce a new stadium at Victoria Park or Hamilton to be a priority with an estimated cost of $3.2 billion.
An urgent validation reports and business case needed on both sites.
The results of these reports will determine the chosen site.
So, how can i justify changing my mind on no new stadium.
The review believe Brisbane needs a new entertainment Centre and a new oval stadium but can't afford both at the same time.
After reading the review i have come to the same conclusion.
The review states we can get both, but an oval stadium is needed more for Olympics than an Entertainment Centre with a drop in pool.
This plan has no legacy for swimming. Swimming Australia and past greats have been stating this for many months. Australia usually wins more gold in the pool than other sports.
The review recommends a legacy for swimming at Chandler and still retain one for Athletics at QSAC be it an expensive one.
The QSAC site is used by way more local people than Lang Park, The Gabba and other venues, so very important to the community.
The review recommends upgrading QSAC even though it will only be used as a training venue for the Olympics.
A training track has not been mentioned in previous Brisbane Games plans.
This was an oversite as they need someone to train, and it has to be world class.
QSAC will still get that major upgrade to a modern 14k capacity and be a great legacy for athletics in the future.

These are the basic figures.

$3.2 billion: New Stadium at Victoria Park/Hamilton
$0.5 billion: Gabba upgrade stays the same
$0.62 billion: New pool Chandler (Quirk review costing)
$1.87 billion: Minor venues stays the same
$0.6 billion: QSAC training venue only. Legacy mode 14k upgrade. (Quirk review costing)
$6.79 billion: total

After the Olympics the Gabba site to have a new Entertainment Centre. Partly funded by land sales from the Gabba site.
Sale of land in this site to developer for units/mixed business/greenspace.
Validation reports at the appropriate time.
Consideration to see if the Entertainment Centre can be built on the Cross-River Rail location above Wooloongabba rail station.
This would make more space available on the Gabba site to sell to developers which would be preferrable.

 

[Grasshopper17]

How can the LNP get out of a statement (promise) via the review.
You also have to remember you need to get the IOC on board as well as the Commonwealth.
He could say after the review (assuming they recommend a new stadium).
............................................................

I said on a few occasions i did not want a new stadium.
I did not give reasons at the time, but it was obvious to me we could not afford a $3 billion stadium when we only have $3.535 billion in total to spend. Of that total $935 million was agreed to co fund the minor events. So not possible.
Labor was probably looking at it this way too.
I also hated wasting $1.6 billion on the QSAC idea being the majority of funds available.
So was hoping the review will come up with alternatives and they have.

Today i announce that i and the LNP have accepted most of the review's recommendations.

The major recommendations we will go forward with are
Renegotiate the State and Commonwealth funding deal to 50/50 split. The total funding remains the same being $7 billion.
I have contacted the Commonwealth, and they are onboard as long as their contribution stays the same and minor venue agreement also stays the same.
By doing this it opens up where we can spend funds more efficiently and get what's best for Brisbane.
The proposed 2nd site of the Brisbane Arena has to many limitations and will still be extremely costly and not really viable according to the review.
Today i announce a new stadium at Victoria Park or Hamilton to be a priority with an estimated cost of $3.2 billion.
An urgent validation reports and business case needed on both sites.
The results of these reports will determine the chosen site.
So, how can i justify changing my mind on no new stadium.
The review believe Brisbane needs a new entertainment Centre and a new oval stadium but can't afford both at the same time.
After reading the review i have come to the same conclusion.
The review states we can get both, but an oval stadium is needed more for Olympics than an Entertainment Centre with a drop in pool.
This plan has no legacy for swimming. Swimming Australia and past greats have been stating this for many months. Australia usually wins more gold in the pool than other sports.
The review recommends a legacy for swimming at Chandler and still retain one for Athletics at QSAC be it an expensive one.
The QSAC site is used by way more local people than Lang Park, The Gabba and other venues, so very important to the community.
The review recommends upgrading QSAC even though it will only be used as a training venue for the Olympics.
A training track has not been mentioned in previous Brisbane Games plans.
This was an oversite as they need someone to train, and it has to be world class.
QSAC will still get that major upgrade to a modern 14k capacity and be a great legacy for athletics in the future.

These are the basic figures.

$3.2 billion: New Stadium at Victoria Park/Hamilton
$0.5 billion: Gabba upgrade stays the same
$0.62 billion: New pool Chandler (Quirk review costing)
$1.87 billion: Minor venues stays the same
$0.6 billion: QSAC training venue only. Legacy mode 14k upgrade. (Quirk review costing)
$6.79 billion: total

After the Olympics the Gabba site to have a new Entertainment Centre. Partly funded by land sales from the Gabba site.
Sale of land in this site to developer for units/mixed business/greenspace.
Validation reports at the appropriate time.
Consideration to see if the Entertainment Centre can be built on the Cross-River Rail location above Wooloongabba rail station.
This would make more space available on the Gabba site to sell to developers which would be preferrable.

Vote 1 Section 5

 

[Walshawk]

How can the LNP get out of a statement (promise) via the review.
You also have to remember you need to get the IOC on board as well as the Commonwealth.
He could say after the review (assuming they recommend a new stadium).
............................................................

I said on a few occasions i did not want a new stadium.
I did not give reasons at the time, but it was obvious to me we could not afford a $3 billion stadium when we only have $3.535 billion in total to spend. Of that total $935 million was agreed to co fund the minor events. So not possible.
Labor was probably looking at it this way too.
I also hated wasting $1.6 billion on the QSAC idea being the majority of funds available.
So was hoping the review will come up with alternatives and they have.

Today i announce that i and the LNP have accepted most of the review's recommendations.

The major recommendations we will go forward with are
Renegotiate the State and Commonwealth funding deal to 50/50 split. The total funding remains the same being $7 billion.
I have contacted the Commonwealth, and they are onboard as long as their contribution stays the same and minor venue agreement also stays the same.
By doing this it opens up where we can spend funds more efficiently and get what's best for Brisbane.
The proposed 2nd site of the Brisbane Arena has to many limitations and will still be extremely costly and not really viable according to the review.
Today i announce a new stadium at Victoria Park or Hamilton to be a priority with an estimated cost of $3.2 billion.
An urgent validation reports and business case needed on both sites.
The results of these reports will determine the chosen site.
So, how can i justify changing my mind on no new stadium.
The review believe Brisbane needs a new entertainment Centre and a new oval stadium but can't afford both at the same time.
After reading the review i have come to the same conclusion.
The review states we can get both, but an oval stadium is needed more for Olympics than an Entertainment Centre with a drop in pool.
This plan has no legacy for swimming. Swimming Australia and past greats have been stating this for many months. Australia usually wins more gold in the pool than other sports.
The review recommends a legacy for swimming at Chandler and still retain one for Athletics at QSAC be it an expensive one.
The QSAC site is used by way more local people than Lang Park, The Gabba and other venues, so very important to the community.
The review recommends upgrading QSAC even though it will only be used as a training venue for the Olympics.
A training track has not been mentioned in previous Brisbane Games plans.
This was an oversite as they need someone to train, and it has to be world class.
QSAC will still get that major upgrade to a modern 14k capacity and be a great legacy for athletics in the future.

These are the basic figures.

$3.2 billion: New Stadium at Victoria Park/Hamilton
$0.5 billion: Gabba upgrade stays the same
$0.62 billion: New pool Chandler (Quirk review costing)
$1.87 billion: Minor venues stays the same
$0.6 billion: QSAC training venue only. Legacy mode 14k upgrade. (Quirk review costing)
$6.79 billion: total

After the Olympics the Gabba site to have a new Entertainment Centre. Partly funded by land sales from the Gabba site.
Sale of land in this site to developer for units/mixed business/greenspace.
Validation reports at the appropriate time.
Consideration to see if the Entertainment Centre can be built on the Cross-River Rail location above Wooloongabba rail station.
This would make more space available on the Gabba site to sell to developers which would be preferrable.

Spot on. But it may be more politically savvy to not spend a cent on the Gabba and allocate that $500m to Suncorp.

 

[Section 5]

Spot on. But it may be more politically savvy to not spend a cent on the Gabba and allocate that $500m to Suncorp.

Yes, politics is always an issue.
There is some money spare so they could throw some Suncorp way but not to increase capacity.
Just a facelift so to speak and stop them screaming to much about losing proposed funds.

But The Gabba is in need of funds just to keep opening so that has to stay.

 

[Billy ray]

Can they do a drop in pool at qsac?
Or lang park?

 

[Section 5]

Can they do a drop in pool at qsac?
Or lang park?

I imagine they can do a drop in pool anywhere.
The seating for swimming has to be reasonably close to the action though.
No point in Lang Park for the reason above as well as it is scheduled for footy games and finals.
Presently for opening/closing ceremonies too.

QSAC well that's just bad for about anything officially Olympic.

 

[Dalions]

How can the LNP get out of a statement (promise) via the review.
You also have to remember you need to get the IOC on board as well as the Commonwealth.
He could say after the review (assuming they recommend a new stadium).
............................................................

I said on a few occasions i did not want a new stadium.
I did not give reasons at the time, but it was obvious to me we could not afford a $3 billion stadium when we only have $3.535 billion in total to spend. Of that total $935 million was agreed to co fund the minor events. So not possible.
Labor was probably looking at it this way too.
I also hated wasting $1.6 billion on the QSAC idea being the majority of funds available.
So was hoping the review will come up with alternatives and they have.

Today i announce that i and the LNP have accepted most of the review's recommendations.

The major recommendations we will go forward with are
Renegotiate the State and Commonwealth funding deal to 50/50 split. The total funding remains the same being $7 billion.
I have contacted the Commonwealth, and they are onboard as long as their contribution stays the same and minor venue agreement also stays the same.
By doing this it opens up where we can spend funds more efficiently and get what's best for Brisbane.
The proposed 2nd site of the Brisbane Arena has to many limitations and will still be extremely costly and not really viable according to the review.
Today i announce a new stadium at Victoria Park or Hamilton to be a priority with an estimated cost of $3.2 billion.
An urgent validation reports and business case needed on both sites.
The results of these reports will determine the chosen site.
So, how can i justify changing my mind on no new stadium.
The review believe Brisbane needs a new entertainment Centre and a new oval stadium but can't afford both at the same time.
After reading the review i have come to the same conclusion.
The review states we can get both, but an oval stadium is needed more for Olympics than an Entertainment Centre with a drop in pool.
This plan has no legacy for swimming. Swimming Australia and past greats have been stating this for many months. Australia usually wins more gold in the pool than other sports.
The review recommends a legacy for swimming at Chandler and still retain one for Athletics at QSAC be it an expensive one.
The QSAC site is used by way more local people than Lang Park, The Gabba and other venues, so very important to the community.
The review recommends upgrading QSAC even though it will only be used as a training venue for the Olympics.
A training track has not been mentioned in previous Brisbane Games plans.
This was an oversite as they need someone to train, and it has to be world class.
QSAC will still get that major upgrade to a modern 14k capacity and be a great legacy for athletics in the future.

These are the basic figures.

$3.2 billion: New Stadium at Victoria Park/Hamilton
$0.5 billion: Gabba upgrade stays the same
$0.62 billion: New pool Chandler (Quirk review costing)
$1.87 billion: Minor venues stays the same
$0.6 billion: QSAC training venue only. Legacy mode 14k upgrade. (Quirk review costing)
$6.79 billion: total

After the Olympics the Gabba site to have a new Entertainment Centre. Partly funded by land sales from the Gabba site.
Sale of land in this site to developer for units/mixed business/greenspace.
Validation reports at the appropriate time.
Consideration to see if the Entertainment Centre can be built on the Cross-River Rail location above Wooloongabba rail station.
This would make more space available on the Gabba site to sell to developers which would be preferrable.

Quick question.

If the Government would have to pay to demolish the Gabba, before then being able to sell the land off to developers, would they actually come out in front?

Serious question!
Would the land alone be worth the cost of demolition of the Gabba?
I would nearly think not.

 

[Walshawk]

Quick question.

If the Government would have to pay to demolish the Gabba, before then being able to sell the land off to developers, would they actually come out in front?

Serious question!
Would the land alone be worth the cost of demolition of the Gabba?
I would nearly think not.

Reckon it would sell for 10 - 20 times demolition costs.

Wouldn’t cost more than $50m to demolish. Possibly a lot less. Not sure what the zoning is but would sell for hundreds of millions surely.

 

[Dalions]

Reckon it would sell for 10 - 20 times demolition costs.

What would your forecast be for demolition costs and on sale costs?

 

[Section 5]

Quick question.

If the Government would have to pay to demolish the Gabba, before then being able to sell the land off to developers, would they actually come out in front?

Serious question!
Would the land alone be worth the cost of demolition of the Gabba?
I would nearly think not.

Good questions but I don't have the information and i am not qualified to answer them. Someone on BF might be.
My opinion is the developer would not take on the project unless they could make some money.
For argument's sake. If the government only agrees to a 4-story maximum height they won't make money.
However, i believe the new Wooloongabba PDA allows for up to 75 stories in some areas.

You only have to look at the recently opened Queens wharf to imagine something suitable for the Wooloongabba area
Restricted interactive map Queens Wharf here. https://queenswharfbrisbane.com.au/explore/
Queens Wharf 4 new luxury hotels.
Star Casino
2 residential towers 1800 apartments.
Restored and activating 9 heritage buildings.

I am also not qualified to say how the Government will handle the total Gabba area assets on their books.
They own the land so a considerable asset that only increases in value.
Buildings: A quick google search says the depreciation part is usually over 40 years. But lots more involved than just depreciation.

The Gabba Towers building being about 13 stories may have to come down too.
However, they might be able to convert it to newer office space or accommodation.

I have thought about demolition costs too but have no idea what that would be.

The original Gabba validation report on full rebuild was $2.71 billion capital costs image below.
The Quirk report: Finding 1.25 - The cost of a stadium in Victoria Park ($3.0 – $3.4 billion)

Somewhere in those reports would be demolition costs but i don't think it has been mentioned anywhere.
The government agreement with the IOC was buildings to be demolished in a green way.
That's why the demolition was to take 2 years to complete. On that timeframe alone that makes it expensive.
Anything after the Olympics is not bound by that so it could come down very quickly and much cheaper if the Government agreed to that type of demolition.

 

[Pacman82]

Even if we doubled the capacity of the Gabba, we'd still have less seats than over 20 college football stadiums in the US..

The 25 biggest college football stadiums in the country

Here are the 25 biggest college football stadiums in the United States, beginning with the Big House in Ann Arbor with a capacity of 107,601.

www.ncaa.com

 

[Dalions]

Even if we doubled the capacity of the Gabba, we'd still have less seats than over 20 college football stadiums in the US..

The 25 biggest college football stadiums in the country

Here are the 25 biggest college football stadiums in the United States, beginning with the Big House in Ann Arbor with a capacity of 107,601.

www.ncaa.com

That is just nuts.

 

[Section 5]

Unlike college football the NFL opted for smaller venues but still fairly large.
Like AFL they get their money from Media rights.
The 7-minute video is good if you want a quick view of the 30 stadiums
The last stadium Fedex Field Washington looks strange and has an insane carpark

Ranking the Biggest & Smallest NFL Stadiums by Capacity

Updated rankings of the biggest and smallest NFL stadiums by capacity.

sports.betmgm.com

 

[Walshawk]

Even if we doubled the capacity of the Gabba, we'd still have less seats than over 20 college football stadiums in the US..

The 25 biggest college football stadiums in the country

Here are the 25 biggest college football stadiums in the United States, beginning with the Big House in Ann Arbor with a capacity of 107,601.

www.ncaa.com

There is virtually no second tier of American Football. There is just NFL. So College football is the next best thing, and the only football for cities that do ot have an NFL team (besides High School football).

Many of those stadiums are old and basic with little to no cover from the elements, but the crowds are huge - they get 100K every week.

 

[Dalions]

There is virtually no second tier of American Football. There is just NFL. So College football is the next best thing, and the only football for cities that do ot have an NFL team (besides High School football).

Many of those stadiums are old and basic with little to no cover from the elements, but the crowds are huge - they get 100K every week.

Have spoken to many Americans who love their College Football much more than the NFL.

 

[Walshawk]

Have spoken to many Americans who love their College Football much more than the NFL.

It’s a strange system - if you don’t make NFL, you can play in Canada otherwise your football career is over at 22.

 

[Section 5]

Looking at the costs factor i choose two NFL stadium videos built fairly recently that fall within $3 billion Australia dollars.
Two interesting videos.
One concentrating of the corporate side.
The other about competing with the big TV home screen which they viewed as their biggest competitor.

US Bank Stadium construction started 2013. Capacity 66,655
It costs US$1.44 billion adjusted for inflation @ August 2024. Thats AU$2.1 billion




Mercedes Benz Stadium construction began 2014. Capacity 71,000
Mercedes Benz Stadium US$1.92 billion adjusted for inflation @ August 2024. That's AU$2.8 billion

The Most Expensive NFL Stadiums: By Construction Costs

SoFi Stadium cost $5.95 billion to build, making it the most expensive NFL stadium in history. Here is the complete list.

frontofficesports.com

 

[Pacman82]

There is virtually no second tier of American Football. There is just NFL. So College football is the next best thing, and the only football for cities that do ot have an NFL team (besides High School football).

Many of those stadiums are old and basic with little to no cover from the elements, but the crowds are huge - they get 100K every week.

Most are well aware of the tier system over there.

I'd guess the bulk of those stadiums are in college towns too, not in a city approaching 3 million & about to host the Olympic games. Just some food for thought..

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I'd guess the bulk of those stadiums are in college towns too, not in a city approaching 3 million & about to host the Olympic games. Just some food for thought..

While that's true, two of them are in Los Angeles and one of those two will be the 2028 Olympic Stadium.