New Brisbane Stadium (2032 Olympics)

[Zayne Dorko]

Now that the Lions have over 60,000 members - surely the Gabba gets rebuilt or they build Victoria Park. Why does the cost of the new stadium have to be added to the Olympics cost? Gabba needs to be replaced and we need a venue for Cricket and AFL, just call it a separate cost - if this new stadium happens to be used for the Olympics too, so be it...

 

[acm21]

Now that the Lions have over 60,000 members - surely the Gabba gets rebuilt or they build Victoria Park. Why does the cost of the new stadium have to be added to the Olympics cost? Gabba needs to be replaced and we need a venue for Cricket and AFL, just call it a separate cost - if this new stadium happens to be used for the Olympics too, so be it...

The qld government won't pay for a 15-20k rectangular stadium in Brisbane, and lang Park is probably not upto scratch long term.
The Brisbane/qld stadium infrastructure needs a total rethink

 

[Roogal]

What should be looked at is where the future home of the Brisbane Lions and the future home of Test Cricket in Brisbane will be. All I have heard about the GABBA recently has been that the inner workings of the ground don't work and it won't be able to host events like AFL football or Test Cricket past the time of the 2032 Olympics. Does Queensland want to build a new GABBA at its current location, or do we build a new venue at a new location. The venue will pass the Olympics venues having a future use as the venue will be the home of the Brisbane Lions and the home of Test Cricket when it is played in Brisbane. Brisbane is losing to Perth and Adelaide because both cities have new venues or upgraded venues for Test Cricket.

The space at the GABBA is one of its drawbacks. However if it took the East Brisbane Primary School site and all surrounding land, and connected to the new Cross River Rail Station, from what we have seen would be a wonderful stadium.

The 2032 Olympic Games should be an opportunity for Brisbane to create a venue that will be that main stadium for the games, and will be the home of the Brisbane Lions and Cricket in Brisbane.

Considering that the Perth Stadium which seats 60,000 was completed only 6 years ago and cost $1.2 billion, why is the projected cost of the proposed 50,000 seat Victoria Park Stadium costed at $3.6 billion? Somebody is definitely having a piss take on the Queensland and Australian taxpayers. A stadium that large ought not cost anywhere near that much money. Consider that the total re-build of Kardinia Park in Geelong cost $450 million for a 40,000 seat arena, and the facilities there are as good as any stadium in Australia.

A $1.6 billion makeover at the QSAC should involve the construction of perhaps two permanent new stands on either side of the main arena with combined seating for 30,000, perhaps similar in design to the Adelaide Oval with large grassed standing berms at either end with a capacity for several thousand each that would have temporary stands built over them for the Olympics and removed after the Games. This coupled with a complete makeover of the existing training athletics track at the QSAC featuring a 5000 capacity stand could become the new QSAC after Games, and the existing main QE2 arena could be permanently converted into an AFL and cricket arena after the Games by having the two permanent stand and the grassed terraces at each end. Certainly, a makeover of that magnitude should not cost anything more than $1.6 billion.

 

[RedV3x]

Considering that the Perth Stadium which seats 60,000 was completed only 6 years ago and cost $1.2 billion, why is the projected cost of the proposed 50,000 seat Victoria Park Stadium costed at $3.6 billion?

The true cost of Perth stadium is close to $ 2 billion with transport infrastructure.
There are reasons why the same Perth Stadium could have been built for approximately half the cost somewhere else.
The Adelaide Oval with a capacity of 50k was built much more cheaply.

The actual cost is irrelevant - it's going to cost a lot and it's unavoidable.
It' makes the most sense to build a stadium that will deliver after the Olympics.
It seems that everyone agrees that a new stadium is needed so it makes no sense to
add the cost of temporary stadiums to the cost of rebuilding the Gabba.

Stadium costs should be independent of location .so that should not be an issue at all.
Transport infrastructure costs will vary.

Stadium costs were not independent of location in Perth because the build on a rubbish tip required a concrete bowl design. .Stadium costs were not independent of location in Perth because of the need to add railway and road infrastructure.

 

[Demonoid]

Queensland Opposition Leader David Crisafulli leaves the door open to rebuild Gabba for 2032 Olympics​

• By Jack McKay
• By Kate McKenna
• Topic:State and Territory Elections

Mon 7 Oct

Queensland LNP leaves door open to Gabba rebuild, labelling QSAC proposal an 'embarrassment'

Opposition Leader David Crisafulli suggests a rebuild or upgrade of the Gabba would be "part of the mix" of a planned Olympics review to be ordered by an LNP government.

www.abc.net.au

 

[BigVic]

As it stands the Lions will have to relocate for a few seasons if the LNP goes with the Gabba option.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Queensland Opposition Leader David Crisafulli leaves the door open to rebuild Gabba for 2032 Olympics​

• By Jack McKay
• By Kate McKenna
• Topic:State and Territory Elections

Mon 7 Oct

Queensland LNP leaves door open to Gabba rebuild, labelling QSAC proposal an 'embarrassment'

Opposition Leader David Crisafulli suggests a rebuild or upgrade of the Gabba would be "part of the mix" of a planned Olympics review to be ordered by an LNP government.

www.abc.net.au

Trying to get votes without commiting either way.
Sitting on the fence and we know hat happens to people who sit on the fence

 

[acm21]

As it stands the Lions will have to relocate for a few seasons if the LNP goes with the Gabba option.

Vic Park will be more expensive to set up but probably the best option long term if (big if), they do it properly

 

[RedV3x]

Vic Park will be more expensive to set up but probably the best option long term if (big if), they do it properly

A decent stadium with decent capacity and decent public transport access and dispersion
is worth the little extra especially when you add in the cost and inconvenience of "temporary" stadiums.

 

[errant bounce]

Governments getting all frigid about the cost of stadiums is pretty paranoid. they're always going to cost a heap but the cost is also going to keep going up, too.

The Gabba looked hagged ten years ago and looks embarrassing now. they really need a new stadium in the next 24 months, not five years.

 

[BigVic]

Will be an embarrassment for the Lions/Heat to play at an ageing Gabba rather than a world-class stadium which is miles behind Optus Stadium which seats 60,000

 

[iameviljez]

Governments getting all frigid about the cost of stadiums is pretty paranoid. they're always going to cost a heap but the cost is also going to keep going up, too.

The Gabba looked hagged ten years ago and looks embarrassing now. they really need a new stadium in the next 24 months, not five years.

It's not that bad.

Ingress/egress is a bit painful, but otherwise, it's ok.

 

[RedV3x]

It's not that bad.

Ingress/egress is a bit painful, but otherwise, it's ok.

If you want to retrieve anything log term from the Olympics then it's advertising.
You want a stadium that says something and not just "OK"
If you want to retrieve anything log term from the Olympics then it's infrastructure that is a capital gain
not just necessary expenditure.

 

[Aussie in exile]

Governments getting all frigid about the cost of stadiums is pretty paranoid. they're always going to cost a heap but the cost is also going to keep going up, too.

The Gabba looked hagged ten years ago and looks embarrassing now. they really need a new stadium in the next 24 months, not five years.

It's not going to happen and neither is the 2032 olympics in Brisbane.

 

[wizardwaffle]

There is really only one answer for the Brisbane Stadium problem. QSAC was seen as the reason why the Lions membership grew when the Broncos played there. It is not near public transport. The GABBA hasn't got the land around it to grow. The stands are built over the roads around the ground already. The Victoria Park option is the best as it will be near public transport and has space to grow. Here is a picture of the proposed stadium.

The stadium is close to Brisbane. A good name for the stadium would be Brisbane Olympic Stadium or BOS. The stadium can be built for the 2032 Olympics, and then host cricket and football from after the Olympics. Until then the GABBA can be the venue for cricket and football.

 

[Roogal]

There is really only one answer for the Brisbane Stadium problem. QSAC was seen as the reason why the Lions membership grew when the Broncos played there. It is not near public transport. The GABBA hasn't got the land around it to grow. The stands are built over the roads around the ground already. The Victoria Park option is the best as it will be near public transport and has space to grow. Here is a picture of the proposed stadium.

The stadium is close to Brisbane. A good name for the stadium would be Brisbane Olympic Stadium or BOS. The stadium can be built for the 2032 Olympics, and then host cricket and football from after the Olympics. Until then the GABBA can be the venue for cricket and football.

Somebody else pointed out the fact that the Perth Stadium was built on toxic land that had to be de-toxified and have a railway line built to it. The 60,000 seat Perth Stadium cost $1.3 billion and the other works associated with land remediation and railway line totaled $2 billion. So why is the proposed Victoria Park option which isn't on toxic land, that already has motorways and railway lines adjacent projected to cost $3.6 billion? You all ought to be asking this question because those of you who pay taxes like me, are going to be footing the bill.

I have said it before on this thread, Queensland has many other urgent broken infrastructure problems and a growing population that still demands all of the new infrastructure to be built to support that growing population. Holding the Olympics is fine, but only if you can afford it. Which BTW is why I would never advocate for Melbourne to have ever considered it for 2032 or at any point in the foreseeable future, even if it was eligible to bid in the first instance. Queensland has similar issues to Victoria with poor regional roads, hospital ramping, a booming population that needs schools and new hospitals, roads and everything else that goes with relentless suburban spread. That's before we even consider the shortages of police, teachers, medical professionals that every other state is also enduring as well.

These considerations, all coupled with the shutting down of power stations and transitioning the energy grid to alternatives is costing consumers and taxpayers billions. Queensland's State debt is per-capita almost on par with Victoria's. The organisers of the Olympics cannot back out because the ramifications for doing so would be infinitely worse than Victoria pulling out of the Comm Games. So yes, the 2032 Olympics have to work, but they should not send the State broke doing so.

Queenslanders and the Games organisers have to put vanity and the "Keeping up with the Jones" (Our stadiums are better than the previous host cities) aside and do what it takes to get the Games over the line, but to do so WITHIN OUR MEANS. There is no pressure on Brisbane to do otherwise, because at the end of the day, no other city in the world was willing to take on the 2032 Games in the first place. The IOC have publicly stated that they want future host cities to scale back on their spending for the Games in order to make the Games more aspirational and affordable for future potential bidding cities. The penny has dropped at the IOC and with potential host cities world wide that spending $15-25 billion on what is essentially a 16 day sporting gymkhana is totally unacceptable.

Costs have massively escalated from the $2.2 billion that Sydney spent on the 2000 Games. Yes, security costs have played a part in the cost increases since 2000, but still the escalation of costs in hosting the Olympics has spiralled well and truly beyond inflation. Keeping in mind folks that $2.2 billion in 2000 equates to $4.37 billion today (Source: Inflation Tool Calculator) when you factor for the effects of inflation over the last 24 years. Yet projections for costs of the 2032 Games are that taxpayers ought not expect any spare change out of at least $15 billion for the 2032 Games considering that the governments (Federal and State) have already allocated $7 billion for the village and stadiums alone.

 

[Underarm]

Somebody else pointed out the fact that the Perth Stadium was built on toxic land that had to be de-toxified and have a railway line built to it. The 60,000 seat Perth Stadium cost $1.3 billion and the other works associated with land remediation and railway line totaled $2 billion. So why is the proposed Victoria Park option which isn't on toxic land, that already has motorways and railway lines adjacent projected to cost $3.6 billion? You all ought to be asking this question because those of you who pay taxes like me, are going to be footing the bill.

I have said it before on this thread, Queensland has many other urgent broken infrastructure problems and a growing population that still demands all of the new infrastructure to be built to support that growing population. Holding the Olympics is fine, but only if you can afford it. Which BTW is why I would never advocate for Melbourne to have ever considered it for 2032 or at any point in the foreseeable future, even if it was eligible to bid in the first instance. Queensland has similar issues to Victoria with poor regional roads, hospital ramping, a booming population that needs schools and new hospitals, roads and everything else that goes with relentless suburban spread. That's before we even consider the shortages of police, teachers, medical professionals that every other state is also enduring as well.

These considerations, all coupled with the shutting down of power stations and transitioning the energy grid to alternatives is costing consumers and taxpayers billions. Queensland's State debt is per-capita almost on par with Victoria's. The organisers of the Olympics cannot back out because the ramifications for doing so would be infinitely worse than Victoria pulling out of the Comm Games. So yes, the 2032 Olympics have to work, but they should not send the State broke doing so.

Queenslanders and the Games organisers have to put vanity and the "Keeping up with the Jones" (Our stadiums are better than the previous host cities) aside and do what it takes to get the Games over the line, but to do so WITHIN OUR MEANS. There is no pressure on Brisbane to do otherwise, because at the end of the day, no other city in the world was willing to take on the 2032 Games in the first place. The IOC have publicly stated that they want future host cities to scale back on their spending for the Games in order to make the Games more aspirational and affordable for future potential bidding cities. The penny has dropped at the IOC and with potential host cities world wide that spending $15-25 billion on what is essentially a 16 day sporting gymkhana is totally unacceptable.

Costs have massively escalated from the $2.2 billion that Sydney spent on the 2000 Games. Yes, security costs have played a part in the cost increases since 2000, but still the escalation of costs in hosting the Olympics has spiralled well and truly beyond inflation. Keeping in mind folks that $2.2 billion in 2000 equates to $4.37 billion today (Source: Inflation Tool Calculator) when you factor for the effects of inflation over the last 24 years. Yet projections for costs of the 2032 Games are that taxpayers ought not expect any spare change out of at least $15 billion for the 2032 Games considering that the governments (Federal and State) have already allocated $7 billion for the village and stadiums alone.

The Gabba is already the worst cricket ground in the country, and too small for the Lions. It will need to be updated at some point in the next 15 years. Why not do it before the biggest event in the world in 8 years time?