RAIL - Back On Track Forum

We are at critical point here in Queensland with the future of the Brisbane Olympic Games.

Have your vote or say as applicable.

Thanks.

Other:
Build a new stadium but not at Victoria Park.

1) The VP greenspace has only just been reclaimed, it would be a shame to lose it already.
2) VP is not an entertainment precinct, there's not a significant number of pubs or restaurants there.
 - If you build a stadium which "only has a 12% footprint", you will eventually develop the rest of the park, ruining the greenspace forever.
3) There are other, better sites for a new stadium, such as over the Woolloongabba CRR station

Plenty of examples of stadiums in parks, this is ideal with noise and crowd considerations.

Spring hill could potentially get a rail station.

Park loss - just go to Roma Street instead.

I prefer Quirk's review, but demolish the Gabba and build the indoor arena there. Better transport options...

Where do you got for a drink or bite to eat after watching a match a VP? It's a 25-30min walk to the Valley or CBD? The park is bordered by a university campus, a hospital, a residential neighbourhood and the ICB. Even if you build a massive pedestrian overpass over the ICB and train tracks, you still have to walk through Spring Hill to get anywhere interesting.

VP is an urban oasis that some cities can only dream of. These massive greenspaces are only ever destroyed, never created. Brisbane is so lucky to have reclaimed it for the public. Destroying it is criminal.

The Roma Street parklands are what, less than 1/10th the size? It's not even remotely comparable.

QuoteWhere do you got for a drink or bite to eat after watching a match a VP?

It's really no different to walking 1200m to get from Melbourne Park (MCG, Rod Laver etc) through Birrarung Marr.
Or Perth Stadium....1100m walk to Crown, or there is one large pub onsite.

I'd say if a stadium got built, more Venues would open in Kelvin Grove Urban Village, or the Normanby will get very popular.

I dont really agree with a stadium "Over" the CRR station, because this block of land is even smaller than the current Gabba site.

QuoteWhere do you got for a drink or bite to eat after watching a match a VP?

Honestly a temporary eating facility made with food trucks would be just fine. Some decent production and set dressing would be perfectly acceptable. Eat street 2.0. Personally doesn't bother me and as Gazza said if you want something a bit more ""classy"", a short work to KG urban village, Normanby, Spring Hill etc.

Not 100% into any option on the table, but I think VP stadium wins it for me, if it were built at either end and most of the space is still parkland in the end. I really struggle with the idea that a temporary boost to QSAC that you tear down most of afterwards meets the criteria of either being value for money or leaving a legacy for SE QLD.

How did we go from "Gabba rebuild is too expensive" to the solution being "an even more expensive stadium in Victoria Park"?

As for the Gabba CRR site, you don't have to be bound by the existing roads, you can extend past Main St and unto the land of the current Gabba.

Quote from: Habitant on March 21, 2024, 14:04:05 PMHow did we go from "Gabba rebuild is too expensive" to the solution being "an even more expensive stadium in Victoria Park"?

If a poll option could seriously involve a time machine and not bidding for the games in the first place, I probably would have gone for that  but I think in general it's important we do our utmost both individually and as a community to see through our commitments.

VP at least has (at least in my view) somewhat less community impacts (acknowledging that's debatable).

QuoteHow did we go from "Gabba rebuild is too expensive" to the solution being "an even more expensive stadium in Victoria Park".

Because there was a perception that you could spend about $3b on the Gabba, and only get 6000 more seats (For a total of 48,000, which is too low)

Whereas if you built greenfield, you could do 60,000 or 70,000 for not much extra, so the actual cost per seat goes down.

QuoteAs for the Gabba CRR site, you don't have to be bound by the existing roads, you can extend past Main St and unto the land of the current Gabba.

It's not just the length but the width.

When youre talking about having stadiums that have to go over roads and all these other complex features, you're doing it wrong IMHO.

Where's the option to just go back to the Gabba rebuild? Or Albion?

The choice has gotten worse and worse over time, mostly because of political spinelessness.

Anyway, of these options, I favour the Quirk review in full, though I wouldn't permanently demolish the Gabba (and as I've said elsewhere I don't think any government will). I'd still keep it as a sports venue, just a smaller one.

Interesting results!  Still a few days to go for this poll.

Thanks.

I voted Other.

I think Miles's QSAC solution is half arsed. We've gone from a Gabba solution that was 'too expensive', with a sticker price of $2.7B+ to a 'cheaper' solution of 1.6B QSAC + 1.0B SS. so essentially the same spend for a temporary solution that is reduced afterwards.

It's a hard pill to swallow when the original proposition was that SEQ had 90% of the venues, and we can use the Olympics as a catalyst for infrastructure.

What would my solution be?

Op1. If it's all about using legacy stadia and boosting infrastructure.
Take Miles's solution and a scrap the QSAC build. Use some of the QSAC $1.6B to add temp seats at Carrara, along with an east-west light rail route. Opening/closing ceremony at Suncorp.
With the left over money, throw it onto DSC.

Op2. The sexy option.
New stadium here we come. My order of preference for location would be Gabba, VP, Albion.
I struggle to understand why Brisbane's new stadium is a similar cost to both Perth's new stadium AND Sydney's rebuilt SFS, combined.  (even after allowing for a healthy uplift in inflation).

Gabba side note:
I'd love to know what field dimensions they've assumed for the Gabba option (noting that AFL/cricket ovals do not have consistent sizes. Gabba is IIRC one of the largest, wiki lists it as 170x150m . Could it be smaller/narrower to better fit the available block?

I think we can see even with this small poll how varied and divided opinions are.

I think every option is defensible and every choice will damage the government making it. The only solution is the main political party's making a choice and sticking with it.

I think Labor have made a choice, the LNP (at a state level) are effectively backing that choice in by not aggressively fighting for another option, the Greens will oppose both Gabba and VP so this is the least bad option for them, KAP will oppose any large spends (same for ONP).

So I actually don't think this decision will change because there's no political imperative to do so. I think even Schrinner is only arguing so that he can stick up for developer mates and help the LNP play both sides for the state election knowing full well that there will be no change to the plan.

Every Olympics is a poisoned chalice. It's a political boon when the bid is won and when the games are on but everything in the middle is a political and social disaster with years of division, fighting, and media doomsaying.