The Gabba

[Sir Rols]

Now that Brisbane 2032 has it’s own sub-forum, it’s probably time to start populating it by moving some discussions to dedicated threads. So let’s start with the possible/probable centrepiece of the games - the Gabba.

While it’s still expected to be the main games aand ceremonies stadium, and it seemed all sewn up, at the present, it’s status is not totally secure:

Quote

 

 Gabba funding for Olympic makeover unclear

The Queensland government says it is not in a position to confirm details of a review of funding arrangements for Brisbane Olympic and Paralympic infrastructure with the federal government.

The Morrison government and the state had agreed to evenly split the costs of infrastructure, but the Albanese government has been reviewing that deal.

Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk has previously promised the international sporting events will be "cost-neutral" and not burden Australian or Queensland taxpayers.

The federal government doesn't want to fund the development of the Gabba, which would add another 8000 seats taking its capacity 50,000 seats and add a new pedestrian plaza, which could cost up to $1 billion, Brisbane Times reports.

It would instead agree to contribute to other projects, such as the Brisbane Live swimming venue, which would shield it from cost blowouts on the Gabba project, the report said.

Acting premier Steven Miles says he is not in a position to confirm details of the funding review, which are still being worked out.

"We had a very productive meeting yesterday with the Australian government's infrastructure minister as well as the Commonwealth Treasurer Jim Chalmers, who is, of course, a Queenslander, and very close to what our plans are for the Olympic and Paralympic Games," Mr Miles told reporters in Cairns on Thursday.

"We're working through the final details of a funding arrangement that will see us deliver what will be fantastic venues for what will be a fantastic games."

Media reports have estimated the total cost of the games could be as much as $5 billion, with the expected economic windfall to be more than $8 billion.

There will be 32 venues, of which 84 per cent already exist, but the Gabba stadium and the Brisbane Live arena at Roma Street will be redeveloped.

Australian Associated Press

 

[Rob2012]

I don't quite understand how a $1bn redevelopment of a state owned stadium can be cost neutral to the state - at least in terms of getting the thing rebuilt. Sure, you can get naming rights sponsors and those kind of things, but not on this scale. Or perhaps you can get some contribution from the tenants but wouldn't they expect some ownership of the stadium in return for that?

The state bid for these 2032 Games, it's ultimately going to have to step up and pay for this isn't it?

Wouldn't it be better to simply say that it'll cost this amount, but the profits from the Games plus the long-term profits from a better stadium will more than cover it. Or would that argument be false?

 

[yoshi]

I know it's not our business from thousands of miles away but I still don't really get why they seem ok with what looks to me like such a poor return on their investment - a billion dollars for a renovation that'll only have 50k seats max - for an Olympics and being the main stadium in Australia's third city? I looked up the Perth stadium, that "only" cost 820 million, yet it's 60k+ for oval, and 65k for rectangular - in a smaller city? Maybe there genuinely aren't any other options, I don't know Brisbane, but it strikes as strange. 

[Rob2012]

1 hour ago, yoshi said:

I know it's not our business from thousands of miles away but I still don't really get why they seem ok with what looks to me like such a poor return on their investment - a billion dollars for a renovation that'll only have 50k seats max - for an Olympics and being the main stadium in Australia's third city? I looked up the Perth stadium, that "only" cost 820 million, yet it's 60k+ for oval, and 65k for rectangular - in a smaller city? Maybe there genuinely aren't any other options, I don't know Brisbane, but it strikes as strange. 

Firstly, I think "redeveloped" is a bit of a euphemism here. They're basically talking about knocking it down and rebuilding it.

Secondly, the Gabba looks to be in a cramped urban area, so I would assume capacity is limited by its surroundings, not by cost factors. Looking at Optus Stadium, it looks to be on a nice big piece of open flat land which means the build would be less complex and capacity not constrained.

Lastly, Optus Stadium in Perth broke ground in 2014. A decade's worth of inflation needs to be taken into account when comparing the two.

If you're saying a new stadium should've been built elsewhere because all these factors mean a Gabba redevelopment is going to be limited, you might have a point. But I don't know anywhere enough about the city or the stadium to argue for or against on that.

[Chris_Mex]

3 hours ago, yoshi said:

I know it's not our business from thousands of miles away but I still don't really get why they seem ok with what looks to me like such a poor return on their investment - a billion dollars for a renovation that'll only have 50k seats max - for an Olympics and being the main stadium in Australia's third city? I looked up the Perth stadium, that "only" cost 820 million, yet it's 60k+ for oval, and 65k for rectangular - in a smaller city? Maybe there genuinely aren't any other options, I don't know Brisbane, but it strikes as strange. 

Sydney did the same thing with allianz stadium, they demolished a 40k rectangular venue and then on the exact same land, they build another 40k rectangular field, guess it's an australian thing spending a fortune for having the exact same product

[AustralianFan]

1 hour ago, Chris_Mex said:

Sydney did the same thing with allianz stadium, they demolished a 40k rectangular venue and then on the exact same land, they build another 40k rectangular field, guess it's an australian thing spending a fortune for having the exact same product

It’s a constrained space thing, not an “Australian thing”.

R__ is right to say the oval shaped Gabba is very tightly wedged in a densely populated residential area with a heritage school building on one side.

There is the space only to expand capacity marginally.  

But what it does have is:

• has a mass people movement public transport hub with an underground train station (circled in green below under construction),
• Brisbane Metro connections (very long new electric articulated buses that look like trams, but have rubber wheels and drive on roads and dedicated busways).
• suburban bus interchange,
• a very central scenic location not far from the Main Press Centre, International Broadcasting Centre and competition venues at South Bank and the Brisbane CBD.

The Gabba,  Brisbane

The Queensland and Australian Governments are working out the funding split as we speak but I cannot see that the 2032 Ceremonies and Track and Field will be held anywhere else except the rebuilt Gabba.

Yes it is expensive.     50,000 is one of the smaller capacity Olympic Stadiums but as a legacy venue after the Games, 50,000 will suffice for the legacy sports tenants, cricket (summer) and AFL football (winter).

 

Allianz Stadium, Sydney

The new Allianz Stadium in Sydney is also in a tight space wedged between Fox Studios, Venues NSW,  Sydney Cricket Ground, University of Technology, Moore Park Road and Driver Avenue.

45,000 is about right for the legacy needs of this rectangular venue whose sports tenants are A-Leage soccer and Rugby League. Is served by two light rsil lines and a very busy bus corridor

 

 

 

[AustralianFan]

From the masterplan are lifted these images showing the proximity of Games locations around the Gabba Olympic Stadium.

 

[AustralianFan]

 

1 hour ago, AustralianFan said:

Warm-up Track, Raymond Park

The temporary warm-up athletics track to be laid at Raymond Park with athletes shuttled to and from the stadium along the two secured illuminated streets, as indicated above. 

[ulu]

12 hours ago, R__ said:

I don't quite understand how a $1bn redevelopment of a state owned stadium can be cost neutral to the state - at least in terms of getting the thing rebuilt. Sure, you can get naming rights sponsors and those kind of things, but not on this scale. Or perhaps you can get some contribution from the tenants but wouldn't they expect some ownership of the stadium in return for that?

The state bid for these 2032 Games, it's ultimately going to have to step up and pay for this isn't it?

Wouldn't it be better to simply say that it'll cost this amount, but the profits from the Games plus the long-term profits from a better stadium will more than cover it. Or would that argument be false?

 

They didn't say the stadium would be cost neutral but that the games would be cost neutral so you've got it right in the bold part.

[Sir Rols]

10 hours ago, yoshi said:

I know it's not our business from thousands of miles away but I still don't really get why they seem ok with what looks to me like such a poor return on their investment - a billion dollars for a renovation that'll only have 50k seats max - for an Olympics and being the main stadium in Australia's third city? I looked up the Perth stadium, that "only" cost 820 million, yet it's 60k+ for oval, and 65k for rectangular - in a smaller city? Maybe there genuinely aren't any other options, I don't know Brisbane, but it strikes as strange. 

 

8 hours ago, R__ said:

If you're saying a new stadium should've been built elsewhere because all these factors mean a Gabba redevelopment is going to be limited, you might have a point. But I don't know anywhere enough about the city or the stadium to argue for or against on that.

In favour of the Gabba, as well as it’s forementioned central location and transport links, it’s also one of those rare major stadiums that’s well suited for the needs of an Olympics - being a cricket oval it can accommodate a (temporary) athletics track without the design compromises and shortcomings of trying to fit it into the more common and favoured rectangular pitch formats. It’s also an iconic site for Brissie, while it’s two other iconic stadiums - Lang Park and Ballymore, are both far more suited for football and Rugby duties. Can’t really begrudge Brisbane scoring a brand-spanking new/refurbished Gabba out of the Olympics - especially if they can write it off against other revenue streams from the games (as tenuous as they usually are) - and 50k is probably well-suited to their needs (though you’d hope the design has flexibility for future seating expansion).  

[Sir Rols]

Since Sydney’s Allianz got brought up…

8 hours ago, Chris_Mex said:

Sydney did the same thing with allianz stadium, they demolished a 40k rectangular venue and then on the exact same land, they build another 40k rectangular field, guess it's an australian thing spending a fortune for having the exact same product

LOL! More a Sydney thing. The Allianz upgrade was part of a big stadium package announced by a previous State government that would have also included knocking down and rebuilding the even-younger Olympic stadium and a few other big suburban stadium upgrades like Parramatta Stadium. It didn’t go over as popular and as much a vote winner as they had hoped. After an outcry, the Olympic stadium rebuild was scrapped in favour of some upgrading, and the suburban stadiums were put on an indefinite back burner (Parramatta still happening, and I think Penrith’s getting a new one). Allianz survived because the NRL (Rugby League) and the ARU (Rugby Union) have the financial and political clout in NSW to ensure they get more bells and whistles than the 1988-vintage stadium offered.

7 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

The new Allianz Stadium in Sydney is also in a tight space wedged between Fox Studios, Venues NSW,  Sydney Cricket Ground, University of Technology, Moore Park Road and Driver Avenue.

That’s a bit misleading, including the satellite image. A large portion of the immediate surrounds are two large ground level car parks that could easily be consolidated underground or a single multi-story facility and Driver Ave is more an access road to the stadiums and the car parks than a major thoroughfare. The UTS building is just a small sub-campus, probably sports medicine. The area itself is also just the one corner - the three stadium zone - of a much, much larger parkland belt. The Moore Park parklands, immediately adjacent across Driver Avenue are frequently partly used as overflow cark parking for major events. The Moore Park parkland itself extends across to a golf course, the ES Marks athletics field, then Centennial Park and on to Randwick Racecourse. It’s actually quite a vast green belt. The green belt itself was bordered by a lot of aging industrial-type zones that in recent years have buen redeveloped as large medium-to-high density apartment developments (ie: Meriton-ised) that would have been perfect for, say, an Olympic Village development.

This would have been the centrepiece of a 1996 games if Sydney had, (a) won the domestic bid and (b) gone on to win the IOC bid. As a lifelong inner city Sydneysider myself, I’m a little disappointed we didn’t go the same path for 2000 - it would have been a more city-centric games closer to more postcard picturesque Sydney. Homebush was more a political savvy choice to provide a precinct closer to the sprawling western suburbs population bubble.

7 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

45,000 is about right for the legacy needs of this rectangular venue whose sports tenants are A-Leage soccer and Rugby League. Is served by two light rsil lines and a very busy bus corridor

 You forgot Rugby Union (though I accept you southerners often forget the difference between Union and League) - it’s the home of the NSW Waratahs and the ARU headquarters are next door. The NRL, as far as I know, still base themselves in Philip Street in the CBD. 

Edited January 28, 2023 by Sir Rols

[yoshi]

Lol I know the Gabba is iconic - I can't deny that a small part of my thought that a bigger stadium could be better comes from a desire to turn the telly on one November evening in the 2030s to see Jimmy Anderson (let's be honest, it'll still be him) opening the bowling at the first Ashes Test in front of a wall of 80k baying Queenslanders  I guess though if you're haven't got a site like the Lea Valley near the middle crying out to be an Olympic complex, then a rebuild of something that's there makes sense. I'm also quite surprised that 50k is considered plenty for Brisbane, when you look at what other Aussie cities have. Might be a useful message to send for the IOC though, easier to find uses for 50k than 80.

[Australian Kiwi]

On 1/28/2023 at 12:51 AM, R__ said:

I don't quite understand how a $1bn redevelopment of a state owned stadium can be cost neutral to the state - at least in terms of getting the thing rebuilt. Sure, you can get naming rights sponsors and those kind of things, but not on this scale. Or perhaps you can get some contribution from the tenants but wouldn't they expect some ownership of the stadium in return for that?

The state bid for these 2032 Games, it's ultimately going to have to step up and pay for this isn't it?

Wouldn't it be better to simply say that it'll cost this amount, but the profits from the Games plus the long-term profits from a better stadium will more than cover it. Or would that argument be false?

 

Welcome to the bullshit spin factory of Australian state politics. 

Its going to be a long 10 years in Queensland politics as they reckon with the fact that we've they've got isn't what they've been sold. The temptation to outshine 2000 is going to be palpable and it's going to cost. 

[Chris_Mex]

3 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Welcome to the bullshit spin factory of Australian state politics. 

Its going to be a long 10 years in Queensland politics as they reckon with the fact that we've they've got isn't what they've been sold. The temptation to outshine 2000 is going to be palpable and it's going to cost. 

This

Will have trouble outshining this...

[AustralianFan]

5 hours ago, Chris_Mex said:

This

Will have trouble outshining this...

 

                                  It’s not the size that matters.

[Chris_Mex]

51 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

 

                                  It’s not the size that matters.

Ofc, it's design that matters...  gabba just look bland. It looks like the unwanted little brother of London's olympic stadium

vs

IK both are populous designs, but THIS was also a restricted land mid-sized populous venue

 

[TorchbearerSydney]

The Gabba will be half the size of Stadium Australia...for starters! Melbourne 2006 tried to outshine Sydney (the premier of Victoria even said it would), and it just ended up a very oversized Commonwealth Games that scared off future bidders.

I wish they would just move the 2032 main stadium to a bigger site, with space for a warm up track, articulation and events. Is the showground site a possibility (like Sydney)? They can put a big indoor venue on  the Gabba site then on the station.

[ulu]

39 minutes ago, Chris_Mex said:

Ofc, it's design that matters...  gabba just look bland. It looks like the unwanted little brother of London's olympic stadium

vs

IK both are populous designs, but THIS was also a restricted land mid-sized populous venue

 

 

The design for the Gabba hasn't even been made public yet.

[Sir Rols]

Personally, I’ll be happy if the Gabba stays a modest, unpretentious venue, rather than become a grandiose vanity design a la the Bird’s Nest. That would make the statement that it’s the people rather than the concrete, that makes the games.

[ulu]

I was glad when Japan abandoned that monstrosity by Zaha Hadid.

[Australian Kiwi]

23 hours ago, TorchbearerSydney said:

The Gabba will be half the size of Stadium Australia...for starters! Melbourne 2006 tried to outshine Sydney (the premier of Victoria even said it would), and it just ended up a very oversized Commonwealth Games that scared off future bidders.

Melbourne 2006 didn't outshine Stadium Australia - the MCG did

Agree though re the 2006 Games being moreorless an experiment in alternative history like Manchester 2002 - the what-if Olympics. 

It also aint Melbourne's fault that its good at major international events, if it scared off future hosts (which it didn't) then thats the CGF's responsibility and they should have picked Wellington.

[AustralianFan]

2 hours ago, Australian Kiwi said:

As a likely pass around party bottom I think you know that is not true.

Highly offensive sexual harassment remark you have posted Australian Kiwi.    Do you have no filters?

[Australian Kiwi]

3 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Highly offensive sexual harassment remark you have posted Australian Kiwi.    Do you have no filters?

WOW - homophobic much? There is nothing offensive about being a bottom. 

[AustralianFan]

On 1/29/2023 at 5:55 PM, ulu said:

 

The design for the Gabba hasn't even been made public yet.

Agreed.  Those images posted by @Chris_Mex are simply very early concept images.

We await the final design go be released.   Once the funding split issue has been resolved between the state and federal governments, we can expect to see the final stadium Gabba Olympic Stadium design emerge at some point (likely to be by design firm Populous).

[Rob2012]

Yep, hardly worth commenting on placeholder images.

It's the capacity that's an issue at the moment (if it even is an issue).

Speaking of Manchester 2002, Sydney 2000 etc...I don't suppose it would be possible to do what they did here to create a temporarily higher capacity? I'm guessing the cramped nature of the site means that's unlikely, but...maybe something worth exploring?