The Gabba

[Australian Kiwi]

8 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

To your other point, I’ve previously said that until we hear otherwise, we can only assume the Brisbane 2032 Masterplan will go ahead as planned.   The same still applies.  Until the Review makes recommendations in 60 or so days time and the Queensland Government decides which recommendations to accept, we simply do not know what venue plans will be affected, if any, including the Gabba Rebuild.

 

Thats not what you said. You can't retrospectively add to what has been previously said. Thats not how time and space works. 

When I have the time and energy I'll dig up some of those quotes as the **** starts to hit the fan. Thank goodness you can't edit posts. 

[Australian Kiwi]

27 minutes ago, yoshi said:

I know some posts would probably say it's what was planned all along but I can't help having a suspicion that this 60 day review is actually a process to create a full proposal of the Olympic plan, a 'white paper' to put to a referendum. I don't know what else they can do about a stadium beyond building a new one - although at what point does it become cheaper to build a railway line to Carrara rather than the current plan?

We don't do referendums for this type of local issue in Australia. If you're interested in the terms of reference for the review it should be available. The 2032 Olympics are led by the Queensland Government. This means its vulnerable to the whims of Queensland politics. 

[AustralianFan]

 

1 hour ago, Australian Kiwi said:

Thats not what you said.

I know exactly what I said which is until we hear otherwise, we can only assume the Brisbane 2032 Masterplan will go ahead as planned. 

Until we hear otherwise, which is what changes come out of this Review, then the announced Masterplan of venues is all that has been announced.

I’m sure there will be some changes from the Review, we just don’t know what they are or which venues will be affected until the government announces which of the recommendations will be accepted.

[Gonzo]

1 hour ago, Australian Kiwi said:

We don't do referendums for this type of local issue in Australia

In QLD they can

Quote

Referendums may be held to alter the State Constitution or to seek opinions from electors on a particular issue

https://documents.parliament.qld.gov.au/explore/education/factsheets/factsheet_6.2_referendums.pdf

[AustralianFan]

Four Options for the Gabba Rebuild

as presented to QLD Govt by ‘Populous’’ in 2023

It’s worth reviewing ourselves the three options for the Gabba Rebuild as presented in 2023 to the Queensland Government, which went for Option 1 at the time - the full rebuild.

Maybe the 60 Day Review will go instead for Option 4 instead of Option 1?  But I doubt it as Option 4 is the most expensive.

*******************************

Option 1

• full rebuild
• 50,000 capacity
• new elevated level for field of play
• meets Brisbane 2032 and legacy requirements (AFL, Cricket, etc)
• $2.716 billion

 

Option 2 

• full rebuild
• 45,000 capacity
• field of play at existing level
• does not Brisbane 2032 or legacy requirements (AFL, Cricket, etc)
• $2.234 billion

 

Option 3

• rebuilding east and west stands, retaining north and south stands
• field of play at existing level
• does not meet Brisbane 2032 or legacy requirements (AFL, Cricket, etc)
• $2.554 billion

 

Option 4

• a significant portion of the existing structure is retained
• removes existing bowl, roof and walls
• new elevated field of play
• capacity 50,000
• meets Brisbane 2032 or legacy requirements (AFL, Cricket, etc)
•  $3.174 billion

Summary

• at a cost of $2.6 bn, Option 3 proposed retaining the north and south stands while replacing the east and west sections, had poor accessibility and offered 50% roof coverage
• both Options 2 and 3 failed to to satisfy Brisbane 2032 legacy requirements to significantly improve the precinct, according to the design proposal.
• Option 4 was virtually the same as Option 1 but proposed retaining the existing slab so was not able to be elevated.  It was also the most expensive of the four options.

Credit:  Skyscrapercity.com

[AustralianFan]

2 hours ago, yoshi said:

I know some posts would probably say it's what was planned all along but I can't help having a suspicion that this 60 day review is actually a process to create a full proposal of the Olympic plan, a 'white paper' to put to a referendum. I don't know what else they can do about a stadium beyond building a new one - although at what point does it become cheaper to build a railway line to Carrara rather than the current plan?

There is no bigger referendum than the coming Queensland State Election.

That’s why this 60 day Review is happening.

[Sir Rols]

Of course it’s all political. The Qld state elections are later this year, the Qld local council elections are a few days before the report comes out, support for the Olympics and Gabba rebuild are going down in the polls, cost of living is biting into all governing parties’ support, both the LNP and Greens are opposing it. Miles himself seems unenthused for the full rebuild. The old political adage that you don’t call an inquiry unless you know what the findings are going to be already, and I suspect Miles is laying the groundwork for some electorally focussed backtracks.

As much as I have no problem with the Gabba rebuild, I think it’s highly likely the current plans are going to be scaled back.   

[AustralianFan]

So, QSAC is out then imo.

• No mass public options at QSAC othen than lots and lots of shuttle buses.  Not impossible, but embarressing  for the Olympic Games to have daily mass spectator exchanges via a hundreds of shuttle buses moving spectators to/from two daily athletics sessions at QSAC.
• the same mass people movement restrictions also apply to Carrara on the GC.

The Govt is not keen to increase expenditure to build a brand new stadium anywhere

• that kinda rules out any new stadium at Albion or Victoria Park.

 

Suncorp Stadium or Brisbane River for Ceremonies?

• yes that’s possible but where will athletics (track and field) be held?

So, what’s left? What stadium could handle efficient, mass public transport, track and field and ceremonies?

• politically unpopular but it all points to an upgraded or rebuilt Gabba.

In an election year, the result of this review will be keenly anticipated.  As will whether or not the Government agrees with and enacts any of the recommendations from the review.

[Sir Rols]

Lol!

Seriously, though, a new stadium can’t be ruled out if it’s gonna cost less (likely far, far less) than an upgrade of the Gabba. Simple political economics.

Edited March 1, 2024 by Sir Rols

[stryker]

4 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

So, what’s left? What stadium could handle efficient, mass public transport, track and field and ceremonies?

• politically unpopular but it all points to an upgraded or rebuilt Gabba.

In an election year, the result of this review will be keenly anticipated.  As will whether or not the Government agrees with and enacts any of the recommendations from the review.

Key words are politically unpopular. Politicians like to get reelected. Supporting expensive projects that the voting public doesn't like is akin to committing political suicide at the ballot box. They aren't going g to support the bloated Gabba rebuild if the constituents don't want it.

QSAC and Carrara aren't ideal but they are IMO the best of a bad situation given this fiasco.

 

[AustralianFan]

3 hours ago, stryker said:

Key words are politically unpopular. Politicians like to get reelected. Supporting expensive projects that the voting public doesn't like is akin to committing political suicide at the ballot box. They aren't going g to support the bloated Gabba rebuild if the constituents don't want it.

QSAC and Carrara aren't ideal but they are IMO the best of a bad situation given this fiasco.

 

Well the leader of the Review is a member of the opposition LNP party, so if the opposition gets into government later this year, this athletics stadium issue is not going away and will stay with whoever wins the election.

More Olympic stadium political pain is surely coming for both the Labor government and LNP opposition parties from this review.

[Rob2012]

11 minutes ago, AustralianFan said:

Well the leader of the Review is a member of the opposition LNP party, so if the opposition gets into government later this year, this athletics stadium issue is not going away and will stay with whoever wins the election.

More Olympic stadium political pain is surely coming for both the Labor government and LNP opposition parties from this review.

The level of politicisation is unusually high here (city, state, government from different parties). But I still can't help but think the process of awarding the Games was the catalyst. The lack of transparency, competition, and long lead time gave ample opportunity for years of arguments.

The old process at least had this going for it - cities would push all their energy into beating other countries' cities during the bid process, and then would have to Get The **** On With It once they'd won. Wrangling over budgets and some shift around of more minor venues wasn't unusual, but this kind of weaponisation between political parties - if indeed that is what is going on - is something there wasn't much time for.

Or perhaps I'm being harsh and it isn't weaponisation. Perhaps it's normal democracy doing what it should? In which case, maybe it would've been better to sort this before the bid was launched and crowned behind closed doors?

[Sir Rols]

8 hours ago, Rob2012 said:

Or perhaps I'm being harsh and it isn't weaponisation. Perhaps it's normal democracy doing what it should? In which case, maybe it would've been better to sort this before the bid was launched and crowned behind closed doors?

I wouldn’t say it’s been weaponised - apart from the Greens and minor parties explicitly opposing it (well, they would, wouldn’t they), the major parties haven’t really been using it as a blunt object against each other. It’s more the eye-watering cost (third most expensive stadium in the world) and the ancillary issues like losing nearby schools and parklands has made the whole issue so toxic and undoubtedly contributed to the fall in public support for the games to 38 per cent in last polling figures. Both major parties just want to not be associated with it, and the ruling Labor party’s calling the review was a lot to distance themselves from it and give them an out clause. 

So, yes, democracy working as it should.

[Australian Kiwi]

I think that is very the vibe - we have ended up with this "great honour" in our lap but this time there isn't the enthusiasm of the 1990s in the lead up to the 2000 Olympics. The world is different, Australia is different, and there isn't really a lot of political capital in being associated with it.

[AustralianFan]

As much as it irks me, the clues coming now from several media reports, including the latest from thr Brisbane Lions AFL team, “it seems” that in 2032, the Gabba is going to give way to a new stadium on top of the grasslands and gardens at Barrambin (Victoria Park).

To lose a large swathe of this green area at Barrambin will be a real shame and very disapointing for.   A warm-up athletics track is also going to have to be fitted in there somewhere.  

Currently, Barrambin is the venue for cross country equestrian and freestyle bmx at the Games. Whether there will still be room for these competitions or these sports will be moved elsewhere remains to be seen once we see what is officially released.

After the Games, the Lions and cricket would move into the new stadium as legacy tenants.

This may also give the school near the  Gabba a new lease of life given these reports talk about the Gabba being demolished after the Games.

The likely inclusion of an Olympic T20 Cricket as an additional sport in 2032 might also see this being played at the Gabba as a swansong and farewell before the Brisbane Cricket Ground (“The Gabba”) is demolished after the Games.

Nothing is official yet and its possible these ‘leaked inside info’ reports may be wide of the mark, but it’s really starting to sound more inevitable that the Gabba’s days numbered and Brisbane may get a new stadium for AFL, Cricket and the Olympic/Paralympic Games.

Less than 2 weeks to go now before we hear what the Brisbane 2032 Review officially recommends.   Then, what of these recommendations will the Government support?

[Sir Rols]

 

Quote

 Then, what of these recommendations will the Government support?

I doubt Miles would have any alternative or wriggle room. After being castigated for denying he texted in parliament, to go back on his vow to implement all recommendations of the review would be a scandal and disastrous to his political reputation. More the question is will the IOC sign off on them? They have the ultimate say. And the IOC’s preferred option, as conveyed via Coates, seems to be QEII.

[AustralianFan]

@Sir Rols sorry I posted in the wrong thread.  Happy for you to move these last two posts to the Stadiums/Venues thread.  My mistake sorry, just had ‘Gabba’ on the brain.

[Sir Rols]

It’s still on topic here. I’ll delete the other instead

[Australian Kiwi]

18 hours ago, AustralianFan said:

 

To lose a large swathe of this green area at Barrambin will be a real shame and very disapointing for.   A warm-up athletics track is also going to have to be fitted in there somewhere.  

 

This could be removed post Games - but yeah I take your point it is disappointing to lose Barrambin. If I was a Brisbanite I'd be furious. 

If you proposed building a stadium on Centennial Park in Sydney or Royal Park in Melbourne people would riot. If they confirm this I expect the Greens to go nuclear. 

[kcbworth]

I wonder what we could do with the Gabba if we repoint the $1.6B for QSAC in an in-place uplift to the Gabba instead. Wouldn't be a long long long term option, but certainly better than throwing it away on QSAC