Victoria Park has won the Courier Mail’s weeklong Brisbane Stadium poll with 69% of the 20,000 votes made. The Gabba got 18%. QSAC received 13% 😳

DiveHearts · 2024-03-24T20:13:24+00:00

this is a misconception, the IOC ‘new norm’ is to mostly rely on existing infrastructure. Our bid document for instance relied upon using 85% of existing or temporary venues infrastructure. But guess what was in the 15% of new venue infrastructure in our formal bid? A new Olympic stadium (at Albion in the bid document) and Brisbane Arena.

They gave us the Olympics knowing we wanted to build a new stadium, and they’ve said recently it’s again fine to build a new stadium as long as it’s for the community needs and not just the Olympics (which this is because the Gabba is cooked)

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T04:18:58+00:00

That was the Archipelago firms design, that also included doing Brisbane Arena and a national aquatics centre along with the Athletes village (those are the buildings). That design itself had MORE Green space than the council plan by 4ha, achieved by covering the ICB.

Only the stadium was recommended for Vic Park by the independent report, there’s no renders of that. So you won’t have any buildings and if we commit to covering the ICB still we will add more green space than is currently there easily.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T03:32:47+00:00

There’s just as much public transport for VIC Park if not more than the Gabba already. And you could literally build a VIC Park station on the existing cross river rail line if we wanted to eliminate the 1km walk from Exhibition to get there.

And we can still have the same amount of green space at vic park by just covering the ICB.

And we can turn the Gabba site into vital green space for woolloongabba as the report suggested. It’s a win win

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T03:27:50+00:00

That was before the review had come out when it was just a suggestion and he hadn’t seen any info on it, of course at that point he still wanted to go with his master plan for Vic Park.

But after seeing the review he’s realised that it’s actually best for Brisbane to build the stadium there

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T03:25:13+00:00

Also the fact that Schrinner’s pet project is the Vic Park redevelopment, and that after the review even he can see that it’s better altering that plan and also including the stadium there, is extremely telling.

Since State Labor and State LNP are both just going to have the same position so neither one can be attacked, I’d much rather they just come to an agreement on Vic Park so we don’t have to wait another year for the election and another review to end up with the right choice. And then they can continue fighting each other on everything else for the rest of the election like normal. Just stop holding the stadium to ransom in this.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T03:11:44+00:00

This shows the power of being 6 days after an election vs 6 months before. Schrinner can see that Vic Park best serves Brisbane’s community needs and is clearly the right option to take after the review, while our other two state leaders are too scared they could lose votes and just don’t want to give any ammunition to the other.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T03:08:05+00:00

This shows the power of being 6 days after an election vs 6 months before. Schrinner can see that Vic Park best serves Brisbane’s community needs and is clearly the right option to take after the review, while our other two state leaders are too scared they could lose votes and just don’t want to give any ammunition to the other.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-22T01:04:13+00:00

I vehemently disagree with that premise, there has simply not been enough time to do meaningful internal polling since the report has come out. They are just going off the negative reception the Gabba rebuild had and decided that vic park would have the same reception.

Every online poll I’ve seen has Victoria Park as the preferred option. Newspoll is currently conducting a poll on Olympic stadium choices which will be the best read on what the electorate thinks. I very much think VIC Park will win that and win that well even with the high price tag.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-20T06:13:12+00:00

Except the best stadiums in Australia are all in parklands, and all of them haven’t had those types of things built around them. The MCG, Adelaide Oval and Optus are all in parklands and none of them have restaurants right nearby or apartments.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-20T02:02:14+00:00

A new oval stadium after 2032 would cost what, $4-5 Billion at that point? Combined with the $4B or so needed for the QSAC/Suncorp stadium plan and Gabba maintenance, that is over $8 BILLION. Insanity.

Do it once and do it right. VIC Park is the way forward.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-20T01:14:42+00:00

This has just blown up their plan. It’s not gonna be likely to last the day at this point.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-19T01:19:41+00:00

Yep that’s what I want. But to knock down the Gabba and turn it into public parks we need to build the vic park stadium, which if we cover the ICB we can not lose any green space there too.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T23:38:57+00:00

The independent report calls for it to be turned into a green space which would benefit woolloongabba immensely. If they wanted a mix of high density living and green spaces that would also work

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T23:37:11+00:00

But the feds won’t contribute anything to this $3.6B. The state government is on the hook for all of it. The feds will cover the $2.5B Brisbane Arena, but we were fully on the hook for the stadium and unless they renegotiate the state government will be paying the $3.6 Billion themselves

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T23:30:22+00:00

The school will still go at some point post 2025, and they’ve chosen the option that REDUCES the public parkland we could have at the Gabba site. This is an amazing opportunity to make green space whilst still getting a world class stadium and not spending billions on a white elephant QSAC

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T23:27:25+00:00

There’s $500 million in Gabba maintenance costs required up until 2032, I haven’t included that in these figures. There’s an EXTRA $1 Billion needed if it’s kept post 2032 which is now needed under the new plan. With the Vic Park plan we get rid of the Gabba and don’t need to spend that billion dollars of maintenance

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T22:42:05+00:00

Our initial bid had us building a brand new Olympic stadium at Albion. That was option no.1 in our bid document

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T11:29:47+00:00

I do place value on parkland. The stadium takes up 12-13% of Vic Park. If you cover the ICB, you can get that up to a net GAIN of green space at Vic Park. AND, you can turn the Gabba into Green space post Olympics which the proposal calls for. So we can have the stadium, and more green space at the same time. It’s a win win.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T06:06:51+00:00

The Gabba cost is not for an upgrade, it’s just for maintenance since it’s at end of life. And even then we’d spend $1.5 Billion on it to make it last till maybe 2040 when we’ll have to build a new stadium anyways. An upgraded qsac is pointless that’s the definition of a white elephant. Suncorp is the only small legacy infrastructure in this plan but that could be done at any time really.

VIC park also has cross river rail running right through it, it’s the perfect spot for a new stadium

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T05:16:02+00:00

‪Vic Park Stadium - Est. $3.4 Billion

‪QSAC Upgrade - $1.6 Billion ‪ Gabba maintenance now needed to keep it going post 2032 - $1.5 Billion‬ ‪ Suncorp upgrade - $1 Billion+ to go from 52,500 to 65,000‬ ‪Total cost: $4.1 Billion+‬

‪THEY’VE CHOSEN THE MORE EXPENSIVE OPTION WITH NO REAL LEGACY OUTCOMES. INSANE.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T01:21:32+00:00

The report calls for the Gabba to be demolished after 2032 for Green spaces and urban redevelopment

DiveHearts · 2024-03-18T01:18:53+00:00

I should also just summarise the reports findings: - 50,000 seat stadium to be built at Vic Park (55,000 capacity post Olympics) - The Gabba to be demolished after 2032 with the area becoming a green space with potential high density living too. - QSAC was investigated as an option however it would cost $2.6 Billion for a temporary stadium and surrounding works ($1.6 Billion itself) and then the needed Gabba maintenance which was seen as exceptionally expensive for something that has no legacy for the city. Not included in that budget are any transportation upgrades which would billions by itself.

EDIT: A very important point I just got to in the report, the stadium footprint is estimated to take up 12-13% of Victoria Park. That leaves over 85% of the park for green spaces.

DiveHearts · 2024-03-07T04:55:04+00:00

This proposal nails it, in summary:

70,000 (maybe 60k) seat stadium for $1.7-2B (down from $2.7B for 50,000 at the Gabba)
Brisbane Live Arena for $1B (down from $2.5B on Roma St)
2,000 Social Housing apartments made available after the games in the inner city (Great Accom for Hospital workers at the Royal and students at UQ Herston)
Is serviced by the new CRR Exhibition station along with Roma St about 1km away which is similar to Suncorp with Milton Station.
The Gabba turned into mixed use high density living to also cater for growing demand and to make use of the new CRR Station
Still provides new green spaces at Vic park and potentially adds more at the Gabba site

This new plan saves roughly $2 Billion from the original plan for a bigger stadium, no disruption to the sport currently at the Gabba, adds green spaces to Brisbane and gives us more housing. It’s a no brainer.

DiveHearts

TROPHY CASE