Queensland’s current Olympic venue plan centres on the Queensland Sport and Athletics Centre, or the QSAC in Nathan, but concerns have emerged over whether the stadium will meet community expectations as the primary athletics venue for the 2032 Brisbane Games.
With just under a decade until the Games, questions are mounting over whether the proposed $1.6 billion upgrade to QSAC will deliver the necessary infrastructure and legacy benefits. Located 12 kilometres south of Brisbane’s central business district, QSAC currently holds 48,500 seats and has served Brisbane’s athletic and sporting events for years. However, some believe its location and current design may not fully align with the community’s vision for a world-class Olympic venue that leaves a lasting impact.
Venue History and Alternative Options
The QSAC upgrade plan emerged after several years of discussing the best venue for Olympic athletics events. Previously, two major alternatives had been considered: a $2.7 billion upgrade to Brisbane’s iconic Gabba stadium or the construction of a new stadium at Victoria Park with an estimated cost of $3.4 billion. Both options were ultimately set aside due to cost concerns and the logistical complexities of construction, with the state deciding to focus on QSAC as a more economical choice. The nearby Suncorp Stadium was selected for the Games’ opening and closing ceremonies.
An independent review earlier this year had also expressed doubts about QSAC as the primary Olympic venue. The review pointed to the opportunity a new stadium could provide for Brisbane, potentially creating a multi-use facility with a higher seating capacity that could serve large-scale events beyond the Olympics. Despite these recommendations, the high costs associated with a new stadium ultimately led the state government to focus on QSAC, which was seen as a viable, lower-cost option.
Broader Collaboration
Recent discussions with federal authorities suggest the possibility of broader collaboration on the final venue decision, following the Mr David Crisafulli’s win in the last polls.
Both federal and state governments have allocated $7.1 billion in funding for the 2032 Olympics, including $2 billion for a new “Brisbane Arena” at the Roma Street precinct, intended to host the Games’ swimming events. This funding agreement has sparked interest in whether federal support could help explore or revisit alternative venues.
In light of community feedback, Mr Crisafulli proposed the formation of an independent infrastructure authority. This body would be tasked with conducting a comprehensive review of all venue options within a 100-day period, allowing for an in-depth assessment of costs, infrastructure needs, and community benefits. The goal is to ensure that any investment aligns with Brisbane’s long-term vision for its sports facilities.
“I didn’t miss the opportunity to raise 80:20 funding,” Mr Crisafulli told the press of his discussion with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.
Community and Legacy Impact
Residents and local sports organisations have shown strong interest in how Olympic venues will impact the community both during and after the Games. Some argue that upgrading QSAC could serve as an opportunity to enhance facilities that are already accessible to the public, particularly those used by schools and community athletics programs. However, others worry that, even with upgrades, QSAC may not provide the same level of economic and social legacy that a new or more central stadium might offer.
Previous reviews of the potential venues highlighted these issues, estimating that keeping the Gabba operational would cost at least $400 million until 2032, with an additional $1 billion needed to keep it compliant with modern codes beyond that year. An upgraded Gabba, or a new Victoria Park stadium, could serve as a more versatile venue, providing additional value for large sporting events, concerts, and community functions.
Published 28-Oct-2024