What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
6,645
That didn’t sound all that salty. Just a description of what has transpired and the ridiculousness of spending $1.6B on a temporary stadium that will never be used again when you could upgrade/reconfigure the Gabba to 45K AND rebuild Suncorp at 65K for the $2.6B total that they are spending on the three venues.
First of all there seems to be a lot of Victorians keen to tell us how to run our stadium policy (referring to the video, not you personally) and of course that opinion is filtered through the 'what's best for AFL' lense, whilst pretending to give a shit about the Olympics. It comes across as typical Victorian arrogance to be honest.

Secondly, the myth about QSAC never getting used after the Olympics needs to die. It is our second most used stadium behind Suncorp and is actually an athletics stadium. It will get heaps of use after the games and hasn't had any significant work done to it since 1992.

The video, and all the Victorians in the comments section are absolutely salty that we aren't giving AFL yet another stadium. The reality is that a 40k Gabba is more than enough for AFL and cricket.
 
Last edited:

Pj,Rj,Hj

Juniors
Messages
196
Victoria Park is the nuclear energy of stadiums.

Not planned, expensive, rushed at last minute, and designed to benefit faceless organisations behind the scenes.

Beware the bullshit.
I've got a degree in Architecture, and Urban Planning. What you wrote is the Bull Shit.
Victoria Park is ideal for the main stadium.
 

Pj,Rj,Hj

Juniors
Messages
196
Based on what criteria?
That QSAC's location is a relic of mid century car oriented planning.
That centralised major stadiums, near major commuter rail routes have proven far more successful over the last 30 years.
Superior integration into the established urban fabric.
Vastly superior dispersion routes for foot traffic (think the MCG vs old Waverley Park)
That Australian's don't actually utilise metropolitan public open space efficiently when they remain passive spaces. The QSAC site is a single purpose site filled with spartan infrastructure long payed off, there's little pressure to diversify use, that will change when you have a $1.6 billion 14000 seat athletics stadium (legacy mode) in an inconvenient location for large swathes of Brisbane metropolitan area. Enjoy paying off a rebuilt QSAC when only Queensland Athletics will want to be tenants.
Someone claimed that QSAC was the second most patronised stadium in Brisbane after Suncorp. It's an apples and oranges comparison as QSAC is much more akin to an over sized recreation centre and training facility in its function. For ticketed events, seldom will the match the price of a Suncorp event.

A Stadium at Victoria Park diversifies the parks use from mostly passive to active on event days while taking up only 10% of the space. Appropriate examples at the Adelaide Parklands, Yarra Park, Moore Park, Burswood Parklands, as opposed to the QSAC site, or the extensive grounds of the Brisbane Entertainment Centre as a public park of significance and accessibility and egress.
A Victoria Park stadium will justify superior connection between the north and south sides of the park and a dedicated train station or a major extension to the Ekka station.
The Stadium in the parklands works as a destination in of itself.
Stadiums are not longer designed to be inward looking buildings with a single focus use. They are secular cathedrals, sitting high in the hierarchy of public infrastructure. Their architecture should reflect the pride and aspiration of their cities, tell their story. Suncorp does that, not so much the current Gabba, QSAC not at all. Publically funded stadiums need to serve the community well beyond the utilitarian. Like a convention centre they need to offer diverse uses and facilities for weekday use backed by a great location. Victoria Park offers the fitting location for that without the restraints of the Gabba Lot. Hemmed in by major roads, a cemetery, bushland, the QSAC site can't offer any of that. It isn't even attractive to passive activation to justify the expense of a rebuild. A rail spur line would add hundreds of millions of not more to the price tag.

If it's merely animosity towards the AFL, a worthy stadium can be designed for Victoria Park with a reduced capacity in legacy mode so that Suncorp remains the larger stadium. Suncorp will get a major overhaul regardless. The western stand will be 38 years old by 2032, partial or full rebuilding will be warranted.
 
Last edited:

Vee

First Grade
Messages
5,634
That QSAC's location is a relic of mid century car oriented planning.
That centralised major stadiums, near major commuter rail routes have proven far more successful over the last 30 years.
Superior integration into the established urban fabric.
Vastly superior dispersion routes for foot traffic (think the MCG vs old Waverley Park)
That Australian's don't actually utilise metropolitan public open space efficiently when they remain passive spaces. The QSAC site is a single purpose site filled with spartan infrastructure long payed off, there's little pressure to diversify use, that will change when you have a $1.6 billion 14000 seat athletics stadium (legacy mode) in an inconvenient location for large swathes of Brisbane metropolitan area. Enjoy paying off a rebuilt QSAC when only Queensland Athletics will want to be tenants.
Someone claimed that QSAC was the second most patronised stadium in Brisbane after Suncorp. It's an apples and oranges comparison as QSAC is much more akin to an over sized recreation centre and training facility in its function. For ticketed events, seldom will the match the price of a Suncorp event.

A Stadium at Victoria Park diversifies the parks use from mostly passive to active on event days while taking up only 10% of the space. Appropriate examples at the Adelaide Parklands, Yarra Park, Moore Park, Burswood Parklands, as opposed to the QSAC site, or the extensive grounds of the Brisbane Entertainment Centre as a public park of significance and accessibility and egress.
A Victoria Park stadium will justify superior connection between the north and south sides of the park and a dedicated train station or a major extension to the Ekka station.
The Stadium in the parklands works as a destination in of itself.
Stadiums are not longer designed to be inward looking buildings with a single focus use. They are secular cathedrals, sitting high in the hierarchy of public infrastructure. Their architecture should reflect the pride and aspiration of their cities, tell their story. Suncorp does that, not so much the current Gabba, QSAC not at all. Stadiums to serve the community well beyond the utilitarian. Like a convention centre they need to offer diverse uses and facilities for weekday use backed by a great location. Victoria Park offers the fitting location for that without the restraints of the Gabba Lot. Hemmed in by major roads, a cemetery, bushland, the QSAC site can't offer any of that. It isn't even attractive to passive activation to justify the expense of a rebuild. A rail spur line would add hundreds of millions of not more to the price tag.

If it's merely animosity towards the AFL, a worthy stadium can be designed for Victoria Park with a reduced capacity in legacy mode so that Suncorp remains the larger stadium. Suncorp will get a major overhaul regardless. The western stand will be 38 years old by 2032, partial or full rebuilding will be warranted.
Interesting. Wasted here. Just saying...
 

Jamberoo

Juniors
Messages
1,456
You really love your afl venues don’t you? I really enjoyed the utter nonsense you posted about the proposed Tasmanian stadium. A load of rubbish and terrible analysis if ever I’ve seen it.
Happy to amuse you.

I am a massive cricket fan as well and like it when governments use taxpayers money. I find it strange that people like you are happy to piss $1.6B down the drain just so long as no oval stadium is built or upgraded, even if that means less money is also spent on Suncorp. The current plan benefits nobody.

It’s like you’re scared that people will go to Lions games instead of RL games if they have a better stadium.
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
34,495
That QSAC's location is a relic of mid century car oriented planning.
That centralised major stadiums, near major commuter rail routes have proven far more successful over the last 30 years.
Superior integration into the established urban fabric.
Vastly superior dispersion routes for foot traffic (think the MCG vs old Waverley Park)
That Australian's don't actually utilise metropolitan public open space efficiently when they remain passive spaces. The QSAC site is a single purpose site filled with spartan infrastructure long payed off, there's little pressure to diversify use, that will change when you have a $1.6 billion 14000 seat athletics stadium (legacy mode) in an inconvenient location for large swathes of Brisbane metropolitan area. Enjoy paying off a rebuilt QSAC when only Queensland Athletics will want to be tenants.
Someone claimed that QSAC was the second most patronised stadium in Brisbane after Suncorp. It's an apples and oranges comparison as QSAC is much more akin to an over sized recreation centre and training facility in its function. For ticketed events, seldom will the match the price of a Suncorp event.

A Stadium at Victoria Park diversifies the parks use from mostly passive to active on event days while taking up only 10% of the space. Appropriate examples at the Adelaide Parklands, Yarra Park, Moore Park, Burswood Parklands, as opposed to the QSAC site, or the extensive grounds of the Brisbane Entertainment Centre as a public park of significance and accessibility and egress.
A Victoria Park stadium will justify superior connection between the north and south sides of the park and a dedicated train station or a major extension to the Ekka station.
The Stadium in the parklands works as a destination in of itself.
Stadiums are not longer designed to be inward looking buildings with a single focus use. They are secular cathedrals, sitting high in the hierarchy of public infrastructure. Their architecture should reflect the pride and aspiration of their cities, tell their story. Suncorp does that, not so much the current Gabba, QSAC not at all. Publically funded stadiums need to serve the community well beyond the utilitarian. Like a convention centre they need to offer diverse uses and facilities for weekday use backed by a great location. Victoria Park offers the fitting location for that without the restraints of the Gabba Lot. Hemmed in by major roads, a cemetery, bushland, the QSAC site can't offer any of that. It isn't even attractive to passive activation to justify the expense of a rebuild. A rail spur line would add hundreds of millions of not more to the price tag.

If it's merely animosity towards the AFL, a worthy stadium can be designed for Victoria Park with a reduced capacity in legacy mode so that Suncorp remains the larger stadium. Suncorp will get a major overhaul regardless. The western stand will be 38 years old by 2032, partial or full rebuilding will be warranted.
I’m never using you are an architect that’s for sure lol

Brisbane doesn’t need billions spent on an oval shaped stadium

And if you are arguing that rugby league should be played at an oval then that’s even worse
 

t-ba

Post Whore
Messages
59,844
Build a rectangular venue at Victoria Park and use any money for renovation that Lang Park would get in those circumstances to the 'Gabba if that's the case.

Brisbane gets a beautiful shiny new precinct and an increased capacity on the stadium that is currently selling out the most often in the city, and the oval venue gets a renovation worthy of the rectangular one in the inversed circumstance.

Drop the bowl in like the City of Manchester Stadium if you insist on the main stadium being the athletics track.
 
Last edited:

Vlad59

Bench
Messages
4,251
Happy to amuse you.

I am a massive cricket fan as well and like it when governments use taxpayers money. I find it strange that people like you are happy to piss $1.6B down the drain just so long as no oval stadium is built or upgraded, even if that means less money is also spent on Suncorp. The current plan benefits nobody.

It’s like you’re scared that people will go to Lions games instead of RL games if they have a better stadium.
I’m from Hobart. Why would I care who watches sport in Brisbane. What annoyed me was the utter crap you wrote about the Hobart stadium all of which was wrong.
 

Canard

Immortal
Messages
35,620
That QSAC's location is a relic of mid century car oriented planning.
That centralised major stadiums, near major commuter rail routes have proven far more successful over the last 30 years.
Superior integration into the established urban fabric.
Vastly superior dispersion routes for foot traffic (think the MCG vs old Waverley Park)
That Australian's don't actually utilise metropolitan public open space efficiently when they remain passive spaces. The QSAC site is a single purpose site filled with spartan infrastructure long payed off, there's little pressure to diversify use, that will change when you have a $1.6 billion 14000 seat athletics stadium (legacy mode) in an inconvenient location for large swathes of Brisbane metropolitan area. Enjoy paying off a rebuilt QSAC when only Queensland Athletics will want to be tenants.
Someone claimed that QSAC was the second most patronised stadium in Brisbane after Suncorp. It's an apples and oranges comparison as QSAC is much more akin to an over sized recreation centre and training facility in its function. For ticketed events, seldom will the match the price of a Suncorp event.

A Stadium at Victoria Park diversifies the parks use from mostly passive to active on event days while taking up only 10% of the space. Appropriate examples at the Adelaide Parklands, Yarra Park, Moore Park, Burswood Parklands, as opposed to the QSAC site, or the extensive grounds of the Brisbane Entertainment Centre as a public park of significance and accessibility and egress.
A Victoria Park stadium will justify superior connection between the north and south sides of the park and a dedicated train station or a major extension to the Ekka station.
The Stadium in the parklands works as a destination in of itself.
Stadiums are not longer designed to be inward looking buildings with a single focus use. They are secular cathedrals, sitting high in the hierarchy of public infrastructure. Their architecture should reflect the pride and aspiration of their cities, tell their story. Suncorp does that, not so much the current Gabba, QSAC not at all. Publically funded stadiums need to serve the community well beyond the utilitarian. Like a convention centre they need to offer diverse uses and facilities for weekday use backed by a great location. Victoria Park offers the fitting location for that without the restraints of the Gabba Lot. Hemmed in by major roads, a cemetery, bushland, the QSAC site can't offer any of that. It isn't even attractive to passive activation to justify the expense of a rebuild. A rail spur line would add hundreds of millions of not more to the price tag.

If it's merely animosity towards the AFL, a worthy stadium can be designed for Victoria Park with a reduced capacity in legacy mode so that Suncorp remains the larger stadium. Suncorp will get a major overhaul regardless. The western stand will be 38 years old by 2032, partial or full rebuilding will be warranted.
Is Victoria Park a centralised location? And how good are it's transport links? It doesn't strike me as anything like Yarra Parklands in terms of centralised location with major transport links.

I'm not advocating for QSAC at all, by the way.
 

Pj,Rj,Hj

Juniors
Messages
196
Is Victoria Park a centralised location? And how good are it's transport links? It doesn't strike me as anything like Yarra Parklands in terms of centralised location with major transport links.

I'm not advocating for QSAC at all, by the way.
Well it certainly isn't immediately nextdoor to the CBD like Yarra Park and the Adelaide Parklands, but it is comparable to Moore Park from the central station, and closer to the city centre than Burswood Parklands.
The Victoria Park site has a motorway, and Heavy Rail (the Ekka Loop and the Cross River Rail line) running through the middle of the park, along with two Bus rapid transport stations along the northern perimeter of the parklands. Incomparably superior to QSAC (noted you're not advocating for it).
Also event day trains from other northern lines may be able to be diverted to the park side of the Ekka Loop.
A dedicated station may have to be built if the Ekka Station is deemed too far. Still much cheaper than a rail spur for QSAC, and serviced by many more lines.
 

Pj,Rj,Hj

Juniors
Messages
196
Build a rectangular venue at Victoria Park and use any money for renovation that Lang Park would get in those circumstances to the 'Gabba if that's the case.

Brisbane gets a beautiful shiny new precinct and an increased capacity on the stadium that is currently selling out the most often in the city, and the oval venue gets a renovation worthy of the rectangular one in the inversed circumstance.

Drop the bowl in like the City of Manchester Stadium if you insist on the main stadium being the athletics track.

That could work to. Offsetting some of the cost by developing the Lang Park site
 

Wb1234

Immortal
Messages
34,495
Public transport is already included in ticket cost for league games at Suncorp

Very easy to get to the ground
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
6,645
Is Victoria Park a centralised location? And how good are it's transport links? It doesn't strike me as anything like Yarra Parklands in terms of centralised location with major transport links.

I'm not advocating for QSAC at all, by the way.
The golf course at Victoria Park was recently closed down so the land can be used by the public as green parklands.

There won't be a stadium at Victoria Park, that being one of the many reasons.
 

titoelcolombiano

First Grade
Messages
6,645
That QSAC's location is a relic of mid century car oriented planning.
That centralised major stadiums, near major commuter rail routes have proven far more successful over the last 30 years.
Superior integration into the established urban fabric.
Vastly superior dispersion routes for foot traffic (think the MCG vs old Waverley Park)
That Australian's don't actually utilise metropolitan public open space efficiently when they remain passive spaces. The QSAC site is a single purpose site filled with spartan infrastructure long payed off, there's little pressure to diversify use, that will change when you have a $1.6 billion 14000 seat athletics stadium (legacy mode) in an inconvenient location for large swathes of Brisbane metropolitan area. Enjoy paying off a rebuilt QSAC when only Queensland Athletics will want to be tenants.
Someone claimed that QSAC was the second most patronised stadium in Brisbane after Suncorp. It's an apples and oranges comparison as QSAC is much more akin to an over sized recreation centre and training facility in its function. For ticketed events, seldom will the match the price of a Suncorp event.

A Stadium at Victoria Park diversifies the parks use from mostly passive to active on event days while taking up only 10% of the space. Appropriate examples at the Adelaide Parklands, Yarra Park, Moore Park, Burswood Parklands, as opposed to the QSAC site, or the extensive grounds of the Brisbane Entertainment Centre as a public park of significance and accessibility and egress.
A Victoria Park stadium will justify superior connection between the north and south sides of the park and a dedicated train station or a major extension to the Ekka station.
The Stadium in the parklands works as a destination in of itself.
Stadiums are not longer designed to be inward looking buildings with a single focus use. They are secular cathedrals, sitting high in the hierarchy of public infrastructure. Their architecture should reflect the pride and aspiration of their cities, tell their story. Suncorp does that, not so much the current Gabba, QSAC not at all. Publically funded stadiums need to serve the community well beyond the utilitarian. Like a convention centre they need to offer diverse uses and facilities for weekday use backed by a great location. Victoria Park offers the fitting location for that without the restraints of the Gabba Lot. Hemmed in by major roads, a cemetery, bushland, the QSAC site can't offer any of that. It isn't even attractive to passive activation to justify the expense of a rebuild. A rail spur line would add hundreds of millions of not more to the price tag.

If it's merely animosity towards the AFL, a worthy stadium can be designed for Victoria Park with a reduced capacity in legacy mode so that Suncorp remains the larger stadium. Suncorp will get a major overhaul regardless. The western stand will be 38 years old by 2032, partial or full rebuilding will be warranted.
Qsac doesn't need a train line, they'll just extend the busway which is just as effective.

In terms of an inconvenient location, have you been to Garden City and the surrounds? Brisbane's southside is home to upwards of 1.2m people and the Stadium pretty much sits at the end of the Ipswich Motorway, essentially opening it up to the population of the west also.
 
Top