8 August 2023

As a community, are we bold enough to consider new proposals for a Civic Stadium?

| Tim Gavel
Join the conversation
48
Imagining the new Civic stadium. Photo: GHDWoodhead.

At least four locations have been proposed for a new Civic Stadium. But what about sending Parkes Way into a tunnel to make space for it? Photo: GHD Woodhead.

Every time something ‘left field’ is proposed in Canberra it is seemingly rejected before being carefully considered.

Thirteen years ago there was a proposal to build a walkway bridge across Lake Burley Griffin from the National Museum to Lennox Gardens.

It was to be known as the Immigration Bridge and would recognise the contribution immigrants have made to Australia.

There was immediate opposition from the sailing community, which I admit I was part of at the time. The opposition was because one option featured 12 bridge pylons, with the walkway 12 metres above the lake surface.

It was knocked on the head before the other option of a walkway without any pylons was even considered. There was also the argument that the proposal was inconsistent with Burley Griffin’s vision for the lake.

READ ALSO ‘Do you work here?’: What do you do when you’re always mistaken for staff?

There was also intense opposition to the light rail when it was first proposed but it is now seen as an important part of Canberra’s infrastructure as well as adding vitality to the city centre.

But it does appear that our community has a level of opposition to anything left field when it comes to infrastructure.

Artist's impression of the surrounds of new city stadium. Photo: GHDWoodhead.

Artist’s impression of the Civic Pool site and surrounds if considered for a new city stadium. Photo: GHD Woodhead.

This is probably why David Pocock’s suggestion of sending Parkes Way into a tunnel to allow space for a new Civic Stadium hasn’t gained much momentum.

True to form from many in Canberra, there was commentary that it wouldn’t get past first base, it was too expensive, it wouldn’t receive ACT Government backing, and construction would create considerable disruption to traffic.

But I think it’s worth considering the proposal rather than dismissing it outright.

READ ALSO Woden through road will put cars where there should be people

The Civic Stadium would revitalise the City to the Lake concept as well as create an expression of boldness in the ‘CBR’ brand.

It’s worth considering, but unfortunately it would appear as though the Civic option has fallen behind a rebuilt stadium at Bruce and Exhibition Park.

Having been to most of the modern stadiums in Australia, Canberra Stadium by comparison is antiquated and needs replacing.

Whatever the decision, a stadium is needed.

And the bold option of the Civic Stadium with a Parkes Way tunnel has incredible merit and should not be dismissed simply because it appears all too difficult.

Join the conversation

48
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest
HiddenDragon7:50 pm 10 Aug 23

“True to form from many in Canberra, there was commentary that it wouldn’t get past first base, it was too expensive, it wouldn’t receive ACT Government backing, and construction would create considerable disruption to traffic.”

For the many, quite possibly majority, of Canberrans who would never use a Civic stadium those are fairly compelling arguments – as dull and disappointing as they might be to the people who have stars in their eyes over this proposal.

Aside from the grey cardigan genes carried by many Canberrans, one of the reasons for the local scepticism (called it negativity if you like) towards grand plans relying on public funding, even if only in part, may be the growing impact on many households of the (very) slow-grinding transition from one off property stamp duty charges to much higher annual rates.

An obvious consequence of this transition is that many more households are now regularly reminded of their contribution to supporting the ACT government compared to what they get in return, and will be that much harder to persuade about ideas which go beyond the essential services they expect from the Territory government.

So because there are those that won’t use it then Government money shouldn’t be used for it? There is alot that fits that bill but at the end of the day that is what the Government of the day has to balance out and while that argument is floated the other side could argue their tax dollars should provide facilities across the city they can enjoy. I for example could care less about a new theatre but there is no way it will get built if the Government doesn’t do it and even though I won’t use it I can see the benefits of it and that there are those in the community that want it so it doesn’t bother me that my rates go toward it.

“True to form from many in Canberra, there was commentary that it wouldn’t get past first base, it was too expensive, it wouldn’t receive ACT Government backing, and construction would create considerable disruption to traffic.”

For the many, quite possibly majority, of Canberrans who would never use a tram, those are fairly compelling arguments – as dull and disappointing as they might be to the people who have stars in their eyes over this proposal.

Someone just had to bring up the tram. Couldn’t resist not doing so! I will rarely use the tram (think I’ve used it once. I only have buses where I live) as it doesn’t come near where I live, but I can see the benefit for the future in light rail. Many others will use it, and if a public transport system is advanced enough, people don’t need to use a car for everyday things. It will make the city more livable and viable. It’s looking to the future, as well as now, which some people appear to lack the ability to do so. The population is only going to increase, and it’s easier to put in things like light rail now, than when the population grows to a million and beyond, which it will get to with the present immigration rate. Imagine the disruption needed then to put in a light rail.
I have just returned from Europe and in the cities I didn’t need a car. Last year I spent two weeks in Melbourne and used trains, tram and buses every day; several a day, right to the outer edge of the system. I didn’t need a car to get around, although as I saw some locals doing, a bike would be good to increase distances.
I have never spoken out against the stadium, even though I will never use it, at least to watch boring sport. (I used to play sport, played cricket as an adult. That’s fun, that’s participating, but going to watch sport; no thank you.) I accept though, that although I might never visit the stadium, others will. We might not be able to prise you out off your car and you will never use public transport, but others will. The tram is more comfortable, can hold more people and is more certain. It’s easier to know where it goes and if you buy a home near it, you are unlikely to have it change its route on you. It’s inflexibility is it’s strength. (The last comment from someone who had their convenient bus route changed and made less convenient.)

Me neither, I don’t actually oppose it. But it’s the same concept of a city stadium: Not everyone will use it, but it will benefit a lot of Canberra

I’m not interested in another stadium or extending the tram. How about fixing our health services (medical and dental) instead, so people don’t have to wait ridiculous times for treatment. The Government needs to get its priorities right.

Talking to people at coffee shops it seems not many people (in fact none i spoke to) who agrees on the idea of a sports stadium in civic. Barr is on the right track by suggesting the revamp of existing or a rebuild on its existing location. The local press can push this civic location thing again and again (as its done) but in reality it’s not a popular choice.

Margaret Freemantle3:37 pm 16 Aug 23

You are going to the wrong coffee shops! It is by far the most sensible and popular choice.

Coming from a journalist who only a few weeks back didnt support having a team based in CBR for the Womens world cup, which has been a resounding success……The push for a new stadium will come at the ballot box next year!!!!!

The real issue with infrastructure projects is whats actually good for society and whats politcally good for the party proposing them is often not the same or close enough. Many of these proposals are only ever designed to be aspirational so you associate it with the political party. City to the lake makes a lot of sense, as does a City Stadium (especially when you realise the parking at Bruce is earmarked for apartments). But politically they are a hard sell because they know the other party will oppose just about any infrastructure spend. The only exception is roads which for some strange reason the people don’t seem to care on cost at least not in Canberra. Yet if roads had to meet a cost benefit analysis they’d probably never get built.

Even just a few hundred metres of parkes way buried with a cut and cover, would allow for an amazing land bridge with the stadium linking commonwelath park to the city and intgrating it int a great place for Floriade, Multicultural festival and other big events and festivals. It all makes sense, I get the cost is the issue, but everything else feels a waste of money with minimal benefits to society.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.