“It may also be unwise and inappropriate for the government to insist that a redeveloped Gabba host the athletics for the Games,” the interim report released on Thursday found.

“State governments should not use major events as an excuse to fast-track already-planned urban development against the wishes of their citizens and local communities, and without due diligence,” the report found.

Personally, I don’t know how I feel about all this. I disagree that using major events to fast-track already-planned projects is a bad idea. In fact I’m all for it, when it’s something they already knew needed to happen. But the Gabba rebuild specifically being done at extra expense so that it can temporarily be an Olympic athletics venue and then converted back to its primary purpose, rather than just doing it once and doing it right, does bother me.

[–] johnthedoe@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don’t know enough about the olympics or the state of the Gabba. What I do know is from an experiential point of view people won’t give a crap if the stadium looks a little old. They will care about the trip as a whole. From a slow ass train from the airport into town. Having a narrow footpath to walk next to 4 lanes of traffic. And not being able to explore anywhere but southbank and the city without a car.

Good tourism should make people want to live here. That’s the point of hosting the games. As long as the venue does the job it’s fine.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 4 points 2 years ago

I mostly agree with everything you said, though I would point out that the problems with the Gabba are about more than it just "looking a little old". It has serious accessibility issues for both the crowd and the competitors, and it needs to be rebuilt or substantially renovated regardless of the Olympics.

It just…doesn't need to be renovated to be an athletics stadium and then re-fitted for cricket and AFL. And it definitely doesn't need a warm-up track next to it.