As it happened, I was invited to Arcadis' Brisbane office to meet with the company's Global Cities Director, John Batten, who was in town on a lightning visit last week.
While there, Arcadis Brisbane boss Paul Allan told me that while the report they prepared for the archipelago was confidential, he could confirm Edwards' figure of $3.4 billion accumulated.
So how is this possible? How could Brisbane get three venues for less than the price of two?
Allan said having the sites in the same location created numerous efficiencies.
“Having the sites together is part of that, and obviously you can build all three simultaneously,” he says.
In terms of green space, Allan supported Edwards' contention that there would be a net increase under the Archipelago proposal.
loading
The reason? Additional green space gained by building on the inner city ring road and railway line to the south-east of the site.
“It's basically in sections, so you can link Victoria Park to the park on the other side where the Centenary Pool is, and that more than makes up for the footprints of the three stadiums,” he says.
“Obviously, the pool isn't huge. The arena isn't huge either. The stadium is the biggest, but that [ICB and rail covering] more than makes up for size.”
An added benefit of this was that it would better link Victoria Park to the city. As it stands, the railway lines and the ICB are quite significant obstacles to pedestrian access to the site.
loading
“I think [Victoria Park] it's only 1½ kilometers from the city,” says Allan.
“It's pretty close, but no one uses it because it's not that accessible.”
It's not just pedestrian access from the CBD that works in the scheme's favour: with Cross River Rail and the Brisbane Metro, Victoria Park is poised to become much more accessible by public transport, which is woefully lacking from QSAC.
As Allan says: “It's much more expensive to build transport than to build stadiums.”
So is Victoria Park the best option for Brisbane? This is for people far more qualified than a simple reporter to answer.
loading
All the cost estimates and planning so far have been, by Allan's own admission, quite high-level. Further forensic analysis would be needed before any decision is made.
But it is clear that Victoria Park is an option that requires proper investigation and not to be ruled out, as both Miles and Opposition Leader David Crisafulli have done.
Queensland taxpayers deserve to know if they could save $1.1 billion by pursuing an Olympic plan that would leave a lasting legacy in Brisbane. After all, other worthy sports infrastructure projects could benefit from these savings.
If the costs add up, and indeed there would be no net loss of green space, Victoria Park is an absolute no-brainer.
