NOMINATIONS CLOSE SEPTEMBER 12 RECOGNISING THE INDIVIDUALS BEHIND THE PROJECTS
NOMINATIONS CLOSING SEPTEMBER 12 URBAN LEADER AWARDS
Resources
Newsletter
Stay up to date and with the latest news, projects, deals and features.
Subscribe
The clock is ticking towards the Brisbane 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. It will be a medal-worthy feat to deliver all the venues, accommodation and infrastructure to serve the Games and beyond, let alone to manage it all on time, on budget and a lasting legacy for Queenslanders.
These are crucial times with the highest of stakes.
In this article—the second of a four-part series exploring the infrastructure challenges of Brisbane 2032—we focus on the Olympic venues. These high-profile assets carry significant budgetary and reputational risks, but also have the potential to shape the legacy of the Games if delivered strategically.
Sports venues are among the most scrutinised Olympic investments because of their size, visibility and costs. In any Olympic host city, new or upgraded stadiums and sporting venues are major investments with a very long list of stakeholders. These stakeholders will be well aware of the shadow of history, with Games that left underutilised venues and major budget blow-outs—but they won’t be keen on settling for second-best.
Under stakeholder pressure, what starts as a well-defined concept can quickly evolve into a project burdened by add-ons that weren’t part of the original scope or budget. This can place governments and developers in an unenviable squeeze between the risk of cost overruns and the inevitability of cutting corners at the 11th hour.
One of the most effective defences against design creep is a robust scope definition process early in the project lifecycle. This means clearly identifying stakeholder requirements from the outset, prioritising must-haves versus nice-to-haves, and locking the scope in early. Design options should be weighed up based on their long-term impact and ability to serve the community’s future needs.
It’s not a perfect world, so some changes are almost certainly going to be required. Building in smart contingencies can help to prevent costs from spiralling out of control.
Tracking every change is paramount. When project stakeholders can see the projected cost and program implications of every change clearly mapped out, they’ll be far more empowered in their decision-making.
Planning for legacy means maximising the chances of the Games investment resulting in long-term, real value for Queenslanders over generations. This needs to be front of mind from the start—yet planning for long-term value is challenging when it is still unclear how venues will be used after the Games. Too often, host cities have invested in large-scale venues with limited or unclear post-Games uses.
Stakeholder engagement is essential for delivering what future generations need. A key outcome of the Games Independent Infrastructure and Coordination Authority’s (GIICA) 100 day review was a public consultation process. This received more than 5000 submissions from the public, construction professionals, transport experts, planners, sporting and community organisations, and athletes. Some of the most mentioned requests were for public and active transport infrastructure and ensuring the investment in sporting venues will meet Queensland’s long-term needs.
These views helped inform GIICA’s recommendations to government and the subsequent Delivery Plan. This bodes well for achieving a lasting legacy for the communities of Queensland.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) developed a strategy for sustainability as part of the Olympic Agenda 2020—and it set high standards. It recognised that true sustainability is as much about money and legacy as it is about environmentally friendly buildings. One of Brisbane 2032’s strongest sustainability credentials lies in its commitment to reuse and adapt existing facilities. When demolishing a building, especially a sports venue, it’s important to factor in the energy costs of demolition pollutants, landfill waste and carbon emissions. These have a large environmental impact.
Take Sydney’s Olympic Stadium at Homebush. Just two decades after it opened, it was slated to be demolished and rebuilt, sparking community and stakeholder backlash. The eventual decision to refurbish rather than rebuild highlights the importance of whole-of-life thinking—and whole-of-life cost modelling. This approach takes a more realistic view of the genuine legacy and sustainability of a structure, with a lens that extends beyond the initial capital outlay and encompasses ongoing maintenance, adaptability, revenue potential, and even regeneration/redevelopment costs.
It’s great to see that the Queensland Government has taken note of this and heeded the IOC’s sustainability strategy. The Delivery Plan is repurposing 11 of the 17 venues it is delivering. This includes the Brisbane Showgrounds, Queensland Tennis Centre, Sunshine Coast Stadium, Gold Coast Hockey Centre, Brisbane International Shooting Centre, Anna Meares Velodrome, Barlow Park and Toowoomba Showgrounds.
Brisbane 2032 presents an incredible opportunity not only to host a memorable Games, but to leave a sustainable built legacy that benefits Brisbane and its regions for decades. Navigating this amongst headwinds of rising costs, limited capital and diminishing time is possible, but it will require a whole-of-industry approach.
The planning and regulation initiatives coming on board will help, including the Queensland Government’s decision to suspend Best Practice Industry Conditions and the Federal Government’s recent decision to pause the next round of updates to the National Construction Code. But more needs to be done. We look forward to further initiatives in the final report from the Queensland Productivity Commission in October.
A whole-of-industry approach should extend to early engagement with builders of prefabricated or modular options so that off-site manufacturing pipelines and capacity can be established. This will help boost productivity while putting downward pressure on onsite trade labour constraints.
What’s needed now are smart, strategic decisions on planning, design, procurement and delivery, so that every dollar spent today continues to deliver value tomorrow.
This is the second in a series of insights to navigate the hurdles on road to Brisbane 2032. Subscribe here to be notified when the next articles are published.
Tim Bessell is a National Director and WT’s National Sports & Venues Sector Lead, based in Brisbane. With over 20 years of experience in cost management and commercial advisory, he has delivered major projects across a range of sectors. Tim specialises in sports infrastructure, with a portfolio that includes the MCG, Optus Stadium, Marvel Stadium, Allianz Stadium, AAMI Park and the upcoming Brisbane 2032 venues. Tim led WT’s team that worked closely with GIICA, undertaking cost and program reviews to help shape the recommendations in the 100 Day Review report.
The Urban Developer is proud to partner with WT to deliver this article to you. In doing so, we can continue to publish our daily news, information, insights and opinion to you, our valued readers.
WT is a leading international project advisory firm with more than 75 years of multi-sector experience. Our clients can tap into the collective thinking of over 2,000 of the best people in the industry, operating from 70+ offices throughout Australia, New Zealand, Asia, India, Middle East, North America, Africa, the UK and Europe. In Australia, we support our clients across property, construction and infrastructure with an award-winning team of 500 specialists in portfolio and program advisory, cost management and quantity surveying, commercial advisory, carbon and sustainability, asset and facilities management, and digital solutions.
