Premier Jeremy Rockliff has rejected the advice of the Tasmanian Planning Commission to shelve the 23,000-seat Macquarie Point stadium, saying that they have been “massively underestimated”.
“Stadiums are complex, and this is the reason why across the nation special laws are used to approve them, instead of the traditional planning scheme,” Premier Rockliff said today. “At the beginning of this process, it was known that elected Members of Parliament would have the final vote on the Project.
“It is now time for MPs to have their say.”
It comes after the future of the stadium – which, if built, would be the world’s largest timber-roofed stadium – is now in serious doubt after Tasmania’s planning authority formally rejected the $1 billion-plus proposal.
In a scathing report released this morning, a panel appointed by the Tasmanian Planning Commission (TPC) recommended parliament reject the stadium, concluding: “The disbenefits outweigh the benefits.”
The venue is a cornerstone of Tasmania’s bid for the AFL’s 19th team, with the league maintaining a firm “no stadium, no team” stance. However, the TPC’s findings will now shape a critical parliamentary vote on the stadium’s planning permit. And the panel didn’t mince words.
“The fundamental problem is that the size, location, and geographical features of the site, in its highly valued context, do not support the disproportionately large, monolithic building proposed,” the report stated. “It is a building which is incongruent with the valued characteristics of its spatial context, completely at odds with the long-established planning principles guiding and informing development, and with the land and urban fabric surrounding the site and the heritage values associated with nearby places.”
The panel also warned of “irrevocable and unacceptable adverse impacts” on Hobart’s landscape, urban form and cultural heritage. Financially, the report was equally damning: “The project represents a significant net cost and will diminish the economic welfare of Tasmanians as a whole,” it said. “And it offers almost no scope for the site to become a vibrant, active place that is attractive to visit outside of major event mode.”
“In very simple terms,” the panel concluded, “the stadium is too big for the site and the benefits it will bring are significantly outweighed by the disbenefits it creates.”
Despite bipartisan political support, the stadium’s future now hinges on a handful of undecided independents in the upper house. If they vote against the permit, the project could be dead in the water. Opponents argue the stadium will dwarf historic Hunter Street and the Cenotaph, and question its necessity given Tasmania already has two AFL venues amid mounting budget pressures.
Supporters, however, insist the stadium is essential to securing the Tasmania Devils AFL team and unlocking long-term economic benefits through sport, entertainment and tourism.
In May, the Tasmanian government attempted to fast-track the project using a “design and construct” procurement model, fully funded by the state—unlike the public-private approach used for Brisbane’s Olympic infrastructure. “Feedback from the market sounding process is crucial in understanding how to activate the precinct in a way that unlocks decades of economic investment, jobs and opportunities,” said Eric Abetz, Minister for Business, Industry and Resources.
“The decision to prioritise the delivery of the multipurpose stadium through a design and construct pathway provides certainty and confidence in the future of the precinct and the Tasmania Devils AFL club.”
- To learn more about Macquarie Point, click here for Wood Central’s special feature, including the full plans for the stadium.
