Hobart’s AFL Stadium: A Dream Dividing Tasmania

Tasmania’s bid for an AFL team, and the stadium needed to secure it, is facing its toughest test yet. The Tasmanian Planning Commission has recommended against the $1.13 billion Macquarie Point project, warning it would “diminish the economic welfare” of the state and cause lasting damage to Hobart’s landscape and heritage. 

Premier Jeremy Rockliff has rejected that assessment. He insists the stadium is about more than football, arguing it will create jobs, supercharge tourism, and secure Tasmania’s sporting future. And with the AFL standing firm on its “no stadium, no team” stance, the project has become one of the most divisive issues in the state’s history. 

A ballooning price tag 

The stadium’s cost estimates have been climbing since day one. Originally pitched at $715 million, the figure rose to $945 million, then $1.13 billion – an increase of more than $400 million in just a few years. 

The Planning Commission has gone further, warning that blowouts could push the final bill closer to $1.8 billion and saddle the state with an extra $5,900 in taxes per household. Rockliff disputes this, promising Tasmanians taxes won’t be raised to pay for the stadium. 

Still, critics see the growing figures as a red flag. One online commenter, James, described the deal as “a ridiculous agreement with the AFL. Tasmanians will be paying for this albatross for generations to come.” 

A “monolithic” project 

The proposed site, 9.3 hectares between the Hobart Cenotaph and Macquarie Wharf, near the CBD, is tightly constrained. To fit, the plan calls for relocating the historic Goods Shed and erecting a stadium with a 58,500 sq m footprint, a transparent dome peaking at 54 metres, and an oval the same size as the MCG. 

The stadium would seat 23,000 for AFL matches, expand to 31,500 for concerts, and include a 1,500-person function room. 

Supporters argue this is exactly the kind of landmark infrastructure Hobart needs. Critics, however, say it’s out of scale for a city of around 580,000 people, roughly one-tenth the size of Melbourne, where the MCG draws crowds of 100,000. 

The Planning Commission’s assessment agreed, describing the proposal as “too big for the site” and warning it would overwhelm the city’s landscape and heritage. 

Voices from the community 

The public reaction has been fierce and divided. 

Some see Tasmania’s endless debate as a problem in itself. Greg commented: “While other states would have started building the stadium by now, Tasmanians are still arguing… It’s no wonder the youth flee Tasmania at their first chance.” 

Others want the government to reconsider location. Phil suggested: “It would make more sense to build a stadium in Launceston on much cheaper land with fewer restrictions.” But AFL officials have been clear: the stadium must be in Hobart, and it must have a roof. 

For others, the question is about priorities. As Brian pointed out: “The cost would pay for an awful lot of homes for the homeless. I guess it’s a matter of priorities.” And another reader compared it to ancient Rome: “So much priority given to a game, maybe like ancient Rome to distract the masses from important issues.” 

What happens next 

The Planning Commission’s recommendation isn’t binding. Parliament will have the final say, with the lower house likely to support the project. The real test will come in the upper house, where independents hold the balance of power. 

For Premier Rockliff, the project remains non-negotiable. For opponents, it risks becoming a financial and cultural burden.