We asked you to answer nine stadium questions. Here are the results

It doesn't matter if you're in camp Civic, belligerent about Bruce or don't think the city needs a stadium at all. The one thing respondents to a Canberra Times stadium survey agree on is this: frustration.

"The fact there is a debate at all is stupid," one said.

"The thing that has frustrated me the most is, Canberra is the capital city and quite possibly has one of the worst night-time atmospheres out of every state and territory," another said.

"A lot of talk and no action," from another.

"[Canberra Times] reporting has been ridiculous. [Andrew] Barr created the problem of minimal investment in the AIS by prevaricating on a Civic stadium for years." Ouch, but everyone deserves their say.

And, to sum it all up: "Stop wasting money and get on with it."

Almost 2500 people completed the stadium survey. It's the first time Canberrans have been able to vote on the options, and voice their concerns, since Barr first unveiled a long-term stadium vision in 2009.

So after years of waiting, and waiting, and waiting ... here is the blueprint voted on by Canberrans, for Canberrans.

Drum roll, please ... The winner is Civic. And by a long way, too.

This has been one of the most sensitive issues of the debate over the past two years after ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr ditched his plans to build a stadium in the city and shifted focus to Bruce.

The survey gave people a chance to pick from the location list that has been around for about 15 years - Civic, Bruce, Exhibition Park and Woden.

The majority went for Civic (52 per cent), while the existing site (either as is, or with an upgrade) was next on the list with 24 per cent of the vote.

The result poses an interesting question come ACT election time later this year and after Prime Minister Anthony Albanese committed $10 million to a Bruce precinct masterplan study on Friday. The masterplan will look at options for a stadium in the suburb.

ACT Labor is pushing ahead with Bruce as the preferred site.

Barr commissioned a technical site study this year to examine the possibility of building a stadium on the site of the old Raiders HQ on the corner of Battye Street and Haydon Drive.

The Canberra Liberals are yet to announce their exact election pitch, but they are preparing their plans for a $500-$800 million stadium in the city.

The common, and lazy, criticism for the Civic site is the impact on traffic and overcrowding the city. Those critics forget sporting fixtures are usually on the weekend (when people aren't working in Civic offices) and most start at 7.30pm (even if it's on a weekday, people are driving into town rather than in peak-hour traffic going home) and games finish at 10.30pm (when ... the critics are in bed).

The city and Bruce were by far the two most popular choices, while the "other" option threw out some wildcard spots.

For the more plausible: ANU, Southwell Park, the Dickson Playing Fields, Greenway or Thoroughbred Park. For the more lighthearted: Charnwood, City Hill (I guess we have to take responsibility for that one!) and Yass.

Wherever it goes, most people want it connected to the light rail network (60 per cent voted yes).

These are the $1 billion questions. Or the $750 million, or the $500 million, depending on whose money you're spending and whether you want the bells and whistles.

The cost of building stadiums has ballooned in the more than a decade of planning and discussing options. What cost $200 million to build 10 years ago is now easily around the $500 million mark.

It seems Canberrans are happy to aim relatively high, even if it is the taxpayers who will foot the bill for the cost of the stadium after the government previously rejected approaches from private operators.

The combined options of $500m-$750m and $750m-$1bn took 71 per cent of the vote.

The majority (88 per cent) believe the federal government should pay half of the bill after Barr lodged his request for a partnership earlier this year.

And as it turns out, size matters. There is a downsizing push that has been gaining momentum in recent times, with a preference emerging for a 10,000 or 15,000 seat to ensure the ACT Brumbies, Canberra Raiders and a potential A-League Men's team could fill it every week.

The concern with that approach, however, is that it won't account for the capital's population growth, which is expected to hit 550,000 by 2032-33 and almost 800,000 by 2060.

If a new stadium is built with a 50-year lifespan in mind, it needs to cater for a growing city.

So, a capacity of 25,000-30,000 (more than the existing stadium) was the No. 1 option in the survey.

And when will it be finished? The fans want it somewhere between 2027-2029. That might be overly ambitious given there's still no preferred site, design, funding ... you get the picture. The next most popular option - 2030-2032 - might be closer to the mark given it matches the government's timeline of completion within a decade.

ACT Sport Minister Yvette Berry set tongues wagging when she was asked about the need for a roof at the new stadium. In dismissing the idea because of the cost, she said: "part of the memories the stadium brings for Canberrans in particular is the weather" and that fans were "pretty tough".

Those "pretty tough" fans shiver through chilly nights because they have to, not because they want to. Fewer than 20 per cent of the seats at Canberra Stadium are covered by a roof.

Do those fans want a fully-enclosed stadium? You bet. In fact, 83 per cent say it's a no-brainer. The No. 1 reason why was because a roof would make the venue a year-round option for concerts and events (58 per cent).

Of the 17 per cent of the more than 2400 survey participants who don't want a roof, the No. 1 reason for their decision was ... It's too expensive and they're happy to sit in the cold (46 per cent). Maybe Berry was on to something after all.

So what do Canberrans want? To sum it up, they want:

- A stadium with a roof and located in the city as well as being connected to the light rail network;

- Costs should land somewhere between $500m-$750m, the federal government should pay half, the capacity should be 25,000-30,000 and it should be opened by 2029.

That depends who you talk to. There's no doubt Barr is keen to push the stadium forward - he has been its biggest political supporter since the start of this wild ride in 2009.

But there are other projects that keep getting in the way. In the past it was Mr Fluffy, light rail and COVID-19. Now it's light rail, a new convention centre, a new theatre and a 10,000-seat pavilion.

Given the ACT government hasn't settled on a timeline, or completed a business plan, it's unfair to expect the federal government to sign a blank cheque. As such, there won't be any stadium funding in the budget on Tuesday.

The federal government, however, has committed $10 million for work to be done on a Bruce masterplan, which will include options for a stadium in the sport, health and education precinct.

The problem is Canberra fans and teams have been stuck in a holding pattern for too long, and it has allowed frustration to fester. It just depends where you fall on the frustration spectrum.

You might be like these people: "We don't need a new stadium, we already have one." And: "I don't understand why everything has to be bulldozed nowadays to make way for bigger and better. If there is nothing structurally wrong it is far more cost effective to improve the existing stadium," another added.

Or you're on a different frustration page.

"It is simple - build an all purpose under cover stadium that is central and close to restaurants and bars. Anything else will be a white elephant," one said.

"Just get on with it and make a decision," one survey respondent said. And to finish: "Stop leaving us out in the cold!"