[COM] Torrens Footbridge | $40m

[Alyx]

For anyone that can't see the player - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yYF2OifjOmc

[Port Adelaide Fan]

A hurdle for the long-awaited footbridge over the Torrens. A City Council report branding the bridge a visual blight because it's too wide.

[[Shuz]]

Better the bridge to be too wide than too narrow. It's practically an OHSW issue - if ever the need arises for patrons to evacuate Adelaide Oval and or the Riverbank, the bridge provides a convinient ease of access to trasnport tens of thousands of people across to safety as fast and as quickly as possible and a wider bridge would accomodate for that kind of emergency sufficiently.

[mutt]

Better the bridge to be too wide than too narrow. It's practically an OHSW issue - if ever the need arises for patrons to evacuate Adelaide Oval and or the Riverbank, the bridge provides a convinient ease of access to trasnport tens of thousands of people across to safety as fast and as quickly as possible and a wider bridge would accomodate for that kind of emergency sufficiently.

evacuate the riverbank
the lake is barely knee deep

i think it is an ugly bridge by the way and you will believe me when you see it built. the curve just increases its negative visual impact.
of course the architect is going to defend his own work.

[Nathan]

of course the architect is going to defend his own work.

It's Nick Tridente (of Tridente Architects) in the video. The bridge is being handled "a consortium led by engineering firm Aurecon and comprising designers Taylor Cullity Lethlean and architects Tonkin Zulaihka Greer". He's offering his opinion, not defending his own work.

[Waewick]

omg

honestly, can't we just get rid of the council...or at least ban Moran from running ever again.

[mutt]

i think there's a lot of unfair criticism of Cr Moran on this forum.

i dont know her nor do i necessarily support everything she stands for, but there seems to be this blame her for everything attitude here. some of her points are quite valid imo.
not all development is good development.

[ynotsfables]

Anne Moran has a lot of unfair criticism towards development, no mercy for the woman!

[mrblackrooster]

Anne Moran has a lot of unfair criticism towards development, no mercy for the woman!

+1

[Waewick]

i think there's a lot of unfair criticism of Cr Moran on this forum.

i dont know her nor do i necessarily support everything she stands for, but there seems to be this blame her for everything attitude here. some of her points are quite valid imo.
not all development is good development.

that is true, the problem she has is her credability is shot because she cans pretty much every development - well to be fair, she cans every development that the media seeks her public input from.

so, whe Cnr Moran needs to do, is to be seen publicly backing some developments to avoid the stigma of being a NIMBY or anti-development.

[crawf]

i think there's a lot of unfair criticism of Cr Moran on this forum.

i dont know her nor do i necessarily support everything she stands for, but there seems to be this blame her for everything attitude here. some of her points are quite valid imo.
not all development is good development.

that is true, the problem she has is her credability is shot because she cans pretty much every development - well to be fair, she cans every development that the media seeks her public input from.

so, whe Cnr Moran needs to do, is to be seen publicly backing some developments to avoid the stigma of being a NIMBY or anti-development.

The only proposal I remember her showing full support was the redevelopment of the old Planet site into a 19 storey ugly box, thankfully that project died. I'm sure there is others but Anne Moran is still one of the biggest NIMBY in Adelaide. With Sandy Wilkinson a close second.

[Ben]

From The Messenger:

City Council wants control of oval footbridge

18 Jul 12 @ 04:00pm by Chloe Kennedy

THE City Council will ask for the $24 million Adelaide Oval Footbridge to be gifted by the State Government, which will give it control over naming rights and artwork.

Elected members, at a committee meeting last night, recommended the City Council own, manage and maintain the bridge once it is completed.

If agreed, the council would ask the State Government for annual payments of up to $20,000 to cover the maintenance of the bridge, including any upgrade or improvement works required.

The council also would use its ownership to make money from events held on and around the bridge.

Cr Mark Hamilton said it was vital the council managed the bridge so it could also maintain control of the parklands.

"I would be very fearful of this becoming a slippery slope into losing control of the parklands," he said.

"Council will operate the bridge for the benefit of the whole community."

Cr Anne Moran said if the State Government or Stadium Management Authority controlled the bridge she feared it would become too sport-orientated.

"It will be painted Crows colours on one side and Port on the other," she said.

"Us keeping it doesn't give us total control but it gives us some control."

The City Council will vote on the proposal at its next meeting on Tuesday, July 24

[Waewick]

how aboutthe Council just has a say in it

the last thing we need is the ACC looking after it and repaving it every 12-18 months - most likely in the middle of June

[mattblack]

From The Messenger:

Cr Anne Moran said if the State Government or Stadium Management Authority controlled the bridge she feared it would become too sport-orientated.

"It will be painted Crows colours on one side and Port on the other," she said.

With comments like this, no wonder Moran has a low credability rating.

[build 'em smarter]

From The Messenger:

Cr Anne Moran said if the State Government or Stadium Management Authority controlled the bridge she feared it would become too sport-orientated.

"It will be painted Crows colours on one side and Port on the other," she said.

"Us keeping it doesn't give us total control but it gives us some control."

I was of the understanding that all works no matter how minor (even small interior alterations) that are north of north Terrace require council approval anyway, so the bridge couldnt be painted football colours without the council approving it anyway. Could someone confirm if this is indeed the case, because if so, i dont see any basis to their argument.