[COM] Adelaide Oval Redevelopment
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
These trees along with many white cedar trees in Adelaide suffered greatly during the drought and are not in good health. White Cedars have a limited lifespan in our climate, and would have had to be removed/replaced with or without the carpark. Nothing like a storm in a teacup when it comes to the parklands though. Lets hope they don't replace them with an avenue of dead native grass though as is the current trend.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
The White Cedar is apparently a native of the Kimberley. It has been classed as a weed in Perth, but I don't think that applies in Adelaide. The seeds are eaten and distributed by birds, but we don't see white cedars growing in national parks etc to the same extent that we see olives, which are spread the same way and which are considered a weed here.
cheers,
Rhino
Rhino
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Wow, the DAC circumvent the rules and laugh in the face of public opinion to do a dawn raid on a bunch of protected trees to satisfy the SACA, I was so surprised I nearly blinked.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Quick...while they're foaming about the trees lets whack up that permanent stand in Victoria Park..... Oh thats right, they're busy with puting up the temporary stand again.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
It's all about the trees, of course...oh, and rampant bending of the rules by the DAC to stuff up our city, again! Rail freight through suburbs, concrete blah on Twin Street, parks on industrial slag heaps for St Claire, I'm loving it, can't wait to see what's next. Of course, the more commando activity the State government carries out, the more the public sees they are being ignored and the facade of public consultation and 'independent' ruling bodies begins to fall. I get the impression the state government can smell defeat in 2014, hence the ramping up of blatant nasty activity around the city.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
If you really care so much why didnt you chain yourself to one of these half dead trees. By the way DAC is independent of the government. You might want to check the basis of your attacks before you get up on your soap box.degruch wrote:It's all about the trees, of course...oh, and rampant bending of the rules by the DAC to stuff up our city, again! Rail freight through suburbs, concrete blah on Twin Street, parks on industrial slag heaps for St Claire, I'm loving it, can't wait to see what's next. Of course, the more commando activity the State government carries out, the more the public sees they are being ignored and the facade of public consultation and 'independent' ruling bodies begins to fall. I get the impression the state government can smell defeat in 2014, hence the ramping up of blatant nasty activity around the city.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Maybe Pat Conlon should have, they're going to die so soon they'd have probably collapsed before the dawn raid and he'd be safe as a 27 story apartment complex on top of Parliament House! Maybe he was worried about that once in a hundred year flood occurring overnight...scoff, chortle. Anyway, who needed to chain themselves to anything, the avenue was protected, wasn't it?mattblack wrote:If you really care so much why didnt you chain yourself to one of these half dead trees. By the way DAC is independent of the government. You might want to check the basis of your attacks before you get up on your soap box.
DAC...independent? Scoff, chortle.
Maybe, but here's the setting:
Having lost their battle with the ACC to have the avenue removed, the State government and SACA appealed to the DAC and, presto, overnight, fixed! Does that look independent to you? It doesn't to a lot of people, especially with the knowledge only a few DAC members even bothered to attend the appeal hearing.
To be honest, although it's only a few old trees, it's a PR disaster for the government and a real eye opener for the public. Telling everyone the trees were dead, or dying, or in a flood zone is only making the educated public laugh louder.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Trees have a finite life. Councils and institutions etc need to manage declining trees, plan their replacements etc.
White Cedar trees may look attractive in their prime but there are reports of people developing allergies in proximity to these trees. They are no longer a favoured tree in the Burnside Council area (like Queensland Box and Desert Ash) and are not used in replanting schemes.
The Burnside Council Tree Management Strategy ...
http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/files/da9 ... rategy.pdf
... has this on Pg 43
"In the case of Melia azedarach (White Cedar), Council has chosen to discontinue its use due to inherent risks associated with the berry that the tree produces."
Many trees in this avenue of trees near the Adelaide Oval appear to fit the declining category.
Is there a garden plan, associated with the redevelopment, showing replacement trees and garden design?
White Cedar trees may look attractive in their prime but there are reports of people developing allergies in proximity to these trees. They are no longer a favoured tree in the Burnside Council area (like Queensland Box and Desert Ash) and are not used in replanting schemes.
The Burnside Council Tree Management Strategy ...
http://www.burnside.sa.gov.au/files/da9 ... rategy.pdf
... has this on Pg 43
"In the case of Melia azedarach (White Cedar), Council has chosen to discontinue its use due to inherent risks associated with the berry that the tree produces."
Many trees in this avenue of trees near the Adelaide Oval appear to fit the declining category.
Is there a garden plan, associated with the redevelopment, showing replacement trees and garden design?
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Public being ignored??? Dont mistake the loud few that spew all over the Advertiser letters as being the general public. The fact is the vast majority of public just want the damn thing built and are happy at the lightning speed it is happening. Finally something that is not endlessly held up by agonising over a small section of parkland. Ditto St Claire. 99.9% of Charles Sturt residents would never have set foot in St Claire park, nor care it is being moved a few hundred metres to make better use of the under used train station and run down Woodville Road.degruch wrote:It's all about the trees, of course...oh, and rampant bending of the rules by the DAC to stuff up our city, again! Rail freight through suburbs, concrete blah on Twin Street, parks on industrial slag heaps for St Claire, I'm loving it, can't wait to see what's next. Of course, the more commando activity the State government carries out, the more the public sees they are being ignored and the facade of public consultation and 'independent' ruling bodies begins to fall. I get the impression the state government can smell defeat in 2014, hence the ramping up of blatant nasty activity around the city.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
+1claybro wrote:Public being ignored??? Dont mistake the loud few that spew all over the Advertiser letters as being the general public. The fact is the vast majority of public just want the damn thing built and are happy at the lightning speed it is happening. Finally something that is not endlessly held up by agonising over a small section of parkland. Ditto St Claire. 99.9% of Charles Sturt residents would never have set foot in St Claire park, nor care it is being moved a few hundred metres to make better use of the under used train station and run down Woodville Road.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Can we just IGNORE the obvious trolls from the various self interest head up their ass groups, like the guy a few posts above making a huge fuss about some dead trees?
I mean seriously, we are going to engage in an argument with this obvious troll about dying trees that were removed? Come onnnn!!
These idiotic groups rely on the fact that most people these days will NOT do their own research to inform them selves of the facts, and therefore try and take advantage of peoples passive attitudes on matters that don't directly affect them by making a whole lot of noise to get attention and hope that those people hear the misleading information they are spreading.
Remember, IGNORE.
The sooner we ignore these idiots, the sooner they piss off.
I mean seriously, we are going to engage in an argument with this obvious troll about dying trees that were removed? Come onnnn!!
These idiotic groups rely on the fact that most people these days will NOT do their own research to inform them selves of the facts, and therefore try and take advantage of peoples passive attitudes on matters that don't directly affect them by making a whole lot of noise to get attention and hope that those people hear the misleading information they are spreading.
Remember, IGNORE.
The sooner we ignore these idiots, the sooner they piss off.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
+2:)DaShyFreak wrote:+1claybro wrote:Public being ignored??? Dont mistake the loud few that spew all over the Advertiser letters as being the general public. The fact is the vast majority of public just want the damn thing built and are happy at the lightning speed it is happening. Finally something that is not endlessly held up by agonising over a small section of parkland. Ditto St Claire. 99.9% of Charles Sturt residents would never have set foot in St Claire park, nor care it is being moved a few hundred metres to make better use of the under used train station and run down Woodville Road.
Big infrastructure investments are usually under-valued and & over-criticized while in the planning stage. It's much easier to envision the here and now costs and inconveniences, and far more difficult to imagine fully the eventual benefits.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
Wandered into invitingly open gates at Adelaide Oval today... will post a couple of proper pics later. Looking good.
[COM] Re: U/C: Adelaide Oval Redevelopment | 53,500 | $545m
A couple of happy snaps from the Intercontinental.
- Attachments
-
- IMG_1775.JPG (246.41 KiB) Viewed 2978 times
-
- IMG_1774.JPG (265.52 KiB) Viewed 2978 times
-
- IMG_1769.JPG (366.27 KiB) Viewed 2978 times
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Cryptic, gnrc_louis, Semrush [Bot] and 6 guests