[COM] Torrens Footbridge | $40m

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Message
Author
User avatar
Matt
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: London

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#256 Post by Matt » Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:18 pm

It's topical because her/their stance on this may alter or delay the project, be it out of genuine concern (doubtful) or political point scoring.

Crawf's right. If there wasn't a bridge, I don't doubt they'd be arguing as to why not, and probably painting it as some sort of government planning failure.

This is what oppositions do, as we've seen federally, ad nauseum.

However, given what their pie-in-the-sky enclosed stadium would have cost, the "we can't afford this bridge" argument lacks credibility.

Nort
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:08 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#257 Post by Nort » Fri Nov 30, 2012 5:53 pm

Not just the bridge, I have seen a few comments by the Opposition talking about how if they are elected they will have to deal with a large financial impact caused by the Adelaide Oval redevelopment...ignoring that both parties wanted to spend money on city stadiums at the last election.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3774
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#258 Post by Waewick » Fri Nov 30, 2012 9:19 pm

that is completely irrelevant.

we will never know what an encolosed stadium would have cost - but we know that a new upgraded stadium cost 535M and that is all we can talk about.

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#259 Post by claybro » Sat Dec 01, 2012 10:49 am

Had the Liberal proposal of the covered stadium on the new hospital site got up, we would not be having an arguement over the footbridge as no bridge would be required. We do know the cost of a covered stadium, because they are built all over the world every year. Their option of an upgraded hospital on the RAH current site, and a new covered stadium at the new site, would have come in combination about a billion dollars less than the combined hosital and stadium0 now under construction,and without the colossal ongoing payments we now have to stump up for the next 30 odd years for the hospital. Having said this, there was an election on these options, the Libs lost and they need to move on and respect this was what the voters have chosen and stop trying to score cheap points. Its why they are so on the nose.

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3290
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#260 Post by [Shuz] » Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:13 am

Apologies if its already been annouced but it looks like actual construction work has commenced on the Northern Riverbank where the footbridge viewing platform/waterfall feature will go.

Further along the northern riverbank walkway to the west of the construction work, some barricades have been put up around what I presume looks to be where the first of the support pylons will go for the northern landing.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

User avatar
Matt
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: London

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#261 Post by Matt » Thu Dec 06, 2012 4:29 am

Excellent! Photos would be super if anyone happens to be down that way this week

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#262 Post by Ho Really » Thu Dec 06, 2012 11:09 pm

claybro wrote:Had the Liberal proposal of the covered stadium on the new hospital site got up, we would not be having an arguement over the footbridge as no bridge would be required. We do know the cost of a covered stadium, because they are built all over the world every year. Their option of an upgraded hospital on the RAH current site, and a new covered stadium at the new site, would have come in combination about a billion dollars less than the combined hosital and stadium0 now under construction,and without the colossal ongoing payments we now have to stump up for the next 30 odd years for the hospital. Having said this, there was an election on these options, the Libs lost and they need to move on and respect this was what the voters have chosen and stop trying to score cheap points. Its why they are so on the nose.
Didn't the Liberals actually win the election on numbers? I would think that's more inline with a referendum. So, if they're still trying to score points as you say, they may have a point :wink: Anyhow, the deed has been done. The Libs have no choice now but complete what's already started. Hopefully everything within budget. Then we can complain. Perhaps?

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Matt
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: London

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#263 Post by Matt » Fri Dec 07, 2012 8:05 am

Isn't this still yet to be approved/finalised?
Confused as to the previous post mentioning possible construction action.

Goya's Line
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 4:10 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#264 Post by Goya's Line » Sun Dec 09, 2012 2:30 am

The Liberals didn't have a clear mandate in the 1998 Federal election and the Playmander (2:1) system advantaged a number of State Liberal results... swings and roundabouts. Can we focus on the forum topic?

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2429
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#265 Post by claybro » Sun Dec 09, 2012 9:50 pm

There was a clear choice at the previous state elcetion. Isobel and the new covered stadium or Mike and the upgraded Adelaide oval complete with footbridge. Me being a fan of covered stadiums discussed this with many friends, who said they preferred staying at Football Park! (as with many in SA dont like change,and as a change was happening anyway I think the idea of upgrading Adeelaide oval was more comfortable for them).The election result was close and murky, as previously discussed on this forum, but in the end I believe more South Australians wanted a converted Adelaide Oval. Wheather in 30 years time we will again be discussing an enclose stadium for our city, well who knows, but the footbridge will be built and maybe we will be beating ourselves up as the wheather to enclose the nothern end of the oval, and the best location in Adelaide for a Stadium will be covered by a hospital, costing us multi millions per year in re-payments.

mattblack
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 11:20 am

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#266 Post by mattblack » Sun Dec 09, 2012 11:41 pm

claybro wrote:There was a clear choice at the previous state elcetion. Isobel and the new covered stadium or Mike and the upgraded Adelaide oval complete with footbridge. Me being a fan of covered stadiums discussed this with many friends, who said they preferred staying at Football Park! (as with many in SA dont like change,and as a change was happening anyway I think the idea of upgrading Adeelaide oval was more comfortable for them).The election result was close and murky, as previously discussed on this forum, but in the end I believe more South Australians wanted a converted Adelaide Oval. Wheather in 30 years time we will again be discussing an enclose stadium for our city, well who knows, but the footbridge will be built and maybe we will be beating ourselves up as the wheather to enclose the nothern end of the oval, and the best location in Adelaide for a Stadium will be covered by a hospital, costing us multi millions per year in re-payments.

Okay kids.

Get.
Over.
It.

Move on ............ now about the footbridge construction.

User avatar
Matt
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1125
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
Location: London

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#267 Post by Matt » Mon Dec 10, 2012 2:27 am

Hear hear. It's done, we're getting it, get over it.

Build a bridge, if you will...

(...and hopefully sooner rather than later)

User avatar
Maximus
Legendary Member!
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:05 pm
Location: The Bush Capital (Canberra)

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#268 Post by Maximus » Mon Dec 10, 2012 12:00 pm

[Shuz] wrote:Apologies if its already been annouced but it looks like actual construction work has commenced on the Northern Riverbank where the footbridge viewing platform/waterfall feature will go.

Further along the northern riverbank walkway to the west of the construction work, some barricades have been put up around what I presume looks to be where the first of the support pylons will go for the northern landing.
Matt wrote:Isn't this still yet to be approved/finalised?
Confused as to the previous post mentioning possible construction action.
According to the recent New Directions publication, this was "investigative drilling". The bridge itself is expected to be completed in time for the December 2013 Ashes Test match.
It's = it is; its = everything else.
You're = you are; your = belongs to.
Than = comparative ("bigger than"); then = next.

believesinadsy
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 10:31 pm

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#269 Post by believesinadsy » Wed Feb 20, 2013 3:59 pm

Guessing this will start up soon? Not that I'm an expert, I question how this can all be done in time for the cricket by years end.

Ben
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 7566
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
Location: Adelaide

[COM] Re: SWP: Torrens Footbridge | $30m

#270 Post by Ben » Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:23 pm

Preliminary Site works have already commenced.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests