#VIS: Inner-City Stadium/Riverbank Precinct

[muzzamo]

I think people in Adelaide are still a bit edgy and nervous to invest in major projects as they still hold onto the past of the state bank collapse. Let it go......the past is the past, look to the future.

You mean major projects like... let see, a new hospital, desalination plant, northern expressway and dam which are going to total to something like $3 billion.

We are currently in the middle or soon will be in the biggest infrastructure spend this state has ever seen, you just need to step back and take the time to notice it. But that doesn't mean they are going to build you a new stadium.

[crawf]

I think people in Adelaide are still a bit edgy and nervous to invest in major projects as they still hold onto the past of the state bank collapse. Let it go......the past is the past, look to the future.

You mean major projects like... let see, a new hospital, desalination plant, northern expressway and dam which are going to total to something like $3 billion.

We are currently in the middle or soon will be in the biggest infrastructure spend this state has ever seen, you just need to step back and take the time to notice it. But that doesn't mean they are going to build you a new stadium.

And - new prisons at Caven and Murray Bridge, Major road upgrades (such as South Road aswell as other things. So really it would be over $5bn.

Plus the government is yet to give the train network a major makeover, which will cost around $1.5bn. All these things are currently major issues for SA and more important then building a stadium atm.

[frank1]

I think people in Adelaide are still a bit edgy and nervous to invest in major projects as they still hold onto the past of the state bank collapse. Let it go......the past is the past, look to the future.

You mean major projects like... let see, a new hospital, desalination plant, northern expressway and dam which are going to total to something like $3 billion.

We are currently in the middle or soon will be in the biggest infrastructure spend this state has ever seen, you just need to step back and take the time to notice it. But that doesn't mean they are going to build you a new stadium.

And - new prisons at Caven and Murray Bridge, Major road upgrades (such as South Road aswell as other things. So really it would be over $5bn.

Plus the government is yet to give the train network a major makeover, which will cost around $1.5bn. All these things are currently major issues for SA and more important then building a stadium atm.

This is all true, but most of these projects should have been done years ago. I'm mainly talking about public entertainment projects which are still important for the states economy.

[crawf]

Yes quite alot of these projects should of been, but its a bit hard when you have thing called 'State Bank Collapse'

[cinema4]

okay - i've got it...

but don't gobbie my schlong till you've heard me out.

that sa water site is fine for a hospital if we build it up and not flat which the current government seems to envisage. who builds things flat these days? haha. no one.

what ever happened to that santos stadium in the west? is that surface okay for ball games? well, is it?

starting tomorrow, i propose we get out there with our shovels and hoes and build several rows of chairs around it and play team sports there. crawf, you build your carpark, my group will erect the scaffolding and the rest of you go to footy park and steal the seats. the blue ones.

we should be done before underbelly starts.

[frank1]

Yes quite alot of these projects should of been, but its a bit hard when you have thing called 'State Bank Collapse'

What about the so called '80's boom' when Adelaide was not much smaller than it is now.

[Norman]

that sa water site is fine for a hospital if we build it up and not flat which the current government seems to envisage. who builds things flat these days? haha. no one.

"Flatter" hospitals work a lot more efficient than tall buildings, especially during emergencies.

[crawf]

okay - i've got it...

but don't gobbie my schlong till you've heard me out.

that sa water site is fine for a hospital if we build it up and not flat which the current government seems to envisage. who builds things flat these days? haha. no one.

Actually majority of hospitals built these days are built outwards not upwards (example Queen Elizabeth Hospital expansion) because of a few reasons (such as emergencies). Plus that site is the worst location and its not big enough even if it had the same height buildings as the RAH.

What about the so called '80's boom' when Adelaide was not much smaller than it is now.

That was over 25 years ago!, what are you trying to get at

[Brando]

MILES KEMP
February 21, 2008 08:00am
ACTIVISTS have warned they will stack the independent Parklands Authority with anti-development councillors to block developments and return land to parklands.

Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association President Jim Daly has warned that the appointment to the authority of new Adelaide City Council members would create a more proactive body.

Mr Daly, the major opponent of last year's failed Victoria Park grandstand development, said new members including APPA member Cr David Plumridge gave his organisation an opportunity to influence the State Government's planned Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital plan, and block the Liberal Party's policy for an inner-city AFL stadium. "These appointments will strengthen the Parklands Authority resolve to actually protect the parklands," he said.

"The authority will be more proactive, not as it has, sitting back and wait for issues to come before it." The independent Parklands Authority was set up in 2005 with four council appointments and five State Government appointments.

Replacement council appointments have been made this month following last November's council elections.

Cr Plumridge said he would seek a more proactive role for the authority in parklands planning and would remain active on the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association committee.

"I don't see it as a conflict of interest - I am on the association's committee and I will be advocating sensible parklands preservation," he said.

Mr Daly said two other new councillors on the body who he expected to oppose development were Cr Ralph Clarke and Cr Michael Henningsen.

Mr Daly said the association now expected the authority to develop a position on the planned return of land near Morphett Street bridge, the SA Water site in the west parklands and the police barracks at Thebarton.

The only remaining council member from the four appointed to the previously constituted authority, Anne Moran, said she would try to make sure it remained independent.

"If they think that the authority can drive an agenda with the State Government they will be disappointed.

Cr Moran, who offered conditional support for the Victoria Park redevelopment last year, said the council should reject the advice of the authority if it was partisan.

A spokeswoman for Environment Minister Gail Gago said only the council could comment on its appointments to the authority as the State Government was advised of, but could not reject them.

I am really, really getting tired, frustrated and sick to death of this idiot. He has gained momentum and confidence after the state government backed down over Vic Park. This is getting beyond the joke. We really need to start getting our voice out there more as a pro development group.
These council members....How for the life of me, can this not be seen as a conflict of interest when their casting votes will not be in the best interest of ALL South Australians.

I'm sorry, but enough is enough.

[Brando]

Ok, i am posting up a link for the APPA- Adelaide Parklands Preservation Assoc.

I would clearly like to stress to everyone on this site to not send any abusive, threatening, foul or derogatory emails to the APPA. I am not being silly or condescending in saying that. It is in the best interest of this forum and those involved.

I will personally be sending an appropriate, yet stern email of my beliefs why certain developments and activities should be allowed on our parklands. Reading through the APPA, i believe they do have good intentions, but not necessarily what is best for the well being of a prosperous Adelaide.
Please do the right thing as i'm sure Howie and mods will appreciate your understanding in this delicate issue.
If i am correct in saying, please also refrain from making references to this website or your involvement.

http://www.adelaide-parklands.org/index.html

[frank1]

Why does the parkland association have so much power that they can hold back and run this state?.It is like the government doesn't make the economic decisions, but th APPA does. It's mind bottling................ Their complaint is a bit silly considering that the rail yards already exist on that land so it is already developed.

[crawf]

FFS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry but FFS what is with the APPA why don't we just demolish everything such as roads, museums, universities, hospitals and turn into a huge ring of disused dried up paddocks plus with some sheep and cattle. So glad the we have the state government

He is one of things I hate about Adelaide. Go and move to the Adelaide Hills, its the 21st century not 1836

[Will409]

I was hoping I would never (I mean never) have to say this but we need some 'northern subrurbs justice' on this lot.

[Norman]

I was hoping I would never (I mean never) have to say this but we need some 'northern subrurbs justice' on this lot.

Something like the Coca Cola Barreling Plant?

[monotonehell]

I am really, really getting tired, frustrated and sick to death of this idiot. He has gained momentum and confidence after the state government backed down over Vic Park. This is getting beyond the joke. We really need to start getting our voice out there more as a pro development group.
These council members....How for the life of me, can this not be seen as a conflict of interest when their casting votes will not be in the best interest of ALL South Australians.

I'm sorry, but enough is enough.

What about their actions do you object to? Their objectives actually sound fairly sane:
• the Parklands should be available for use by the general public
• the public should, so far as practicable, have free and unrestricted access to the Parklands
• the Parklands should be reserved as a place for public recreation, leisure and enjoyment
• alienated areas of the Parklands are restored for recreational use, preferably as open space
• the character of the Parklands as a place dividing the City of Adelaide from the suburbs should be preserved
• the Parklands should be preserved and maintained in a manner that enhances their special place in the design of the City of Adelaide
• the amenity of the Parklands is not impaired by inappropriate development of nearby lands

They're against any development of the parklands that lock away areas for private use. That sounds reasonable.

I must admit to being fairly ignorant about what they actually have done, other than to object to the Vic Park horse racetrack upgrade. Have they done anything that isn't "in the best interest of ALL South Australians"?

(Nb that's not a rhetorical question, I'm looking for what they've done that has you so upset)