[COM] New Royal Adelaide Hospital | $2.1b

[Shuz]

Ugh, some people just don't seem to get it here.

If you asked every Adelaidian, most would say that they are in favour of a new hospital being built. Rann is right in doing something for the people.

However, the tune changes when you say, 'should we build a hospital on the railyards - the city's most valued prime real estate left', most would say no. This is where Rann is wrong, by going against the word of the people.

We have several sites, Clipsal, Keswick, even the existing RAH, that can be all used for the same purpose, localities which the public approves of, but not on our waterfront real estate, which would idealistically be used for the entertainment precinct that we all want.

I don't think many people will give a shit if Rann backflips and says, 'Okay, we wont build it here, we'll just redevelop the RAH', at least were getting the new hospital.

I find myself in a compromising position whether to elect Rann at the next election or not, but I will make my point adamantly clear, Liberals can f... right off.

Are there any other political parties which have a different opinion, or are we just left with two knuckleheads and a dog bone?

[Will]

^^I am in a similar position to you Shuz. I lament how our 2 major parties have become so alike that it is hard to differentiate between the 2. I am a Labor voter, however I am not impressed by the ALP's rightward drift. After yesterday's infamous decision to crush injured workers in order to give business tax cuts, I am quite disillusioned with Labor. However I still cannot bring myself to vote Liberal.

I just wish the state government would stop being so arrogant, and admit tat they made a mistake, and move the hospital to the army site at Wayville, and change the name of the new hospital! It is completely inappropriate to name a new hospital after a sports person!

The railway yards are a prime piece of real estate and if we cannot afford to do something world class with them, at this stage we should let them be until SA has monster surplus budgets like WA. The equivalent is if Sydney built a hospital at Darling Harbour or Melbourne built a hospital at Southbank!

[rhino]

I cant believe that the government announces a project this visionary and of this magnitude, and everyone in Adelaide starts bitching and moaning.... AGAIN. we need to get over this small town attitude and toughen up.

Hooray for you Muzzamo - I agree 100%.

It's quite obvious that the SANFL don't want to support a new central stadium, and it's also obvious that without the SANFL a central stadium won't pay it's way. Live with it.

Further, it's been on the cards for the last few years that the railyards will have to be moved, because of contaminants entering the Torrens a couple of times in recent history. Some of you seem to want a LeCornu-style vacant lot to exist there for a couple of decades, until maybe the SANFL will decide to throw it's support behind your idea. S-A, while having a lot of good ideas, is not the majority of Adelaideans so stop acting like we are.

As for that stupid poll at AdelaideNow - I voted 3 times to prove that I could, and if I could be bothered I could vote 700 more times and swing the argument any way I wanted. The result is meaningless.

[cruel_world00]

I cant believe that the government announces a project this visionary and of this magnitude, and everyone in Adelaide starts bitching and moaning.... AGAIN. we need to get over this small town attitude and toughen up.

Hooray for you Muzzamo - I agree 100%.

It's quite obvious that the SANFL don't want to support a new central stadium, and it's also obvious that without the SANFL a central stadium won't pay it's way. Live with it.

Further, it's been on the cards for the last few years that the railyards will have to be moved, because of contaminants entering the Torrens a couple of times in recent history. Some of you seem to want a LeCornu-style vacant lot to exist there for a couple of decades, until maybe the SANFL will decide to throw it's support behind your idea. S-A, while having a lot of good ideas, is not the majority of Adelaideans so stop acting like we are.

As for that stupid poll at AdelaideNow - I voted 3 times to prove that I could, and if I could be bothered I could vote 700 more times and swing the argument any way I wanted. The result is meaningless.

I think you'll find the majority of S-A forumers want the hospital...JUST NOT THERE... we are also angry with the arrogance and lack of transparency shown by the government in relation to a pretty major decision....stadium or no stadium, this issue stinks.

[roger explosion]

Can someone give me the lowdown on the Keswick barracks and Clipsal sites? Who owns them, are they currently being used, could the Government seize them etc... people are throwing those places up as alternatives, and I'd much prefer to see Marj's Monument being built there, but could it be built there if Media Mike wanted to?

[Edgar]

what's that piece of land right beside the women/children's hospital? If they relocate the Marj there, it would be perfect.

[Hoops]

what's that piece of land right beside the women/children's hospital? If they relocate the Marj there, it would be perfect.

screw the sports precinct "The Health Precinct"

[Edgar]

what's that piece of land right beside the women/children's hospital? If they relocate the Marj there, it would be perfect.

screw the sports precinct "The Health Precinct"

that is going to be very bad. I wouldn't want to be hanging around a health hospital precinct

[cruel_world00]

Posted in the other thread as well

Even though this source is an EX-consultant, this isn't going away Mr Rann

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

MILES KEMP, METREDITH BOOTH

April 11, 2008 01:30am

THE SANFL has been told by its own consultant that AAMI Stadium's redevelopment is unlikely to be viable and a new $400 million stadium in the city railyards should be considered.
A report by engineering firm Dare Sutton Clarke, commissioned by the SANFL, found it was not viable to cover AAMI Stadium because of its large area and the shallow viewing angles of seating.

Large-scale redevelopment also would put the venue out of action for two AFL seasons, requiring an alternative site to be found.

Dare Sutton Clarke director Mike Dare yesterday said the AAMI Stadium site was unlikely to be chosen as a terminus for a light railway because of pressure on the State Government to satisfy other public transport needs.

"Having served for 20 years the needs of the SANFL in the various developments at AAMI Stadium, I am now of the view that the stadium is and always was in the wrong location and, because of this, it cannot possibly satisfy the future needs of football or any other growth sport in South Australia," Mr Dare says in a letter to The Advertiser, stressing he is expressing a personal view.

Read his full letter here



"The suggestion by the SANFL that new light rail could be funded by the taxpayer to manage the transportation of patrons through the road congestion that the location causes proves this point, as does the old-fashioned format of the stadium.

"Their promotion of this light rail idea also suggests that the management at AAMI is out of touch with public sentiment in relation to the larger issues and the greater needs surrounding public transport facilities in SA."

Dare Sutton Clarke (DSC) has worked on AAMI Stadium projects, including the new northern grandstand, but its report last November was not released. A second report, by rival firm Connell Wagner, was commissioned in its place.

DSC completed a preliminary design study for a new roofed stadium – not requested by the SANFL. The cost was estimated at $400 million in March, 2006.

The new stadium would include a fixed glass roof, which Mr Dare argues would be "considerably cheaper" than the opening roof of Melbourne's Telstra Dome. It would also not frustrate TV viewers and networks by casting shadows on the playing surface, which can occur when the Dome's roof is open.

on Wednesday, Premier Mike Rann ruled out his Government supporting a new stadium, which will be a key Liberal Party election promise.

Mr Rann and the SANFL have declared a new city stadium would cost about $1 billion.

In March, the SANFL declared it would consider a move to a new city site but one week later insisted it would stay at AAMI Stadium when the State Government declared it would not support the plan.

SANFL chief executive Leigh Whicker declined to be interviewed on the DSC report but a spokeswoman said the company had not been used for major works at AAMI Stadium for two years.

The spokeswoman did not specify whether the company had been asked to prepare a report on AAMI Stadium but confirmed DSC had not been asked to report on any relocation.

"Dare Sutton Clarke have never been asked to report on any relocation of the stadium," she said.

In his letter, Mr Dare says the preferred site for a new stadium was on North Tce, just to the west of the Morphett St Bridge. He says this site was big enough to accommodate three stadiums, as well as the State Government's planned Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital.

He says the site had the advantage of a central location, along with rail, bus and tram access.

"The site is ideal and even superior to that of the Telstra stadium in Melbourne," Mr Dare says.

It had been suggested to the SANFL at the time of the report, he says, that it secure the "air-rights" to this site for "an inevitable development of a new enclosed stadium sometime in the future". This would involve securing the rights to build over the existing railyards, similar to Melbourne's Federation Square.

Mr Dare suggests the cost of a new stadium would be offset by the sale of contained strata-titled offices, which could be owned and managed by the SANFL. It could also manage the stadium's extended uses, including soccer and concerts.

"A facility such as that proposed here would not cost anywhere near the figure indicated by the SANFL," Mr Dare says.

"Furthermore, it could be a global showcase for sustainable construction of multi-purpose sports facilities."

Mr Dare does not advocate the complete abandonment of AAMI, suggesting instead that it be used for SANFL games and as the corporate and training headquarters of the Adelaide Football Club.

Mr Dare says taxpayers should not fund a redevelopment of AAMI Stadium and suggests the SANFL finance this "internally".

"If it chooses this option, then it should also justify the expense to the shareholders (the SANFL clubs) and it should justify the decision to the paying football public," he says.

"If the taxpayer contributes further to the SANFL, it should only be to a facility with broader applications that would benefit a greater number of the taxpaying public and that will not compound the problems that the West Lakes facility causes the patrons and local residents."

[Shuz]

In his letter, Mr Dare says the preferred site for a new stadium was on North Tce, just to the west of the Morphett St Bridge. He says this site was big enough to accommodate three stadiums, as well as the State Government's planned Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital.

What the?

[monotonehell]

Posted in the other thread as well

Even though this source is an EX-consultant, this isn't going away Mr Rann

It would be best if we could keep the discussion in one thread. I suggest that we keep this thread for discussion related directly to the Marj proposal and use the other thread for all the conjecture, arguments and visions regarding the stadium v hospital debate. Otherwise we'll be having the same conversation in two places.

[cruel_world00]

Posted in the other thread as well

Even though this source is an EX-consultant, this isn't going away Mr Rann

It would be best if we could keep the discussion in one thread. I suggest that we keep this thread for discussion related directly to the Marj proposal and use the other thread for all the conjecture, arguments and visions regarding the stadium v hospital debate. Otherwise we'll be having the same conversation in two places.

No worries

[Wayno]

And so the fight begins...

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008 ... 233349.htm

Hospital plan violates parklands: councillor
An Adelaide City councillor says the planned Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital would breach zoning rules for the parklands.

Health Department officials have met councillors and the Adelaide Parklands Authority to explain the hospital master plan.

Councillor Ralph Clarke says the hospital plan does not meet parklands laws.

He says the railyards site where the hospital is planned should be turned back into parklands in its entirety.

"It's inconsistent with the parklands strategy, the community land management plan and the city of Adelaide development plan with respect to zoning," he said.

"So that's what we've done, we've said that it's inconsistent."

SA Health Minister John Hill says the Government has had advice that it is within the law with its hospital plans.

He says he has had meetings with the Lord Mayor, who seems generally satisfied with the planning for the new hospital.

[Omicron]

I am intrigued as to how Mr. Clarke would have us simply turn the railyards into parklands. Is he advocating the ACC spend millions of its ratepayers' money on the clean-up bill, removal of all lines, and diversion of all suburban rail to the Keswick station, to be replaced by areas of lawn and trees? Or is he advocating some kind of Federation Square-esque cover over the entire site, except with trees, bushes and open areas rather than buildings? The State Government would just love to hear about a multi-million dollar construction project with no financial return whatsoever at a time when they are earmarking cuts to the State Budget.

Surely he wouldn't just be making idle claims about restoring the area to parklands without considering what would need to happen as a result?

[skyliner]

Another option is to make the new hospital 20 - 40 stories and reduce it's footprint - then they could both feel happier. WHY does it have to be so low and sprawling? It takes up so much land it seems rediculous. Inner city land should be capitalising on the plot ratios suitable to a city. Return the rest to parks.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE