Sensational-Adelaide.com

Let's do this...

Other than people coming out and stating how they voted (if they want to) and comments on the poll results, let's see if we can keep the general discussion in the other thread though.

I voted - SACA member will vote Yes.

as much as i dont like cricket, is it worth getting SACA membership now just so i can vote yes? is it even possible?

silverscreen wrote:

But my vote can be bought off. The design, heritage and politics aspects arent top of mind for me. Promise me a guaranteed and serious cash donation from football (and I don't mean a ludicrous $5m), a proper resolution to parking, and a guaranteed backer for a realistically sized underground carpark, (and perhaps hold the insults) and we're talking. Till then I'm still voting No.

I respect your right to vote whichever way you like. Im gathering that you have received your package by now. $18m extra for the SACA over the first 2 years alone. Thats alot of $ that can go toward the grass roots clubs to help in securing cricket into the furture. A resolution to parking has been agreed upon in principal with the major stakeholders with the ACC holding off - its not a deal breaker though. No its not a multilevel job for now but there is still scope for that to happen. A projected economic return of $111m per year to the city. I really hope that these figures will sway you. If it ticks 8/10 boxes is that enough reason to vote it down? Anyway, the countdown till May 2nd is on

SACA Member voting yes here.

And when the ultimate memberships are released (Cricket, AFL, Soccer) , I'll definitely be buying one.

Can you be a bit clearer about the parking resolution between stakeholders Mattblack? Wasn't aware there was anything other than a listing of areas of the Parklands that can be used , and the desire for somebody to build a 400 car space underground park. This is the sort of rubbery planning that I want to see sorted before getting excited.

metro wrote:as much as i dont like cricket, is it worth getting SACA membership now just so i can vote yes? is it even possible?

There's a waiting list, but if you stated on your application that you want a membership just so you can vote yes to the oval redevelopment, who knows, a space might miraculously open up for you.

Given that it's on a development forum, the poll will probably be about as useful as its counterpart on sensational-lawnbowls.com, but it'll at least be interesting to see whether the dissenters in the other thread are just a vocal minority.

mattblack wrote: Im gathering that you have received your package by now.

When did you get yours? Still waiting for mine.

Now the Farmers Federal are vocally against this project?, oh for heaven sake. I'm pretty sure majority of the funding is coming from Adelaide related projects, such as delaying the Port Adelaide/West Lakes tramline.

Some country residents don't seem to understand if Adelaide is a vibrant and happening city, then the rest of the state will benefit aswell. Nor do some even bother to care that MAJORITY of state taxpayers live in a 50km radius of the Adelaide GPO.

rhino wrote:It's not often that I agree with Greg Kelton, but a lot of that stuff needed to be said, AND LOUD!

Agreed, it's all too hard and complicated for lil ol Adelaide. It is so pathetic.

To be quite honest I am losing faith in this whole project and I can see it being rejected by SACA members. Which really really annoys me considering this is a once in a lifetime to create the buzzing riverbank precinct Adelaide has craved - as it's been pointed out a billion times. Even if the State Government do decide to go ahead, the debate will go to a even more extreme level and cost millions in court fees.

You do wonder sometimes is it really worth sticking around in Adelaide... You do only live once.

proxy has gone off to make sure my vote counts regardless of if I can make it or not.

the problem is -the majority of people on this forum are pro-development (hence the forum really)

That was kinda my point (or were you just referring to the poll without having read the post above yours?).

stumpjumper wrote:
The proposal appeared in response to the Liberals' plan for a stadium on the railyard site.

And this is an issue why?.....

rev, I mentioned the timing of the AO eastern stand project to indicate that it was not budgeted for, but was a cost taken on during an election campaign in response to the Opposition's proposal.

however I do believe as a greater vision of the upgraded riverfron precinct the cost v benefit would look fantastic - I cannot even start to put a value of the general attitude South Australians would have if this project got knocked over v once it is completed. the project as a whole will bring more people to the area and it will create something that Adelaide has never had.

Agreed, waewick. So what is a bloody hospital doing in the middle of the swathe of parklands that starts with the old E&WS site at Thebarton and Bonython Park through the to-be-vacated SAPOL barracks and the old Adelaide Gaol up past the weir to the Morphett St Bridge? Where's the grand, integrated planning for that? It seems to me that each party is working on their patch without much thought for the rest of the area.

For an urban designer, the area has a lot of raw material in addition to the AO upgrade. There's a golf course, a watercourse/lake which could be extended in various directions, numerous attractive old buildings, etc etc. Why consider it in bits - why not join it all up?

Unfortunately, the present government - and it's not alone in this - has a standard operating procedure: Announce And Defend. By the time an announcement is made, the stakeholders (except the public who pays for it) has taken up a position. So the option of a truly comprehensive makeover of the Park Lands to capitalise on the removal of the E&WS sheds and the work at Bonython Park doesn't exist. It's been ruled out by the placement of the hospital.

Just saying 'We're doing a full-scale redesign of the riverfront precinct' is not the same as doing it.

I voted undecided. I'd love to be convinced, because I think AFL in the city is a fabulous idea, but I don't yet know if Adelaide Oval is the best way to do so.

your right stumpjumer

the problem we have is that we either back in the current project team or we don't, because the Hospital is going in the middle of what should be parklands and the only option we have now is the AO redevelopment

I actually hope that the RAH site gets returned to parklands as well, in the format of an entrance to the botanic gardens and torrens river area which is underrated and under utilised, it would also provide a great path to the zoo from the CBD.