Sensational-Adelaide.com

AdelaideAlive wrote:

Hooligan wrote:

AdelaideAlive wrote:I want to see all other areas of the state wither up and die and the CBD flourish

Fair enough.

dont know where that quote came from, ive never ever said that, someone has come up with some clever typing i think

Port Adelaide upgrade founders Port Adelaide Enfield Mayor and independent by-election candidate Gary Johanson.
A COSTING dispute between the State Government and Port Adelaide Enfield council on a waterfront boulevard is set to stop a deal before the February 11 by-election.
Council and Land Management Corporation officials met on Monday to discuss the $7.2 million plan, three weeks after it was announced by Premier Jay Weatherill.

The State Government offered $3.6 million and called on the council to match it. The plan includes new pavement, public art, seating and lighting for an area near the Port lighthouse at the northern end of Commercial Rd.

Port Adelaide Enfield mayor - and independent by-election candidate - Gary Johanson yesterday said delays in receiving an official proposal and council budget talks made a deal before the vote "not possible".

He said the council was supportive in principle but the Government's costing appeared inflated compared with similar planned precinct upgrades.

"There can't be (a resolution before February 11) because due process has to be followed. We have to do costings and everything else," Mr Johanson told The Advertiser. "We have been pushing this with the Government since 2007 and six weeks before an election they announce something."

The Government offer was widely interpreted at the time as a political wedge allowing Labor to take credit for the plan's success but blame Mr Johanson if it failed.

Mr Johanson said he wasn't invited to Monday's meeting and the project was in danger of becoming a "pipe dream".

Housing and Urban Development Minister Pat Conlon said government money could be released as soon as the council agreed to deliver its half of the funding.

"He's got to be clear on whether he's dealing with us as a local mayor in the interests of the Port or candidate in his own political interests," Mr Conlon said. "The real problem is the mayor can't disentangle his interests."

Mr Conlon said the Government calculations were updated estimates based on council costings for a similar upgrade proposed in 2006.

Mr Johanson refused to stand down as mayor for the rest of the campaign.

"I'm working very hard for our community. I'm the one with the knowledge on the ground," he said.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6242996245

rev wrote:The question is what sort of people and how many people do you want to attract to the Port(or any destination)?

For me personally, some ship wreck isn't going to entice me to go down to the Port. It simply doesn't interest me, and I'd bet the majority of people feel the same.
That's not to say don't bring the restored clipper here as a tourist display.

New Port pleas

Local News25 Jan 12 @ 09:08am by Lisa Bachmayer


MORE than 30 years after debate to redevelop the Port first ignited, the community is again demanding its maritime history, arts scene and historic buildings be preserved.

More than 400 people, including Premier Jay Weatherill, packed the Waterside Workers Hall for a public meeting about the creation of a new Port Adelaide master plan on Monday night (January 23).

Turning the shipyards into a tourism precinct and creating an arts hub at Hart’s Mill were on residents’ list of priorities - the same demands issued almost three decades earlier.

Speaking at the public meeting, Emma Webb from Port Adelaide-based theatre company Vitalstatistix called for the preservation of historical buildings and more arts spaces.

“We would like to see Hart’s Mill become a public centre for all of the arts community ... not surrounded by housing,” she said to loud cheers from the crowd.

The meeting came in the wake of the State Government’s decision to axe the Newport Quays $1.2 billion waterfront contract and take over planning responsibility for the waterfront and town centre last October.

Newport Quays was awarded a contract in 2002 to develop 51 ha of waterfront land and attract up to 4000 people to the Port.

The Portside Messenger began reporting on plans for the Port Adelaide waterfront development in the 1990s, when work to clear the harbour for a major housing development began.

The redevelopment included shops, cafes, restaurants and 2000 townhouses an apartments.

Boat builder Kingsley Haskett said Newport Quays had been “thrust down” residents’ “bloody throats”.

“(Port Adelaide) is not about high-rise development,” Mr Haskett said.

“I want to see the shipyard turned into a heritage precinct.”

Port Adelaide resident Diana Carroll wanted public spaces, such as the Port Adelaide railway station, to be more welcoming.

“That has to be the worst railway station in the world,” Ms Carroll said at the meeting.

“It looks like a prison. It is unfriendly and inhospitable. I would like to see that looked at.”

Residents such as Annie Hanson, of Semaphore, hoped the government’s promise of redeveloping Port Adelaide was “not a cynical pre-election exercise” ahead of the February 11 by-election.

Mr Weatherill said rejuvenating the precinct was “much bigger than the seat of Port Adelaide”.

“This is my community. I live just up the road,” Mr Weatherill said at the meeting.

“It is not just a matter of public politics for me.

“I wanted to come here, speak directly to the community and demonstrate we are serious about making this work.”

A steering committee made up of community and council representatives and tourism, maritime heritage and business experts will be formed to help create Port Adelaide master plan over the next 12 months.

“That has to be the worst railway station in the world,” Ms Carroll said at the meeting. “It looks like a prison. It is unfriendly and inhospitable."

why in Adelaide, development and heritage cannot co-exist

stumpjumper wrote:

why in Adelaide, development and heritage cannot co-exist

Nail on head, Will. I've recently been to NZ, the UK and to Belgium of all places. Sure, there are 'issues' between development and heritage, but nothing like the complete dissing of heritage by developers as happens here, nor is there anything like the attitude of the government to heritage as there is here.

Heritage conservation in the places I visited seems respected as a potential source of income, and it is taken for granted that heritage conservation is a social good and is worth spending money on. If anything, in the places I visited, heritage conservation is more like a competing developer than a kiss of death to be avoided at any cost.

Yet in SA, the Weatherill government, like the Rann government, is continuing the degrading of heritage management. The 'Heritage Branch' has been further emasculated and defunded to become the 'Heritage Policy Unit', and under the present head the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (formerly Department of Environment and Heritage) will continue to downgrade anything without leaves on it or that has to do with human culture (except indigenous culture).

The State Heritage Authority has become the State Heritage Council - the word Authority being a little strong, and the former Minister for Environment and Heritage has become the Minister for Sustainability, Environment and Conservation.

The government has never really articulated the reasons for hits apparent paranoia where heritage is concerned, but it seems pretty clear that it equates heritage conservation with stagnation and loss to the development industry.

An answer to that would be to compare the desolate and deserted Newport Quays with any of the buzzing former harbour precincts around Australia - Darling Harbour, Fremantle, Salamanca Place etc - where the best land has not simply been handed to residential developers, as happened at our Port.