Page 12 of 78

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 11:00 am
by Cruise
Martin hamiton-smith will personally rip the started work away with a sledge hammer and shovel

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:17 pm
by crawf
Hopefully Mr Hamilton-Smith will retire before the 2010 state election :lol:

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:20 pm
by urban
At the current rate of Liberal leaders we should see another 2 before the next election.

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2007 4:15 pm
by Shuz
urban wrote:At the current rate of Liberal leaders we should see another 2 before the next election.
At this rate, theyre all worse than the previous one. I'd say 3 more. And then about 6 thereafter during Rann's 3rd term in 2010.

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:01 am
by Ho Really
Let's say that the "Marj" is not built and the RAH is redeveloped. How would you guys do it?

Cheers

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Thu Jun 21, 2007 12:08 am
by Ho Really
Also, looking at the aerial images of the "Marj" it looks like there's very limited vehicular access. It seems you can only gain entry from North Terrace. I hope they look at a bridge at the Torrens Lake weir and an underpass under the rail lines for access from the north. I know this won't help the restaurant and the golfers on the north side of the weir, but a hospital should always have good access in case of emergencies. What do you guys think?

Cheers

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:23 pm
by jimmy_2486
Instead of calling it the Margarery Jackson Hospital, we should call it the Samuel L Jackson Hospital!!!!

And have a 'Snakes on a Plane' ward, a 'Pulp fiction ward' etc etc hahaah

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 4:18 pm
by jane
Has anything been done in terms of desgin yet? Or is that still all up in the air?

Thanks :)

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 11:24 pm
by Ho Really
jane wrote:Has anything been done in terms of desgin yet? Or is that still all up in the air?

Thanks :)
There should be a concept design somewhere with floorplans as well. Maybe give the state health minister a tingle.

Cheers

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 9:37 am
by rhino
jane wrote:Has anything been done in terms of desgin yet? Or is that still all up in the air?

Thanks :)

If it's not up in the air it will squash the trains! :wink:

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 12:03 pm
by jane
Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately I need the information for an assignment for Uni, and we are not allowed to approach anyone from the government for it. So I was really hoping they would be somewhere I could just go and have a look at them.

Hehe, perhaps if it were up in the air there wouldn't be all this trouble with the parklands!

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:32 pm
by Shuz
Just to clarify - is the Goverment dead-set about building it on the railyards site, or is there still time for negotiation to relocate/redevelop on either the RAH site, Clipsal, Keswick Barracks, etc?

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 1:43 pm
by Cruise
momentkiller wrote:Just to clarify - is the Goverment dead-set about building it on the railyards site, or is there still time for negotiation to relocate/redevelop on either the RAH site, Clipsal, Keswick Barracks, etc?
They say, we follow. its like a dictatorship

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 2:05 pm
by AtD
The way this project has been discussed, I suspect it was leaked to the media before it was ready, and the government launched the whole project too early to save face. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets shelved.

[COM] Re: $1.7bn plan to build a new RAH

Posted: Sat Sep 08, 2007 3:36 pm
by jimmy_2486
I think our shelf is starting to look full wouldn't u say?