Sensational-Adelaide.com

Reading into Rod Hooks and Pat Conlons comments, it would appear even they acknowlege that on certain maximum attendance days the bridge may prove too narrow, but that we cannot build it to maximum width to cater for a few day/year. If this is the attitude, why build it for a few days per year at all?Surely a structure of 12m wide is visually not much different from side on than a structure 8m wide? Or that much more costly? Seems most people think 18m is too wide and 8m it too narrow, so as serca said, just split the difference. Surely 10-12m wide is not too much.This really has become such a typical Adelaide situation comedy.

Not liking these narrow minded 'only in Adelaide comments'. Please read more broadly than the Advertiser, travel and get some perspective, or take drugs, whatever works faster.[/end rant]

Wayno wrote:Not liking these narrow minded 'only in Adelaide comments'. Please read more broadly than the Advertiser, travel and get some perspective, or take drugs, whatever works faster.[/end rant]

+1

This sort of stuff happens all over the World.

Wayno wrote:Not liking these narrow minded 'only in Adelaide comments'. Please read more broadly than the Advertiser, travel and get some perspective, or take drugs, whatever works faster.[/end rant]

I normally agree with you - but this issue is a fair indication of the State of South Australia

We always seem to find away to do something "ok".

monotonehell wrote:

Wayno wrote:Not liking these narrow minded 'only in Adelaide comments'. Please read more broadly than the Advertiser, travel and get some perspective, or take drugs, whatever works faster.[/end rant]

+1

This sort of stuff happens all over the World.

Please do not try to minimise this with "this kind of thing happens all over the world". It may do,.in some places.. but surely we dont want to live in the type of place where this type of thing continues to happen.This is an example of everything wrong that stifles developement in this state.(yes it is that serous) This is a small (albeit expensive) developement over the Torrens. It is necessary to move a volume of pedestrians after events at Adelaide oval and to connect the Northern Riverbank with public transport and attractions on the Southern side. The bridge in it'self s designed to be a feature over an otherwise unspectacular artificial lake. Just get on with it.

claybro wrote:

monotonehell wrote:

Wayno wrote:Not liking these narrow minded 'only in Adelaide comments'. Please read more broadly than the Advertiser, travel and get some perspective, or take drugs, whatever works faster.[/end rant]

+1

This sort of stuff happens all over the World.

Please do not try to minimise this with "this kind of thing happens all over the world". It may do,.in some places.. but surely we dont want to live in the type of place where this type of thing continues to happen.This is an example of everything wrong that stifles developement in this state.(yes it is that serous) This is a small (albeit expensive) developement over the Torrens. It is necessary to move a volume of pedestrians after events at Adelaide oval and to connect the Northern Riverbank with public transport and attractions on the Southern side. The bridge in it'self s designed to be a feature over an otherwise unspectacular artificial lake. Just get on with it.

But development isn't being stiffled. The bridge is still going ahead. All that happened is that people have differing views regarding how wide the bridge should be. That is all.

The only thing the article has highlighted is our macabre fascination with taking every opportunity, real or imagined to talk ourselves down.

Even an 8 meter wide bridge is significantly more pedestrian space than is currently available across the King William Street bridge. Stop stressing people.

this particular developement being government funded is not being stifled, you are correct. However, a private fund, with money to spend in Adelaide on something remotely different seeing this, would seriously question wheather to bother here. And no point blaming The Adevertiser, or Adelaide Now..they would not be able to report on this comedy, if it wasnt happening. And for those who say the "only in Adelaide" comments are from those who have not travelled or read, well I would say all of us who are educated and well travelled are the most frustrated by how the narrow minds here in Adelaide have such a loud voice. For us to continue to accept this rubbish here, or excuse it only encourages it.

Nort wrote:Even an 8 meter wide bridge is significantly more pedestrian space than is currently available across the King William Street bridge. Stop stressing people.

Anyone having left Ethiad Stadium and crossing the 20m wide concourse adjacent to the Southern Cross station and witnessing the conjestion there after a game would not be questioning if 8m wide is adequate. There are also other paths away from Ethiad, but many people choose the shortest path to trains reguardless of conjestion. Just depends on how well we want the bridge to work.

claybro wrote:this particular developement being government funded is not being stifled, you are correct. However, a private fund, with money to spend in Adelaide on something remotely different seeing this, would seriously question wheather to bother here. And no point blaming The Adevertiser, or Adelaide Now..they would not be able to report on this comedy, if it wasnt happening. And for those who say the "only in Adelaide" comments are from those who have not travelled or read, well I would say all of us who are educated and well travelled are the most frustrated by how the narrow minds here in Adelaide have such a loud voice. For us to continue to accept this rubbish here, or excuse it only encourages it.

I still don't understand why you think it is so disastrous that Rod Hook and Ian Mclochlan have differing opinions as to how wide the bridge should be.


I would understand your sentiments if the situation was one where construction of the bridge was postponed so that we could have another talkfest where everyone that has an opinion regarding the bridge was listened to, and their opinions collated to create a new design that tries to please everyone, but in reality disappoints everyone because in an attempt to not offend anyone, the resulting design is safe and conventional. This isn't happening. We are getting on with building what was presented. Nothing bad has happened.

Do pub owners in Kings Cross say 'only in Sydney'? I doubt it. A lot of good happens here but we expect everything without a hitch.

Is anyone surprised that the Adevertiser made this into such a big issue? If the bridge was designed originally to be 12m wide, we would have headlines screaming "Extra $10million to make bridge wide enough for 2 or 3 days a year!" and we would all be taliking about what a waste of $10million for the 2 or 3 days a year that 8m might not be wide enough. We are doing exactly what News Limited wants us to do.

STOP DOING IT!!! USE YOUR BRAINS!!!

Also this rather narrow stretch of footpath, with light poles in the way, has carried tens of thousands of people to/from footy & cricket matches for many years. I've been in the crowd more times than i can remember, it's crowded, but never had an issue. Sure the oval will soon hold more people, but it's not doubling in capacity and we're at least doubling the pedestrian capacity. I'm sure the bridge width has been modeled to death by several design/architect types. Storm in a teacup.


Adelaide by Night by creolumen, on Flickr

BTW, a beutiful photo Wayno, This bridge befits its entrance to the most picturesque part of the city.

Seriously, if the bridge opens when the refurbishment is completed, the crowd would have 3 bridges to choose from. If you think the new one is too narrow, go to KW street, or the one past the Convention Centre.