Sensational-Adelaide.com

One interesting little nugget from the site report on the chosen location...

This option requires the Port Road Bridge to provide two right turn lanes off Port Road and a tram stop at Gaol Road. In order to achieve this a rebuilding of the Port Road Bridge is required at a cost estimated at $150 million and closure of 9 months.

I imagine having that entrance to the city out of action for 9 months, for both cars and trams, might make things a bit messy.

Elsewhere it says the additional tram stop would be "near George St", so not sure if that's a mistake as it obviously contradicts the above, and is literally only a block away from the existing Thebarton stop. And also they would change all tram services back to terminating at Entertainment Centre.

I doubt the Parklands preservation people will make much of a fuss - it's only the eastern parklands they've ever really cared about. It will be a shame to lose the heritage buildings - the old buildings at the back of the barracks are very nice, and only recently renovated. On the other hand this might be a great opportunity to revitalise the gaol - it would be an ideal site for a good cafe etc. The gaol is probably more unique & important than the old police buildings & is badly in need of TLC.

Nathan wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:32 pm

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:26 pm

Spotto wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:22 pm

If the land wasn't already being developed by Renewal SA, the old LeCornu site on Anzac Highway could've been another perfect location for the nWCH. It's on a major road, reasonably centrally-located, buses run right outside the doorstep, and nothing of heritage significance used to be there (unless you count the Chrysler sign that's apparently being preserved for re-installation at the new development).

Isn't one of the points of this redevelopment proximity to the nRAH and the North Tce health precinct more broadly though?

Yes, which is undermined by it not being actually adjacent (and further separated by placing the car park in between) — such that emergency transfers to nRAH will need to be done by ambulance. I think once it's reached that point, then it doesn't really matter if its 50m or 500m away and sites like the Coke factory should have at least been on the table.

Even with the nWCH located right next to the nRAH some transfers would likely have been done by ambulance anyway, just to be safe - It seems to be the done thing at other co-located hospitals, especially if there's any hint of a cardiac issue involved. Many years ago my wife was working at Flinders private and she felt a bit faint & dizzy one day - they took her to FMC by ambulance out of an abundance of caution!

Nathan wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:56 pm

One interesting little nugget from the site report on the chosen location...

This option requires the Port Road Bridge to provide two right turn lanes off Port Road and a tram stop at Gaol Road. In order to achieve this a rebuilding of the Port Road Bridge is required at a cost estimated at $150 million and closure of 9 months.

I imagine having that entrance to the city out of action for 9 months, for both cars and trams, might make things a bit messy.

Elsewhere it says the additional tram stop would be "near George St", so not sure if that's a mistake as it obviously contradicts the above, and is literally only a block away from the existing Thebarton stop. And also they would change all tram services back to terminating at Entertainment Centre.

I believe the rebuild of Port Road Bridge was included in option 2a. I think it's option 2b that has been selected.

Looking through the report into various site options I am again truly baffled that the Australia Post, Riverbank Edge or Coca/Cola sites weren't even looked at or considered. Their scope for possible alternative locations was far too narrow.

Shameful process.

[Shuz] wrote:Looking through the report into various site options I am again truly baffled that the Australia Post, Riverbank Edge or Coca/Cola sites weren't even looked at or considered. Their scope for possible alternative locations was far too narrow.

Shameful process.

Agree on Riverbank Edge for consideration and a good option in general.
Coca Cola already has a large scale biohub plan (Australisian Property Developments).
Australia Post has a Gurner project in the works which will probably be one of the best quality / masterplanned residential developments the city has ever seen.

Would you and everyone else using these sites as credible alternatives like to see those plans scrapped, not to mention an anti business sovereign risk factor for a State that struggles with such an anti progress reputation already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Listy wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 1:17 pm

I doubt the Parklands preservation people will make much of a fuss - it's only the eastern parklands they've ever really cared about. It will be a shame to lose the heritage buildings - the old buildings at the back of the barracks are very nice, and only recently renovated. On the other hand this might be a great opportunity to revitalise the gaol - it would be an ideal site for a good cafe etc. The gaol is probably more unique & important than the old police buildings & is badly in need of TLC.

In the Adelaide planning system, parklands based offenses are considered especially heinous.
In Adelaide City, the dedicated planners who investigate these vicious felonies are members of an elite squad known as the Parklands Victims Unit. These are their stories. Dong dong.

Nort wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 28, 2022 12:16 pm

Rev it's quite possible for us to say no to something and that be ok, no need to insult us by saying we are not "rational" or "sane".

Development on parklands is perfectly fine, and indeed can be desirable. It's treating parklands as free unused plots of land in ways that doesn't improve on them which is a problem.

Ah get lost already.
I clearly did not insult anyone on this site.
Always looking to stir shit, so sad.

In case this has not already been mentioned. The development of this site is of such a scale that the parklands will no longer have its figure 8 and subsequently will lose the ability to apply for World Heritage Status - forever. This is about far more than heritage buildings and another permanent structure in the parklands this is a game changer for the parklands its is extremely concerning.

Ben wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:48 am

In case this has not already been mentioned. The development of this site is of such a scale that the parklands will no longer have its figure 8 and subsequently will lose the ability to apply for World Heritage Status - forever. This is about far more than heritage buildings and another permanent structure in the parklands this is a game changer for the parklands its is extremely concerning.

That's an important to highlight, I had already thought that this is edging awfully close to closing off the "continuous" parklands (ignoring roads).

Ben wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 29, 2022 10:48 am

In case this has not already been mentioned. The development of this site is of such a scale that the parklands will no longer have its figure 8 and subsequently will lose the ability to apply for World Heritage Status - forever. This is about far more than heritage buildings and another permanent structure in the parklands this is a game changer for the parklands its is extremely concerning.

So if it loses it's "figure 8" shape, why can't an application for world heritage status be made? Is it the figure 8 shape that makes it apparently worthy of world heritage status?



Compare where the building ends near the pond, and look at Google Maps where the existing Police barracks end near the pond. Not that much different, if not near identical.



The car park pretty much covers an area where the old proposal would have built upon as well. Why didn't that proposal "remove the figure 8 world heritage status worthiness" ?

https://www.newwch.sa.gov.au/
If you scroll down there's a video of the artists impression that does a fly around. Looks like plenty of parkland still behind it.

I think it would be a great idea if they added a tram stop out the front, and built an elevated and covered walkway into the hospital.

And in another hundred years they will be fighting to save this heritage hospital to commemorate all the lives of women and children saved there. Move on.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This new hospital will have a helipad...and this is the path planes take when landing on runway 23 at Adelaide Airport. Politicians occasionally talk about building a second airport, so this will add to the excuses to do it.

1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:17 am

This new hospital will have a helipad...and this is the path planes take when landing on runway 23 at Adelaide Airport. Politicians occasionally talk about building a second airport, so this will add to the excuses to do it.

ypad-23.png

oh yeah, I remember posting that when I was going on about height limits I think. Ridiculous have far the planes are away from the CBD to justify them.

VinyTapestry849 wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 7:11 am

1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑

Fri Sep 30, 2022 12:17 am

This new hospital will have a helipad...and this is the path planes take when landing on runway 23 at Adelaide Airport. Politicians occasionally talk about building a second airport, so this will add to the excuses to do it.

ypad-23.png

oh yeah, I remember posting that when I was going on about height limits I think. Ridiculous have far the planes are away from the CBD to justify them.

Not at all, there's tons of potential operations that don't fall under just naively drawing a line.

Doesn't mean they can't be changed if there are good enough reasons and justification to do all the work, but far from ridiculous.