Sensational-Adelaide.com

• * 62 / 37.8% - Build elsewhere as Railyards is valuable civic land
  * 59 / 36.0% - Rebuild on the RAH site
  * 38 / 23.2% - Build on the Railyards
  * 05 / 3.0% - No need to build at all, current facilities are ok

joy wrote:This is definitely a waste of such a unique site in Adelaide.
One only has to look at Melbourne or Brisbane to see what can be achieved on a city river.
I hope this Government will find another more catalytic use for this parkland site than an hospital.

MINUTES OF THE ADELAIDE PARK LANDS AUTHORITY.
(Special Board meeting held on Thursday 1 May 2008 in the Colonel Light Room, Town Hall, Adelaide, at 5.52pm.)

Membership: The Lord Mayor; and 4 other members appointed by the Council; and 5 members appointed by the Minister.

Present:
* Presiding Member - The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR,
* Deputy Presiding Member - Ministerial appointment required,
* Board Members - Councillor Ralph CLARKE,
* Councillor Michael HENNINGSEN,
* Councillor David PLUMRIDGE,
* Councillor Anne MORAN,
* Ms Michelle GRADY, and
* Mr Ian GILFILLAN.

Apology:
* Board Member Mr Frank BLEVINS, and
* Board Member Dr Jane JAMES.

REPORT FOR DECISION
1. ITEM 1 - MARJORIE JACKSON NELSON HOSPITAL PRECINCT MASTER
PLAN [APLA] (2007/02434)

Much discussion ensued.

During discussion the following issues were raised:-
• Wetlands;
• Parking;
• Gateway to Bonython Park & Adelaide Gaol;
• Connection between the hospital and the Torrens;
• Clarifying what portion of the existing RAH site would be returned to ParkLands;
• How the decontamination of the site will be dealt with;
• Displacement of activities related both to the current RAH site and the usages associated with railway activity; and
• Public transport access.

It was then Moved by Mr GILFILLAN, Seconded by Councillor CLARKE - That the Adelaide Park Lands Authority:-
(1) Advises the State Government that the Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital Precinct Master Plan is inconsistent with part of the Park Lands Management Strategy and the Community Land Management Plan for Park 27 (Tulya Wodli) in that it does not return the whole of the rail yards to Park Lands and is also inconsistent with the Adelaide (City) Development Plan in that the proposed use of the site as a hospital would not comply with the current zoning.
(2) Asks Council to consider the views of the Authority in any submission that Council may make to the State Government in relation to the Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital Master Plan.
Carried.

Discussion ensued.

The Board meeting closed at 6.38 pm.

Advises the State Government that the Marjorie Jackson Nelson Hospital Precinct Master Plan is inconsistent with part of the Park Lands Management Strategy and the Community Land Management Plan for Park 27 (Tulya Wodli) in that it does not return the whole of the rail yards to Park Lands

Omicron wrote:I am intrigued as to how Mr. Clarke would have us simply turn the railyards into parklands. Is he advocating the ACC spend millions of its ratepayers' money on the clean-up bill, removal of all lines, and diversion of all suburban rail to the Keswick station, to be replaced by areas of lawn and trees? Or is he advocating some kind of Federation Square-esque cover over the entire site, except with trees, bushes and open areas rather than buildings? The State Government would just love to hear about a multi-million dollar construction project with no financial return whatsoever at a time when they are earmarking cuts to the State Budget.

Surely he wouldn't just be making idle claims about restoring the area to parklands without considering what would need to happen as a result?

urban wrote:Wayno that was not a meeting between the ACC and APPA.

It was a meeting of the Adelaide Park Lands Authority (APLA). The APLA is the board set-up jointly by the State Govt and ACC to advise on development within the parklands.

The APPA (Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association) is merely a community group.

Professor wrote:The new hospital will be built on the railyards

The government has staked its reputation on delivering these new health facilities

The opposition is in disarray when it comes to infrastructure planning

Ian Gilfillan and his wretched preservation society are no longer relevant to this debate.

The decision on location has already been made and therefore good luck to all those who oppose it. Frankly I think it's a great idea and location, as well as convenient for most patients and visitors. The existing hospital is depressing, both inside and out. Pity about the silly name but who really cares?

Let's move on.

Wayno wrote:i noticed today the front page poll is coming along nicely:

• * 62 / 37.8% - Build elsewhere as Railyards is valuable civic land
  * 59 / 36.0% - Rebuild on the RAH site
  * 38 / 23.2% - Build on the Railyards
  * 05 / 3.0% - No need to build at all, current facilities are ok

Nearly 1 in 4 people voted to build on the railyards.