Sensational-Adelaide.com

cruel_world00 wrote:

Cruise wrote:

cruel_world00 wrote: problems with AAMI, where to start...

Well firstly, if you have watched footy anywhere else in Australia, or namely the closest capital to us, Melbourne, you will understand why AAMI pales in comparison.

I have been to stadiums in melbourne, and i perfer footy park

Waverley doesn't count

lol but seriously i find the stands at the mcg to steep

The stands need to be steep in order to maintain good views of the ground for all spectators. The higher the stands are above the ground the steeper they need to be.

What about Telstra Dome?

An alternate solution is to build the hospital on the rail yards and build a new stadium at the clipsal site. You get the best of both worlds.

frank1 wrote:An alternate solution is to build the hospital on the rail yards and build a new stadium at the clipsal site. You get the best of both worlds.

Location, location, location...

Even though the Clipsal site is closer to the city than West Lakes, people just aren't going to travel that extra 2 kilometres to go into town after a match. And yes, thats how lazy people are, but its got to be convinient otherwise it'll just turn out another white elephant like AAMI Stadium is.

Hindmarsh Stadium is a good example of this problem, fantastic venue, good facilities, but it just isn't convinient and accessible enough.

The only way that AAMI Stadium is going to be worth keeping is if there is a massive increase in development potential surrounding the area that will lure people to stay around after a match. Whilst improvements are being made with 2 residential developments and Westfield upgrade, it isn't just enough, greater public accessibility (light rail or heavy rail branchline) and further development will only sustain its future.

This is why the city stadium, convieniently located at North Terrace, servicing the Hindley St precinct after matches will generate economic revenue to surpass the cost of building a new stadium indefinitely.

Cruise wrote:lol but seriously i find the stands at the mcg to steep

Welcome to any modern stadium. Docklands and the Gabba also have steep seating so that everyone can stay close to the action. I haven't been to the SCG or Stadium Australia in Sydney, but I'd hazard a guess that they're the same as well.

Footy Park has always been a horrible venue. There's also an additional problem with it that I believe is being overlooked - the playing surface. There's quite a rise towards the centre to facilitate drainage. A new stadium would have a perfectly flat surface. That would make it more suitable for non footy events like concerts. (A new stadium would also undoubtedly have way superior acoustics as well)

I read about the ex-SANFL consultant's proposal and I am simply blown away by the audacity to have a permanent glass roof! How unbelievably awesome would that be? Surely that would be a world-first.

Rann has shot himself in the foot over this. The hospital was sprung on everyone and without consultation with the medical community. It was proposed and named (a horrible name at that) before it was designed and goes against the recommendations of the government's own review of the health system by centralising services. If this hospital is built, services will be removed from suburban and regional hospitals. Now he's framing it as a choice between a hospital and desalination plant or a stadium. Ignoring the fact that it was the Liberals that called for a desalination plant, it's not a choice between a hospital and a stadium. It's a choice between wasting a prime piece of city real-estate or improving the social fabric of the city and rebuilding the RAH. If the hospital is built, it will be there for a century.

Between this and WorkCover, Rann is gone. I predict he will resign before the election.

Wayno wrote:voila! an hour later and here's my 1st draft.

The attachment railyard-entertainment-precinct-v0.1.doc is no longer available

I'll be without internet access starting in a couple of hours. Should be back online to collect/collate your feedback by Monday, or Tuesday at the latest!

I was not sure whether to include a list of alternate sites for the hospital, and i could only think of the ex-Clipsal site, the Keswick barracks, or rebuild on the current RAH site. Any others? what about at cheltenham surrounded by wetlands?

Many thanks to monotonehell (and a couple of others) for PM'ing me their ideas. The letter is now one page. Please let me know your thoughts - not much feedback received to date - don't be shy! i won't bite

The draft is well written. I strongly back the view that this shouldn't be a case of hospital versus entertainment precinct, because both will contribute to the improvement of our city, but what needs to be considered is the appropriate usage of the site for the greatest potential benefit to the city's residents.

i still disagree with all of this bitching and moaning.. the hospital is quite visionary and with any development this size not everyone is going to be pleased..

muzzamo wrote:i still disagree with all of this bitching and moaning.. the hospital is quite visionary and with any development this size not everyone is going to be pleased..

It's not the development that some people are annoyed with, it's the location. I'm fairly sure everyone here (with maybe one or two one eyed, footy mad, private health zealots as exceptions) agrees completely with building a hospital on this scale and as immediately as possible. Some silly people only have a problem with the name... But most think that the rail yards should be put to a civic use that better befits the location.

Personally I'm okay with the hospital as planed going ahead on the site, as if people claim there's enough room for three stadia, then there' surely plenty of room for a hospital and an entertainment district in the remaining spaces. But on the other hand if the PtB can be convinced to locate the hospital on an other site leaving the rail yards for more 'interesting' purposes, then I'd be equally as happy.

Now what should have happened here is that RAH should be relocated to the proposed Marj Hospital on the railyards, and the existing be crushed down for Entertainment Precinct. If you look at the business trends towards the east of the CBD, entertainment precinct would fit in better.

Wayno wrote: Many thanks to monotonehell (and a couple of others) for PM'ing me their ideas. The letter is now one page. Please let me know your thoughts - not much feedback received to date - don't be shy! i won't bite

railyard-entertainment-precinct-v0.2.doc

Maybe i'm just being paranoid, but i don't feel this submission has the support of the "majority of the vocal minority". It's most important that we work as a team and i'd hate any submission to be sent (even mine!) without true support. Final yay/nay should come from howie.

Pls reply with your approval, disapproval, or suggestions for change.

Edgar wrote:Now what should have happened here is that RAH should be relocated to the proposed Marj Hospital on the railyards, and the existing be crushed down for Entertainment Precinct. If you look at the business trends towards the east of the CBD, entertainment precinct would fit in better.

Agree but the parklands mob would crackup... After the victoria park saga the RAH land is being returned to parklands to satisfy that minority group

I agree with everything said in that submission but think we should include some possible alternatives.
So if he HAS looked into SOME other alternatives and failed he might go... "Hm thats a good one i never looked into that"

Hoops wrote:I agree with everything said in that submission but think we should include some possible alternatives.
So if he HAS looked into SOME other alternatives and failed he might go... "Hm thats a good one i never looked into that"

hiya hoops, the only sites i can think of are:

• * ex-Clipsal site,
  * Keswick barracks,
  * Rebuild on the current RAH site,
  * Cheltenham (surrounded by wetlands so everyone wins?)
  * others?