Marj to Clipsal, Footy Stadium to railway?

[KingsCrow]

......

 

[Punchy Bassett]

A CBD stadium is a waste of time unless you are going to completely overhaul public transport in this city.

 

[cammo84]

Yeah, and the public transport here DOES need an overhaul. As far as infrastructure goes, this city is an absolute joke. It's no wonder we're the butt of the rest of Australia's jokes.

 

[jo172]

Some would argue Adelaide having three major sporting stadiums would be a far greater waste than a new hospital

Did anyone hear the radio this morning when that ****wit Rann went to the airport to welcome back United?

"Give us a stadium, Give us a stadium"

Love seeing pollies cop it trying to bask in reflected glory.

 

[jo172]

I am talking about location.



The Hospital does not need to go there. Its the last large land plot on the North Terrace strip. It even has views of our mighty river torrens (laugh).


Its a complete joke that they are building a low rise hospital taking up a huge chunk of land as valuable as that. The Clipsal site would be a much better option for this.



Whether it be a stadium, a huge south bank style redevelopment, hell even a new mueseum. I don't care. Putting a huge hospital there is stoopid.

It's a big monument to Mike Rann, of course it has to be in the center of the city!

How else will his legacy/ego be remembered?

 

[Punchy Bassett]

You can say that. But how do you mean?

More trains, more trams, more buses?

new lines, new routes?

More everything, I live about a 15-20 minute drive from the city, I don't work in town so I drive home and then if I want to get public transport into the city sometimes if can take up to an hour to get there. No way I would rely on that if there was a Crows game I had to get to.

 

[Punchy Bassett]

I know its common to hear about the public transport 'crisis'. But I honeslty haven't seen it. I live in the hills, serviced by buses, always on time. Run every hour all day.

I've also lived in Burnside, buses were on time there too. Never really full. Came every 15 mins.


I am guessing you live near a rail link. Which I can't really comment on.




The infrastructure around the city is what IMO needs to be improved, more underpasses, over passes. More free flowing. More bike lanes.

Nope I live all of a five minute drive from TTP interchange which shows how ridiculous it is! It's fine during peak hours but footy isn't played in peak hours.

 

[KUNG FU]

Haven't had a car for the last 2 years and I get around fine, but I do live very close to the city there days. Couldn't manage if I still lived out in the burbs.

The new housing development at Clipsal makes a whole lot of sense, but its only one piece of the puzzle.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Id think, with the credit crisis, theres about 0% chance of getting a new stadium. Heck, the word is, even the WA stadium plans are now questionable.

Time to move on Kingscrow.

 

[Alex99]

Id think, with the credit crisis, theres about 0% chance of getting a new stadium. Heck, the word is, even the WA stadium plans are now questionable.

Time to move on Kingscrow.

Why?

I agree with the current credit crisis the chances of Adelaide getting a new stadium in the next 10 year is about .1 of a % (never say never) but if you feel passionately about it, he should never give in.

What i don’t understand is the need to give AAMI Stadium the $100 million dollar grant to upgrade a stadium that is fine for AFL football. It’s not fine for international sport but since when has AFL football been an international sport.

 

[King Elvis]

I am not as passionate about the stadium as I once was. But this thread is mainly about the fact they are wasteing a valuable peice of land on a low rise hospital which could easily be built just down the road.

You are 100% correct.

A hospital isn't exactly a landmark building or icon; doesn't need prime real estate that we're almost out of.

Turn the existing hospital into a 'green village.'

 

[Vince Van Mackay]

While I'm not so sold on the idea of an inner city stadium in this current financial climate. I agree that putting the Marj eye sore in prime city real estate is not a good idea. If it is the City Council's and State Governments desire to increase the inner city population, then placing a behemoth eyesore hospital there isn't the right idea.

Don't get me wrong, I don't entirely disagree with the building of the hospital, just its proposed location.

 

[Geelong2k9]

Yeah, and the public transport here DOES need an overhaul. As far as infrastructure goes, this city is an absolute joke. It's no wonder we're the butt of the rest of Australia's jokes.

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is the setup of your public transport system over there??? ie. trams, trains, buses, etc.

 

[Dogga79]

I found this interesting in today's Sunday mail. It makes you wonder if renovating the RAH has been honestly explored as an alternative.

Doctors blast 'mad Marj' plan


EMINENT medical specialists have launched a campaign to save the Royal Adelaide Hospital, saying the city does not need the planned $1.7 billion Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital.
A group of respected senior doctors who have spent the past year "brooding and alarmed" have decided to go public with their opposition and have formed a committee dedicated to saving the RAH from being bulldozed. "We want genuine discussion about whether the RAH really needs to be closed," spokesman Dr James Katsaros said yesterday.
"We have a responsibility to look at whether we are making a terrible mistake in spending $1.7 billion on something that is not needed while erasing an iconic institution.
". . . as senior members of the medical community we came to the view that if we did not stand up against this lunancy, no one would.
"We have been brooding on this for a long time, whispering in corridors and over coffees about the madness of the plan, which was announced without consultation with the medical community."
The "Save the RAH Medical Committee" says the state does not need a new hospital and the RAH's patient accommodation could be upgraded for far less than the Marj's ballooning $1.7bn cost – and the work completed far earlier than the Marj's 12-year time frame.
The Save the RAH group includes leading and retired orthopaedic surgeons, cardiologists, plastic surgeons, oncologists and pathologists, as well as people who have held representative positions such as Australian Medical Association office holders.
Members so far include Dr Peter Hetzel, Dr John Sangster, Dr Daryl Teague, Dr Francis Ghan, Dr Randall Sach, Dr Peter Malycha, Dr Philip Harding and Dr Katsaros.
The committee is holding a meeting for the medical fraternity at the RAH on March 16 to discuss the issues and see if there is genuine support for the new hospital.
If the meeting shows a lack of support for the Marj, the committee will widen the debate to public meetings. The key concerns of the Save the RAH group include:
A LACK of consultation by the State Government with the medical community or the AMA before the plan was announced;
A LACK of convincing arguments in favour of building the Marj;
MISINFORMATION about the state of the RAH, which they say has been substantially upgraded in recent years;
DESTRUCTION of the close working relationship between the RAH, Adelaide University Medical School, Hanson Institute and Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science, which are all on the one city campus;
ABOLITION of the brand name "Royal Adelaide Hospital" – world famous within medical circles.
Dr Katsaros, committee chairman and director of the plastic and reconstructive surgery at the RAH, said the group represented conservative people who otherwise would not want to be caught in a political row.
"There was no review to see if it was actually needed, no public debate, just an announcement," he said. "We have been alarmed ever since the announcement was suddenly made and the discussions among doctors have been ones of alarm and incredulity.
"Being conservative, it has taken a while to band together and go public, but we have to show leadership and generate genuine discussion about whether we need a new hospital.
"While we as senior doctors feel we must stand up, we also have the support of many junior staff as well as nurses and allied health workers who believe the RAH should be retained.
"I believe we do not need a new hospital at all; but if the overwhelming view of the medical community after we have discussions is that we do need one, then we will say `so be it' and move on."
Dr Katsaros noted the RAH was world respected, both in facilities and in name that also promoted the city.
"The RAH has a brand new emergency (department), which is state-of-the-art, an intensive care area the envy of most hospitals, a world-class burns unit, modern dialysis unit and so on," he said.
"Every hospital has to start planning upgrades virtually as soon as they are built, but the RAH right now is at a point where the most urgent thing is a new patient accommodation wing.
"That could be built for around $300 million, rather than $1.7 billion, and could be completed in a couple of years rather than waiting 12 years."
The committee will meet AMA officials this week with a request it notify members of the March 16 meeting in the hope of having the largest possible number of the medical fraternity on hand to voice their opinions about whether a new hospital is needed.
Dr Katsaros said the Marj announcement came without any review into whether it was needed.
"The existing institution can be refurbished and rejuvenated, as was done in the 1960s when a larger RAH was rebuilt on site without major problems," he said.
Dr Katsaros emphasised the RAH name was a respected and valuable brand name for SA.
"Can you imagine the folk in Minnesota bulldozing the Mayo Clinic and building the Michael Jordan Hospital 1km away?" he said. "They'd be a laughing stock."

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24927491-5006301,00.html

 

[KingsCrow]

The Liberals need to jump onto this and the water issue and they will be a real chance to win the next election.


BTW how ridiculous 2,000,000,000 to build a hospital....over a decade? wtf.

 

[NTRabbit]

I found this interesting in today's Sunday mail. It makes you wonder if renovating the RAH has been honestly explored as an alternative.



http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,24927491-5006301,00.html

I read this too, and saw a small number of senior and retired doctors who are worried that they won't be a part of the new facility, and will lose value with their hospital connections because it's hard to name drop a decommissioned facility, with the new hospital having an entirely new name. Let's see if these supposed meetings of support actually turn into anything more than 30 disgruntled old men.

From the people I've spoken to, the RAH is too old to be upgraded any further, the buildings are literally incapable of supporting the kind of upgrades needed to keep up with modern medical standards. Parts of the Hospital are ok now - not state of the art, but up to current standards - but the problem is keeping the place at those standards in 2015, and in 2020. Plus there are large sections of it that are completely unacceptable now, let alone 5 years from now.

People have been chiding the government for not being proactive and thinking well in advance of replacing Football Park, with studies and programs 5 or 10 years ago when the ground was still good but troubles loomed in the distance - guess what, that's exactly what the government has done here.

The whole site needs to be knocked down regardless of whether you "renovate" (read entirely rebuild) the facility on the same site, or build where the government has proposed. I'm not entirely sold on the name or the new location either, but aside from that a brand new hospital is something this city desperately needs.

 

[Cap]

maybe the wrong place for it... but another nail in the "CBD stadium"



Oval grandstand work set to begin
DANIEL WILLS LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORTER
February 26, 2009 10:00pm
REDEVELOPMENT of Adelaide Oval's western grandstand is set to begin within weeks following approval to use neighbouring land as a construction site.
The Adelaide City Council was expected to approve the use of Adelaide Oval 2 on Monday, but claims community objections had been omitted from official reports delayed the decision to a special meeting tonight.
Final consent for the revamp is required from the State Government's Development Assessment Commission, which was expected to pass the plans in a closed meeting.
The council's approval comes just in time for the South Australian Cricket Association, which plans to break ground on March 10.
Adelaide City Council first gave approval for the revamp in October 2007 but was forced to hurriedly reconsider when SACA lodged new plans in December last year.
Councillor Michael Henningsen said the council had gone out of its way to ensure construction began on time.
"This entire affair speaks of that we're on a very tight deadline, and a deadline imposed by SACA," he told tonight's meeting.
"To be quite frank, we've got a revolver to our head almost, in terms of the timelines to start this project to have them finished in time for these sporting events at the Adelaide Oval."
In a submission to a council committee, SACA Chief Executive Michael Deare said the redevelopment was essential if the Oval was to attract top-flight sport.
"Redevelopment of the western grandstands at Adelaide Oval will significantly enhance the venue for the purposes of maintaining Adelaide's status as a city which can competently support the hosting of major summer and winter sports," he wrote.
The submission includes plans to host a Wallabies international rugby union match and two NRL games featuring the Canterbury Bulldogs in 2011.
The redevelopment will change the playing field from its current semi-rectangular shape to an oval, and the new grandstand will boost the stadium's capacity to 37,000.
Heritage elements of the current stands, including red brick arches and the George Giffen Stand facade, will be maintained.
SACA officials expect the project to be completed around November 2010, in time for the homes Ashes series.
The redevelopment is expected to cost $95 million, with the state and federal governments each contributing $25 million and SACA supplying the remainder with borrowings from Westpac Bank.


Well done SACA - probably 7k short in attendances but the new facility is going to shit on anything else currently on offer.

 

[Alex99]

maybe the wrong place for it... but another nail in the "CBD stadium"

Na i disagree, once any redevelopment work on AAMI is started, then that will be the nail in the CBD coffin. Cricket have never and were never going to play a part in the CBD stadium debate.

 

[Cap]

Na i disagree, once any redevelopment work on AAMI is started, then that will be the nail in the CBD coffin. Cricket have never and were never going to play a part in the CBD stadium debate.

fair enough, but I think you'll find the Adealide Oval has been designed for a few other sports than just cricket.... making it way more Viable than any other option so far

 

[Alex99]

fair enough, but I think you'll find the Adealide Oval has been designed for a few other sports than just cricket.... making it way more Viable than any other option so far

Viable maybe and economically friendly to other sporting code most definitely but does this upgrade meet FIFA standards? Forget AFL for now as once the stadium is built the key stakeholders will find a way of getting AFL played at that venue. The key argurment to any CBD stadium is the world cup. If Australia wins the right to host it, what has to happen for games to be played in SA. Thats the key question.

If the state government put $100 million intio AAMI (like they have said but delaying for a few years) and the Federal government put monies into developing sporting infrastructure in other states. If we miss out because nither AAMI or Adelaide oval are compatible, the shit will hit the fan.

The final nail in this CDB stadium will not be nailed shut until after 2010. If this upgrade of Adelaide Oval meets FIFA standards, you are correct and the door has been closed.

 

[Cap]

you may have your answer to why the CBD stadium will never be built..

 

[Alex99]

you may have your answer to why the CBD stadium will never be built..

That's the ONLY reason it should be built.

 

[Cap]

That's the ONLY reason it should be built.

yes, thats why it isn't required.

 

[Alex99]

yes, thats why it isn't required.

Tell that to the tourisum, retail, hospitality and transport industry that will miss out on millions if Adelaide is over looked for such an event.

 

[jo172]

Tell that to the tourisum, retail, hospitality and transport industry that will miss out on millions if Adelaide is over looked for such an event.

While i'm not unsympathetic to your point of view you do realise how irrational it sounds to justify the spending of a billion dollars to only make millions?

Having said that, you'd be losing money at a lot slower rate than the current state government, so you might just get in!