It will happen.
My concern is the expense, red tape and compromises that will need to be made.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Opinion New AFC HQ: Send in the Bulldozers! Thebarton is Happening!
- Thread starter Elite Crow
- Start date
- Tagged users None
My concern is the expense, red tape and compromises that will need to be made.
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Ramify
Cancelled
- Oct 15, 2012
- 5,384
- 7,471
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Absobloodyluterly they are.
Im sure this would stand a better chance of getting up if it was proposed by off shore Chinese investors for use by Chinese nationals.
So we’ve got 20 days to submit plans or, ”it risks” being knocked back, so not exactly hard and fast. Personally, I don’t get it, who cares if it takes 12 months to settle on a design, there’s a lot to be taken into account. The article mentions that the plans not being published yet are creating, “chaos and angst within the community”. Surely that’s amongst the small group of nutters that are desperate for the plans to be out so the can be vocally outraged against them. Obviously the anticipation is eating them alive, like a 5 year old on Xmas eve.
Surely the plans take as long as they take, they’re provided to council, published, commented on, amended where required and ultimately are approved or rejected. The only time pressure should come from council wanting to expedite the financial noose from the neck of ratepayers. Every other ******* should just get on with the rest of their lives and worry about the ******* plans when they’re provided to council.
Surely the plans take as long as they take, they’re provided to council, published, commented on, amended where required and ultimately are approved or rejected. The only time pressure should come from council wanting to expedite the financial noose from the neck of ratepayers. Every other ******* should just get on with the rest of their lives and worry about the ******* plans when they’re provided to council.
P
I reckon they’re being bombarded by a small group of crazies who have probably reached out to other NIMBY groups to swell their volumes. And some councillors are crumbling under the pressure. It’s madness, it’s completely contradictory to the stated importance of that any development or Re-development needs to fit within pretty strict guideline to ensure the amenity of the parklands remain intact. I get that, I support that wholeheartedly, and the flip side is that detailed and operational plans will take a bit of time.
Plus, we can’t consult with anyone, so we‘ve got a lot of work to do on our financial risk modelling.
Drawing up full plans for a $65m build would be very expensive and require a lot of planning to make sure everything is considered and the building will be future proof. I'd bet it's not "secrecy", we are just hoping for a concrete answer before we invest in the cost of a full final plan.
If we don't have one done yet, I don't think 20 days would be enough time.
If we don't have one done yet, I don't think 20 days would be enough time.
A shame this might fall through, as I said in an earlier post I see it a bit like what the SACA did with the Karen Rolten Upgrade but on a bigger scale. We are really talking about upgrading something that is existing and making it more usable.
What an absolute s&*t show the ACC is.
As much as I’d love the club to have a city base, I wouldn’t care less if this fell through and the ACC remain with their aquatic centre issues.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
As much as I’d love the club to have a city base, I wouldn’t care less if this fell through and the ACC remain with their aquatic centre issues.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Yep, exactly.
We are doing them a favour and yet they are the ones piss farting around.
W@nkers.
Happy for us to stay at West Lakes if it is all too hard, and watch ACC squirm back into a deal.
Aquatic centre is hemorrhaging cash on a daily basis, so not sure what the other alternative is for ACC.
I hope we go back to them and point out that fully developed plans take time. If they want to keep the Aquatic Centre as is, then we are happy to move along and look elsewhere.
Let's see what they really want.
It's clear they want some half-assed plans so they can leak them to a few loonies and be ready to tear it apart.
Most councils are poorly run and run by incompetent people. The ACC is the worst of the worst. Absolutely clueless, achieve nothing and put any and all road blocks in place to ensure no changes happen.
They would literally rather have an unusable facility that is continually costing them a fortune, than have a sensible discussion that might provide a solution.
I'm happy to walk away if they keep carrying on with their stupidity.
Let's see what they really want.
It's clear they want some half-assed plans so they can leak them to a few loonies and be ready to tear it apart.
Most councils are poorly run and run by incompetent people. The ACC is the worst of the worst. Absolutely clueless, achieve nothing and put any and all road blocks in place to ensure no changes happen.
They would literally rather have an unusable facility that is continually costing them a fortune, than have a sensible discussion that might provide a solution.
I'm happy to walk away if they keep carrying on with their stupidity.
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,589
- 21,016
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
I see both sides of it.
Nothing better than when you're flying into adelaide seeing the green belt around the city. (usually brown on west tce).
However in saying that, we already have a monstrosity of an aquatic centre on that block. The remainder of the block is car park and s**t quality sports fields.
So really we arent losing any of the parklands by doing what is planned.
The red tape and bureaucracy at work...
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
Excuse my ignorance on this.
What was on the Karen Rolten oval before the upgrade?
Were there existing older stands there?
How did that development gain approval?
When was the existing Aquatic centre built? What was on that park previously?
Would the Rolten Oval development set a precedent for the AFC/Aquatic Centre development?
Karen Rolton = old Railways Oval, opposite Joplins.
Believe the Government took to decision away from the council as part of the Adelaide oval upgrade deal with the SACA,
And it is on the western side so, in layman's term the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association don't give a hoot about that side of the parklands.
the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association is more NIMBY than most, and the northern and eastern Parklands are there backyards.
The North Adelaide council want to get rid of the aquatic centre. Costing them a ton of money, it's old and needs upgrades and they don't host any big events anymore.
The locals should be seeing this as a huge win/win as they get upgraded facilities they still have access to and get more people visiting into the suburbs. But as usual it's the "if it doesn't directly benefit me then I'm opposed to it" crowd kicking up a storm.
I'd get it maybe if we were taking over parklands, but it's already been taken over.
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,589
- 21,016
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
Agreed.
However the residents of North Adelaide are well known for just being against anything no matter what.
They dont think about benefits or logic or anything like that. They're just complainers by nature.
Their lack of change acceptance and willingness is why North Adelaide as a retail/dining area has died a slow and painful death.
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,589
- 21,016
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
It was footy/cricket ovals for juniors that whole area.
They just redid the change room facilities and put a fence around the ground.
The particlar one on the corner of west tce / north tce was a footy ground for Old Ignations FC for many years (originally called railways oval and actually had someone shot and killed while playing cricket at one point according to my father).
Originally the aquatic centre was built in the 70s from memory but had a refurbish in the early 2000s? (also from memory).
The Rolten oval development would be a lot smaller than anything required to the aquatic centre.
There was no addition to footprint in the area.
Option 1: ACC keeps Aquatic Centre, and raises the rates of it's residents by 30-50% to cover the costs of keeping the thing afloat.
Option 2: ACC works collaboratively with the AFC to ensure a suitable solution is entered into that benefits the community and the ACC is tasked with selling this to it's members, while AFC foot the bill.
Am I missing something here?
Option 2: ACC works collaboratively with the AFC to ensure a suitable solution is entered into that benefits the community and the ACC is tasked with selling this to it's members, while AFC foot the bill.
Am I missing something here?
- Jul 13, 2012
- 43,589
- 21,016
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Charlotte Hornets, Chelsea, Striker
- The unexplained ire towards anything new/different of the North Adelaide residents
- South Australia's penchant for doing nothing instead of something
Similar threads
