New AFC Headquarters at the Aquatic Centre??

(Log in to remove this ad.)

MRB37

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 17, 2009
Posts
21,163
Likes
26,477
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
Up to $15 million is needed to bring the ageing Adelaide Aquatic Centre up to standard as the future of the 49-year-old building again comes under scrutiny.
The Adelaide City Council is losing $700,000 a year operating the parklands facility which is losing water and has sections closed to the public due to concrete damage and rust.
Options include spending $3 million to $5 million on short-term repairs or between $10 million to $15 million for a major overhaul.
No proposal has been made to the council by the Crows for the site, with Ms Verschoor describing the talks as “preliminary and broad in nature”.
She did say that any proposal would have to ensure the site would be able to be accessed by the public.
“We would always put the community first in any decision we make,” she said.
“That is the most important thing for us, community access … a community facility maintaining a swim school and a gym.”
Cr Phil Martin said he would propose at the council’s next meeting for the council to release any details it had about its negotiations with the Crows.
“This is too important for council to draw a curtain of secrecy around it,” he said.
“The Aquatic Centre is not a business, it’s a community asset.”
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
It's fun to dump on the Parklands Protection people for the nimby attitude, and on the council for appearing to not utilise (or water) to the best of their ability, but on the other side of the coin, if you give commercial interests an inch, they'll take a mile, and then charge you for that mile so that they can take another - ie the dodgy AO hotel shambling through parliamentary review right now. Given a sliver of precedent that will let them beat their way through the appeals courts, and enough time, commercial interests will eat up the parklands and there won't be any left at all, to the detriment of the entire city.

Also if this does happen, the existing centre will be certainly demolished, it's too old to renovate, too dilapidated to repair.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
47,544
Likes
61,749
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #331
It's fun to dump on the Parklands Protection people for the nimby attitude, and on the council for appearing to not utilise (or water) to the best of their ability, but on the other side of the coin, if you give commercial interests an inch, they'll take a mile, and then charge you for that mile so that they can take another - ie the dodgy AO hotel shambling through parliamentary review right now. Given a sliver of precedent that will let them beat their way through the appeals courts, and enough time, commercial interests will eat up the parklands and there won't be any left at all, to the detriment of the entire city.

Also if this does happen, the existing centre will be certainly demolished, it's too old to renovate, too dilapidated to repair.
Just a tad melodramatic.

There will always be parklands.

Remember you didn’t want AO redeveloped either.
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
Just a tad melodramatic.

There will always be parklands.

Remember you didn’t want AO redeveloped either.
There won't always be parklands if you let commercial developments happen on them.

By all means force both levels of governments to do better by the parklands, and allow publicly owned developments if they are of sufficient benefit to the public, but as soon as you let a corporation own a piece and develop it, the rest will absolutely follow in time, because that's how commercial interests work - they consume that which belongs to the public for the benefit of the few, and they keep doing it until there's nothing left.
 

Golumless

I'm kind of a big deal on the east side
Joined
Jul 12, 2013
Posts
22,247
Likes
24,693
Location
Wherever the ESH clubrooms are
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Newcastle, Colorado Rockies.
Just a tad melodramatic.

There will always be parklands.

Remember you didn’t want AO redeveloped either.
Most likely there won't be, it makes no real sense to have the parklands where we do, especially with how valuable that land could be.

In saying that, it's inevitable something will come along and start that process in claiming those lands, whether us, another sports team or the state just being that desperate for business.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
47,544
Likes
61,749
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #334
There won't always be parklands if you let commercial developments happen on them.

By all means force both levels of governments to do better by the parklands, and allow publicly owned developments if they are of sufficient benefit to the public, but as soon as you let a corporation own a piece and develop it, the rest will absolutely follow in time, because that's how commercial interests work - they consume that which belongs to the public for the benefit of the few, and they keep doing it until there's nothing left.
Rubbish.

One commercial development will not lead to more commercial developments and the parklands gone.

The only reason this might get up is because the council needs a white Knight because it’s bleeding money, otherwise they would tell the Crows to piss off. Just as they have about bloody anything that upsets Anne Moran.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
47,544
Likes
61,749
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #335
Most likely there won't be, it makes no real sense to have the parklands where we do, especially with how valuable that land could be.

In saying that, it's inevitable something will come along and start that process in claiming those lands, whether us, another sports team or the state just being that desperate for business.
How much of the parklands do you know that have gone?
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
Rubbish.

One commercial development will not lead to more commercial developments and the parklands gone.
Most likely there won't be, it makes no real sense to have the parklands where we do, especially with how valuable that land could be.

In saying that, it's inevitable something will come along and start that process in claiming those lands, whether us, another sports team or the state just being that desperate for business.
Counterpoints to neoliberal waffle just write themselves really
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
47,544
Likes
61,749
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #337
Counterpoints to neoliberal waffle just write themselves really
Yeah “Makes no sense to have them” is really a solid counterpoint. If it’s made no sense why havent the parklands gone already?

You’re just a paranoid commercial enterprise hater because they don’t spend money on you, you are too used to receiving government handouts, “oh what will I do without my free bus ride to the footy?” How about you pay for it yourself?
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
Yeah “Makes no sense to have them” is really a solid counterpoint. If it’s made no sense why havent the parklands gone already?

You’re just a paranoid commercial enterprise hater because they don’t spend money on you, you are too used to receiving government handouts, “oh what will I do without my free bus ride to the footy?” How about you pay for it yourself?
You said "one will not lead to more" and the immediately preceding post was another neoliberal proposing that all the parklands be built over and that it was inevitable. Quality.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Posts
47,544
Likes
61,749
Location
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Thread starter #340
You said "one will not lead to more" and the immediately preceding post was another neoliberal proposing that all the parklands be built over and that it was inevitable. Quality.
What the **** are you on about?

You’re basing all of this on paranoia because you believe “business is bad”.

You have nothing to support the parklands will go if this one development gets up, do you know why? Because there isn’t any. Give me one shred of evidence and then I might not consider your posting the ramblings of a government freeloader.
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
Also known as "third way", tory-lite. An ultimately failed attempt to blend socialist planning with free market capitalism, which ultimately led to the gutting of society across the anglosphere - Keating & Hawke, Tony Blair, Bill Clinton - with the public assets transferred for a pittance to the ownership of the few, later known as 1%ers, for their maximum profit. It was a disaster, and the only people still pushing it are the leeches who profit from it.
 

mattymac

GM of Awareness
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Posts
12,673
Likes
20,483
Location
Yes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
No
There won't always be parklands if you let commercial developments happen on them.

By all means force both levels of governments to do better by the parklands, and allow publicly owned developments if they are of sufficient benefit to the public, but as soon as you let a corporation own a piece and develop it, the rest will absolutely follow in time, because that's how commercial interests work - they consume that which belongs to the public for the benefit of the few, and they keep doing it until there's nothing left.
Parklands are so overrated.

Their main purpose was to provide clear firing lanes for our cannoneers to mow down Russian or French expeditionary forces with our chain shot whilst allowing our musketeers time to reload 3 or 4 times before they covered the ground.

Now they serve mainly as places for nimbys' dogs to shit and creeps to loiter in the bushes. All of those useful services could be concentrated in less than half the parks we have now.
 

mattymac

GM of Awareness
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Posts
12,673
Likes
20,483
Location
Yes
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
No
We're going to be up against some quality opposition :eek:

Cr Phil Martin said he would propose at the council’s next meeting for the council to release any details it had about its negotiations with the Crows.
“This is too important for council to draw a curtain of secrecy around it,” he said.
Capture.PNG
 

NTRabbit

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 1, 2008
Posts
16,870
Likes
10,571
Location
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Arsenal, 76ers, Royals
Parklands are so overrated.

Their main purpose was to provide clear firing lanes for our cannoneers to mow down Russian or French expeditionary forces with our chain shot whilst allowing our musketeers time to reload 3 or 4 times before they covered the ground.

Now they serve mainly as places for nimbys' dogs to shit and creeps to loiter in the bushes. All of those useful services could be concentrated in less than half the parks we have now.
False folklore, and a self serving lie.

The parklands house sporting and cultural events year round, and are used as a place of recreation by both residents and workers. The only people who want to commercially develop over the top of them are the ones who want to profit from the destruction of a key part of the city. There are plenty of underdeveloped places within the CBD square that can be developed, it just costs more, which is anathema to the goal of maximum short term profit. As soon as commercial development broke ground in the parklands, the car parking king would break ground on a new multistory car park in every block, at a time when we should be reducing car parks in the CBD.

If the council want to allow us to lease the land to build a new HQ, on the proviso that we continue to operate the Aquatic Centre replacement as a community facility, then that's fine. Can't say I particularly care if there's a shed replacement, I'd never go if there was anyway, I prefer to head into a city bar.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom