News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Message
Author
Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3631 Post by Eurostar » Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:01 am

In my opinion the former RAH area would be a better spot for a new city aquatic centre/crows ground. It could be integrated with the botanic gardens. The current site should be reserved for an freeway interchange , use it as a park n ride for now with free bus service between park n ride and the city.

The aquatic centre/crows hub would be ideal in the former RAH area because it has access to tram services, bus services, close to restaurant/cafe strip so people can linger after a swim, close to Uni SA, University of Adelaide, next to Adelaide Botanic High School and near many private schools.

Patrick_27
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1800
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3632 Post by Patrick_27 » Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:49 pm

Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:01 am
In my opinion the former RAH area would be a better spot for a new city aquatic centre/crows ground. It could be integrated with the botanic gardens. The current site should be reserved for an freeway interchange , use it as a park n ride for now with free bus service between park n ride and the city.
Please tell me you're joking?

Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3633 Post by Eurostar » Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:28 pm

Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:49 pm
Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:01 am
In my opinion the former RAH area would be a better spot for a new city aquatic centre/crows ground. It could be integrated with the botanic gardens. The current site should be reserved for an freeway interchange , use it as a park n ride for now with free bus service between park n ride and the city.
Please tell me you're joking?
No I am not joking. Our city ring route like many city ring routes around the world should be grade separated motorway not like the current ring route with its lots of traffic lights.

Patrick_27
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1800
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA
Been thanked: 228 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3634 Post by Patrick_27 » Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:35 pm

Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:28 pm
Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:49 pm
Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:01 am
In my opinion the former RAH area would be a better spot for a new city aquatic centre/crows ground. It could be integrated with the botanic gardens. The current site should be reserved for an freeway interchange , use it as a park n ride for now with free bus service between park n ride and the city.
Please tell me you're joking?
No I am not joking. Our city ring route like many city ring routes around the world should be grade separated motorway not like the current ring route with its lots of traffic lights.
Yes, but building a freeway/interchange on the parklands is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You know, it might come as a surprise to some people on here but the parklands aren't just free parcels of land there to be built on at the government's leisure. Whilst I admit that they need more investment from both the ACC and state government, and there are certain public facilities that could be built on there to encourage their use the notion of building roadways above, through etc is absolutely ridiculous. And if I'm sounding like a NIMBY, so be it.

bits
Legendary Member!
Posts: 601
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:24 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 107 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3635 Post by bits » Sun Dec 15, 2019 6:34 am

Knock over the houses on the other side if you want an interchange or park n ride, they are less noteworthy than the park lands.

Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 54 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3636 Post by Eurostar » Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:39 am

Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:35 pm
Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:28 pm
Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:49 pm


Please tell me you're joking?
No I am not joking. Our city ring route like many city ring routes around the world should be grade separated motorway not like the current ring route with its lots of traffic lights.
Yes, but building a freeway/interchange on the parklands is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You know, it might come as a surprise to some people on here but the parklands aren't just free parcels of land there to be built on at the government's leisure. Whilst I admit that they need more investment from both the ACC and state government, and there are certain public facilities that could be built on there to encourage their use the notion of building roadways above, through etc is absolutely ridiculous. And if I'm sounding like a NIMBY, so be it.
Firstly a grade separated city ring motorway is what this city needs. And when I said a freeway/motorway interchange I don't mean some big monster one, I mean like the interchange we have in Gillman.

NTRabbit
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2018 10:00 pm
Has thanked: 140 times
Been thanked: 57 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3637 Post by NTRabbit » Sun Dec 15, 2019 1:47 pm

SRW wrote:
Wed Dec 11, 2019 1:31 pm
Much more detail in the InDaily article just posted. Relevant tidbits that indicate final design is far from settled:
The plan wasn't supposed to be presented for another 3 months, but Anne Moran, Robert Simms, and the North Adelaide society types were able to force this presentation to happen early, without having received any of the guidelines from the council. That's why most of the renders are early stuff featuring old artwork, ie there's one or two that have Eddie Betts murals in them. I read elsewhere that the developers have been in overtime crunch for weeks to get it done on time after this early vote was forced. Moran was hoping to make the club and developers present a half baked plan that could be shot down early, but instead they presented most of a plan that was voted forward to continue to whatever the next phase is. First battle goes to the AFC, on to the next one.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1239
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 384 times
Been thanked: 93 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3638 Post by SBD » Sun Dec 15, 2019 5:18 pm

Eurostar wrote:
Sun Dec 15, 2019 9:39 am
Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:35 pm
Eurostar wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:28 pm


No I am not joking. Our city ring route like many city ring routes around the world should be grade separated motorway not like the current ring route with its lots of traffic lights.
Yes, but building a freeway/interchange on the parklands is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. You know, it might come as a surprise to some people on here but the parklands aren't just free parcels of land there to be built on at the government's leisure. Whilst I admit that they need more investment from both the ACC and state government, and there are certain public facilities that could be built on there to encourage their use the notion of building roadways above, through etc is absolutely ridiculous. And if I'm sounding like a NIMBY, so be it.
Firstly a grade separated city ring motorway is what this city needs. And when I said a freeway/motorway interchange I don't mean some big monster one, I mean like the interchange we have in Gillman.
This is drifting away from the City Council thread topic, but why put a ring route so close in to the CBD? We think we're going to get the North-South Motorway within a decade, and an east-west link is then going to become imperative to link it to the SE Freeway. That's half of the ring route, it just needs a north-south link on the east side (eg Portrush Road) and east-west on the north (eg Grand Junction Road or the disused Northfield railway alignment). The northeast corner might be 12km from Victoria Square - that's less half the distance of the northeast corner of the Melbourne Ring Road to its city centre.

If we get the Globelink freeway, then we'd technically have a ring route once the Cross Road replacement was commissioned, but Truro and Monarto do seem to be a long way out for a ring route.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head
Has thanked: 951 times
Been thanked: 121 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3639 Post by Ho Really » Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:33 pm

Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 11:35 pm
[...] to encourage their use the notion of building roadways above, through etc is absolutely ridiculous. [...]
No it's not funny! It is absurd. :D

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Ho Really, Laidback-Luke and 5 guests