[VIS] New Womens and Childrens Hospital

[SRW]

Early works package of $300 Million approved with construction of the massive eight (8!) storey, 1300 space car park and 'energy' building due to start in new year. The structure appears to be sheathed with perforated steel screens in contrast with previous designs showing plantings. But, for laughs, 'in line with sustainable practices', it will have solar panels and cycle spaces...
https://glamadelaide.com.au/work-begins ... -hospital/

[ChillyPhilly]

Early works package of $300 Million approved with construction of the massive eight (8!) storey, 1300 space car park and 'energy' building due to start in new year. The structure appears to be sheathed with perforated steel screens in contrast with previous designs showing plantings. But, for laughs, 'in line with sustainable practices', it will have solar panels and cycle spaces...
https://glamadelaide.com.au/work-begins ... -hospital/
Car-Park-Entrance-via-Gaol-Road_W1600_H1600_Mfit_fallback.jpg
Car-Park-and-CEP_W1600_H1600_Mfit_fallback.jpg

That is absolutely hideous. What an abomination from the 1960s.

[Ben]

Goodbye parklands, hello concrete and cars.

[rev]

Looks like a major improvement to me, particularly for an aspect of a key piece of public health infrastructure. It's an otherwise unremarkable slither of land where horses used to shit.

Should the car park go underground? Perhaps that's the ideal solution. But what's the cost going to be? And how much whining will occur?

Does having this car park above ground at that location, make it easier to develop the area to the east of it, perhaps an expansion of the RAH, making such a potential future development more accessible with a car park right next door that could be linked by a walkway over the train lines?

[Nort]

Looks like a major improvement to me, particularly for an aspect of a key piece of public health infrastructure. It's an otherwise unremarkable slither of land where horses used to shit.

image_2023-12-04_202112552.png

Should the car park go underground? Perhaps that's the ideal solution. But what's the cost going to be? And how much whining will occur?

Does having this car park above ground at that location, make it easier to develop the area to the east of it, perhaps an expansion of the RAH, making such a potential future development more accessible with a car park right next door that could be linked by a walkway over the train lines?

It's ok for people to say no for parklands being turned from a space with plants and trees and animals to a concrete block for cars to drip oil onto.

[Spurdo]

noooo, how dare sick people drive to hospital, they should have to walk, ride a bike or catch the bus

[Ben]

noooo, how dare sick people drive to hospital, they should have to walk, ride a bike or catch the bus

If the hospital wasn’t being built in the parklands this carpark wouldn’t be eithier. The problem is not the buildings. It’s the location. Once it’s built on it’s gone for good and each and every year the encroachment is getting bigger and bigger.

[rev]

noooo, how dare sick people drive to hospital, they should have to walk, ride a bike or catch the bus

If the hospital wasn’t being built in the parklands this carpark wouldn’t be eithier. The problem is not the buildings. It’s the location. Once it’s built on it’s gone for good and each and every year the encroachment is getting bigger and bigger.

Where would do you suggest the nWCH be built? On the New Market site bounded by the narrow New Market & Rose streets which can barely handle the traffic that shuffles through there at the moment? Not to mention it's a confined space thus limiting future expansion. What would the situation be in another 30-50 years? Find a new site again?

What parklands? A paddock used by horses? Some grass used by police dogs? The majority of the new hospital will be on top of what's constitutes the built form barracks.

[Patrick_27]

Surely the car park could have been either buried or partially buried on its current porposed site or under the hospital itself? An eight storey block takes away from any design merits they are hoping to achieve with the facade of this new hospital…

[ChillyPhilly]

noooo, how dare sick people drive to hospital, they should have to walk, ride a bike or catch the bus

If the hospital wasn’t being built in the parklands this carpark wouldn’t be eithier. The problem is not the buildings. It’s the location. Once it’s built on it’s gone for good and each and every year the encroachment is getting bigger and bigger.

Where would do you suggest the nWCH be built? On the New Market site bounded by the narrow New Market & Rose streets which can barely handle the traffic that shuffles through there at the moment? Not to mention it's a confined space thus limiting future expansion. What would the situation be in another 30-50 years? Find a new site again?

What parklands? A paddock used by horses? Some grass used by police dogs? The majority of the new hospital will be on top of what's constitutes the built form barracks.

This is absolutely a better location with access not from Newmarket and Rose Streets but from North Terrace, West Terrace and Hindley Street - or two more than the current plan. It would also definitely be more accessible and would integrate better with educational opportunities and be better connected to the RAH.

Very valid point about future scenarios. But what would Adelaide look like in 30-50 years? Will we have local and regional hospitals able to meet some non-specialised needs the WCH currently caters for?

The proposal is not without its merits and it is fantastic to have a government interested in healthcare, but this site just ain't it.

[WGG]

Surely the car park could have been either buried or partially buried on its current porposed site or under the hospital itself? An eight storey block takes away from any design merits they are hoping to achieve with the facade of this new hospital…

It is.

[SRW]

Surely the car park could have been either buried or partially buried on its current porposed site or under the hospital itself? An eight storey block takes away from any design merits they are hoping to achieve with the facade of this new hospital…

I think I mentioned earlier, but the nRAH contains over 2,000 car parks within its building envelope.

So yes, they surely could have avoided an 8 storey block and another loss of open space.

In addition to whatever aims there are for the hospital façade (or more importantly, patient outlook), the design of the parking/services complex seriously compromises the supposed improvements to parklands accessibility.

[rev]

If the hospital wasn’t being built in the parklands this carpark wouldn’t be eithier. The problem is not the buildings. It’s the location. Once it’s built on it’s gone for good and each and every year the encroachment is getting bigger and bigger.

Where would do you suggest the nWCH be built? On the New Market site bounded by the narrow New Market & Rose streets which can barely handle the traffic that shuffles through there at the moment? Not to mention it's a confined space thus limiting future expansion. What would the situation be in another 30-50 years? Find a new site again?

What parklands? A paddock used by horses? Some grass used by police dogs? The majority of the new hospital will be on top of what's constitutes the built form barracks.

This is absolutely a better location with access not from Newmarket and Rose Streets but from North Terrace, West Terrace and Hindley Street - or two more than the current plan. It would also definitely be more accessible and would integrate better with educational opportunities and be better connected to the RAH.

Very valid point about future scenarios. But what would Adelaide look like in 30-50 years? Will we have local and regional hospitals able to meet some non-specialised needs the WCH currently caters for?

The proposal is not without its merits and it is fantastic to have a government interested in healthcare, but this site just ain't it.

Yeh nah, no major benefit on that site as opposed to the proposed barracks site being used. Just a major extra cost burden to tax payers for property acquisitions, and zero room for future expansion without requiring tens of millions more in property acquisitions. Why repeat the same situation that we have now with the existing WCH which is limited in expansion options? This is a generational opportunity to do it better. Granted it's not the best outcome, but it's far better then using the New Market and surrounds site that people here wish for.

The only potential benefit would be a costly fully enclosed and air conditioned pedestrian walkway across North Tce, that would be at least 100m in length.
If that level of integration with the RAH was a requirement for the government, the best spot is on Port Road directly west of the RAH over the train tracks up to Gaol Road. The ED for the nWCH could be built over George St there, giving it access to the helipads already in place, and direct access to the operating theaters & ICU on level 4 of the RAH if a patient from the WCH needed to be moved. An emergency department and entry/access to it could be built right there on the left/west side of George St, where the car park access ramp is and the large black tanks which could be reworked and moved elsewhere.

[rev]

Surely the car park could have been either buried or partially buried on its current porposed site or under the hospital itself? An eight storey block takes away from any design merits they are hoping to achieve with the facade of this new hospital…

I think I mentioned earlier, but the nRAH contains over 2,000 car parks within its building envelope.

So yes, they surely could have avoided an 8 storey block and another loss of open space.

In addition to whatever aims there are for the hospital façade (or more importantly, patient outlook), the design of the parking/services complex seriously compromises the supposed improvements to parklands accessibility.

"Parklands accessibility"

So you can freely access that spot where the car park is proposed to be built?
It's fenced off, it's not open public space.

[Nort]

Surely the car park could have been either buried or partially buried on its current porposed site or under the hospital itself? An eight storey block takes away from any design merits they are hoping to achieve with the facade of this new hospital…

I think I mentioned earlier, but the nRAH contains over 2,000 car parks within its building envelope.

So yes, they surely could have avoided an 8 storey block and another loss of open space.

In addition to whatever aims there are for the hospital façade (or more importantly, patient outlook), the design of the parking/services complex seriously compromises the supposed improvements to parklands accessibility.

"Parklands accessibility"

So you can freely access that spot where the car park is proposed to be built?
It's fenced off, it's not open public space.

Not what was said:
seriously compromises the supposed improvements to parklands accessibility