Sensational-Adelaide.com

With all that is happening in Adelaide these days, the issue of development impacts on the parklands is regularly coming into focus (for example, will upgrading Adelaide Oval to AFL standards have a negative impact on the parklands?).

Everyone in Adelaide has an interest in the parklands at some level so I thought it timely to open up a discussion about the future of the parklands.

Personally, I don't subscribe the view that all development in the parklands is evil. I think urban parks only have value to the extent they are occupied and used by people. If nobody wants to go to the parklands, then they are not serving the purpose for which they were intended. For sure we have duty to protect them for future generations, but that doesn't mean we can't selectively and carefully work to enhance them to maximise the use and enjoyment of current generations.

Thus I think careful and selective developments in the vicinity of the parklands can actually have a net positive impact on the parklands. If events and facilities like Adelaide Oval draw more people to the parklands, then more people may come to value the amenity the parklands provide and be supportive of efforts to enhance and protect them in future.

What are everybody's feelings about the parklands and how future developments with potential impacts on the parklands should be approached?

I think the parklands are an underutilised resource.

I would not like to get rid of the parklands however I do not think that sensible development in them is bad. Likewise I do not think that the parklands should be quarantined from events such as the Garden of Unearthly delights or the Schutzenfest.

rogue wrote: How about making a native enclosure in the northern parklands with kangaroos, emus etc?

From the thread What's your vision for the City? I thought this would do great for the parklands

Sorry for the old thread revival but I couldn't find a newer general parklands discussion thread. Let me know if I've missed it...

Anyways, there's a survey being undertaken with regards to heritage protection of the parklands and city squares which could be a good or bad move depending on your viewpoint. Worth completing if you haven't already:

https://yoursay.sa.gov.au/decisions/ade ... ment/about

Closes on Friday.

There's nothing heritage worthy about them.
They are public places and there should be the freedom for public places to evolve through time and as needs dictate.
Heritage listing them, correct me if I'm wrong, will prevent any developments from happening. That would include upgrading the squares, or altering them for better flow of traffic, pedestrian, cyclist traffic etc.

This parklands preservation militant group needs to be deported to Heard & Mcdonald Islands. Check google earth if you want to know where they are. And even then it may not be far enough to get these nutcases out of our lives for good.

rev wrote:There's nothing heritage worthy about them.
They are public places and there should be the freedom for public places to evolve through time and as needs dictate.
Heritage listing them, correct me if I'm wrong, will prevent any developments from happening. That would include upgrading the squares, or altering them for better flow of traffic, pedestrian, cyclist traffic etc.

This parklands preservation militant group needs to be deported to Heard & Mcdonald Islands. Check google earth if you want to know where they are. And even then it may not be far enough to get these nutcases out of our lives for good.

I hope you put in a submission Rev!

rev wrote:They are public places and there should be the freedom for public places to evolve through time and as needs dictate.
Heritage listing them, correct me if I'm wrong, will prevent any developments from happening. That would include upgrading the squares, or altering them for better flow of traffic, pedestrian, cyclist traffic etc.

Pretty much the gist of my submission.

The great urban parks in cities around the world have a range of activities and public institutions (museums, art galleries, zoos etc) for the people to enjoy.

These great parks are also very well-kept, unlike the majority of our parklands.

I've just come back from a family holiday in Tokyo. We went to Ueno Park, a huge park which has 6-7 museums and art galleries located in it. The park itself was stunningly beautiful, reminiscent of the Adelaide Botanic Gardens and Botanic Park to me.

Nothing wrong with public buildings in our parklands, they add to the experience.

Exactly. There just needs to be rules around the types of buildings. They sure be for civic use (like the mentioned museums, galleries, zoos, etc) or support parklands use (community facilities, club rooms, kiosks, pavilions).

Totally agree with the use of the parklands. Through the winter they become a weed-riddled wasteland, through the summer, a dust bowl. We need to either develop them OR make them accessible to the public with civic facilities. Great points guys.