New City Arena

[Algernon]

Start an ambulance thread and tell someone who gives a shit. This is a construction forum.

[rev]

Start an ambulance thread and tell someone who gives a shit. This is a construction forum.

Those of us who actually live in this state have an interest in how OUR government spends OUR money.
So if you don't like the discussion, take a hike, nobody gives a shit.

[Patrick_27]

Start an ambulance thread and tell someone who gives a shit. This is a construction forum.

Those of us who actually live in this state have an interest in how OUR government spends OUR money.
So if you don't like the discussion, take a hike, nobody gives a shit.

^ This. I hate the whole: "(You don't share my opinion and I don't have an adequate counter-argument so my response is) this is a construction forum!"

If the thought is that S.A. is purely a construction forum and doesn't cover the shades of colour in amongst all the development happening in this state (i.e. politics, social causes etc) then perhaps I've been misled for the past 8 years I've been contributing and the further 7 years that I was spectating.

I'm not qualified on health, so I can't comment on the state (and national) health crisis beyond what the experts are saying. But I am qualified in events and live entertainment and I can tell you that this arena is a massive white elephant, it reeks of dodgy dealings under the table between the government and AVM. If anyone actually knew the ins/outs of AVM and their operations, they would realise this $700m arena handout is almost the equivalent of the federal government approving more coal mines in the face of a climate crisis simply because.nThe government want to liven the CBD up and invest in the arts? $700m could do a lot more elsewhere in achieving that, or as rev has pointed out, HALF of that could achieve this and half could go towards solving the shortcomings of our emergency health system.

[HiTouch]

Start an ambulance thread and tell someone who gives a shit. This is a construction forum.

Those of us who actually live in this state have an interest in how OUR government spends OUR money.
So if you don't like the discussion, take a hike, nobody gives a shit.

^ This. I hate the whole: "(You don't share my opinion and I don't have an adequate counter-argument so my response is) this is a construction forum!"

If the thought is that S.A. is purely a construction forum and doesn't cover the shades of colour in amongst all the development happening in this state (i.e. politics, social causes etc) then perhaps I've been misled for the past 8 years I've been contributing and the further 7 years that I was spectating.

I'm not qualified on health, so I can't comment on the state (and national) health crisis beyond what the experts are saying. But I am qualified in events and live entertainment and I can tell you that this arena is a massive white elephant, it reeks of dodgy dealings under the table between the government and AVM. If anyone actually knew the ins/outs of AVM and their operations, they would realise this $700m arena handout is almost the equivalent of the federal government approving more coal mines in the face of a climate crisis simply because.nThe government want to liven the CBD up and invest in the arts? $700m could do a lot more elsewhere in achieving that, or as rev has pointed out, HALF of that could achieve this and half could go towards solving the shortcomings of our emergency health system.

I've never seen so much waffle in my life. As I have said before, the health system is a highly politicised space. The health lobby groups were quiet when they built the Health Precinct. That was the perfect chance to bring in these so-called "changes". You're only complaining about it now because you are being overly emotional on what is a complete non issue.

I agree with Algernon, Lets focus on progress and construction rather than these complaints that are holding our state back.

[NTRabbit]

I've never seen so much waffle in my life. As I have said before, the health system is a highly politicised space. The health lobby groups were quiet when they built the Health Precinct. That was the perfect chance to bring in these so-called "changes". You're only complaining about it now because you are being overly emotional on what is a complete non issue.

I agree with Algernon, Lets focus on progress and construction rather than these complaints that are holding our state back.

This stadium proposal isn't progress, it's an incredibly expensive and ineffecient election stunt that is ignoring what the relevant sports bodies actually want.

[Nort]

The question of what would be a better investment for the state is entirely valid when proponents of this arena are arguing it will provide financial benefit to the state.

If the numbers check out then questioning them is good, it reinforces the case.

If the numbers don't check out then questioning them is also good.

It is entirely valid for the government to invest in projects where they will provide a benefit in other ways (the Aboriginal gallery proposal is one such example), but they should be presented as such and shiny stadium as political legacy doesn't meet the bar.

[SRW]

I'm less against this proposal because of spending priorities or the validity of the business case than because I doubt it is the most valuable (environmentally, socially, economically) use of location. If built, we lose both what's currently there and the opportunity for other things. In my opinion, as a frequent user of the trails along the river, the green space has been undervalued and should be protected. Any built form, of any use, should be positioned further back from the river and over the rail lines.

[Nort]

I'm less against this proposal because of spending priorities or the validity of the business case than because I doubt it is the most valuable (environmentally, socially, economically) use of location. If built, we lose both what's currently there and the opportunity for other things. In my opinion, as a frequent user of the trails along the river, the green space has been undervalued and should be protected. Any built form, of any use, should be positioned further back from the river and over the rail lines.

This is a good point that is part of why it feels like a trophy development. The riverside location means the exterior of a stadium looks great, but for people and events using it that location is entirely wasted due to the fact the entire thing is closed in.

[Listy]

I'm less against this proposal because of spending priorities or the validity of the business case than because I doubt it is the most valuable (environmentally, socially, economically) use of location. If built, we lose both what's currently there and the opportunity for other things. In my opinion, as a frequent user of the trails along the river, the green space has been undervalued and should be protected. Any built form, of any use, should be positioned further back from the river and over the rail lines.

I think it would be a great spot for a community sport facility - basketball & tennis courts, etc. There are several very popular rowing clubs there already, and all the existing courts & ovals in the parklands are very heavily utilised especially on weekends. A nice cafe could do very well in the area with a steady stream of club & school sports teams etc utilising the area. Add an really good adventure / nature playground with a licensed bar attached to it and watch the parents and their wallets come streaming in to the area 7 days a week.

[Nathan]

I think it would be a great spot for a community sport facility - basketball & tennis courts, etc. There are several very popular rowing clubs there already, and all the existing courts & ovals in the parklands are very heavily utilised especially on weekends. A nice cafe could do very well in the area with a steady stream of club & school sports teams etc utilising the area. Add an really good adventure / nature playground with a licensed bar attached to it and watch the parents and their wallets come streaming in to the area 7 days a week.

Exactly. It should have been the location for the skate park, city beach (beach volleyball), and facilities for runners as well. Focus on active participation sports, as a connection between spectator sports and the health precinct.

[SRW]

I think it would be a great spot for a community sport facility - basketball & tennis courts, etc. There are several very popular rowing clubs there already, and all the existing courts & ovals in the parklands are very heavily utilised especially on weekends. A nice cafe could do very well in the area with a steady stream of club & school sports teams etc utilising the area. Add an really good adventure / nature playground with a licensed bar attached to it and watch the parents and their wallets come streaming in to the area 7 days a week.

Exactly. It should have been the location for the skate park, city beach (beach volleyball), and facilities for runners as well. Focus on active participation sports, as a connection between spectator sports and the health precinct.

I agree. The riverbank west of Morphett Street bridge should be naturalised. There's an abundance of underutilised formal riverbank to the east. People like to point out that the parklands are huge, but the accessible green areas are more distant for most city users and residents than in many suburbs. This is a consequence of the build out of North Terrace and the surrender of the squares to vehicles.

[Nort]

I agree. The riverbank west of Morphett Street bridge should be naturalised. There's an abundance of underutilised formal riverbank to the east. People like to point out that the parklands are huge, but the accessible green areas are more distant for most city users and residents than in many suburbs. This is a consequence of the build out of North Terrace and the surrender of the squares to vehicles.

Another good point worth raising is that the argument often presented along the lines of "Oh, this part of the parklands is underused and is just bare ground/car parking already" actually gives credence to the case made by Parklands groups against any development whatsoever. With sites like this, the old RAH site, adjacent to Old Adelaide Gaol, and the Victoria F1 track we see parklands that were used for other purposes then treated as sites that from then on must always retain built development, and those developments be expanded.

Part of using parts of the parklands for development should include some areas that are no longer being used (like carparks and bare areas formerly due to the rail yards) being returned to parkland. Otherwise it is entirely a consistent chipping away at them.

[A-Town]

It's disappointing to see so many people fighting to retain this derelict piece of land, most of whom would never step foot on the ground to the west of the Morphett St bridge. Unfortunately there's a fairly good reason why SA is seen as a backwater state by our neighbours. If some of these North Adelaide-esque anti-development NIMBYs had their way, we would never invest in new facilities and infrastructure to modernise the city.

[Nathan]

It's disappointing to see so many people fighting to retain this derelict piece of land, most of whom would never step foot on the ground to the west of the Morphett St bridge. Unfortunately there's a fairly good reason why SA is seen as a backwater state by our neighbours. If some of these North Adelaide-esque anti-development NIMBYs had their way, we would never invest in new facilities and infrastructure to modernise the city.

Don't be daft, no one is fighting to maintain the land as it is. Don't get suckered in to parroting an Advertiser opinion piece.

[NTRabbit]

The state government wants to build the stadium, and then have the riverbank lined with new hotel developments - it's no coincidence the Hotel Association has come out hard in favour of the stadium, and the government is currently trying to rush through legislative changes to development in the area. It's all about the election, the dirty developer money they need to fund it, and the developers making stacks of cash for themselves by getting valuable public land for nothing.