Sensational-Adelaide.com

Shuz wrote: Rev; sorry, but that's the stupidest idea I've ever heard of all the "ideas" that people have presented to the forum.

Lol, pot kettle black

adam73837 wrote: I totally agree with you Howie. But I'm afraid that until Mike Rann begins to listen to people and until Martin Hamilton-Smith stops being so reckless, the younger people of this state haven't really got anywhere to go; except out. That's where I'll be going (unless either MR or MHS change their ways), anyone care to join me?

So you would rather take the easy way out...

Rev, i understand your arguement about copying other cities. Unfortunately, here in Adelaide our attempts are very minimal. If we left it up to our narrow minded people in power here, we would not have much of an exciting future. We do need to look abroad and see what works, but also how we can do better, with a little Adelaide twist to it. Melbourne is so often used, as it's the most recognised analogy we can relate too. Most of us have been to Melbourne and we are well aware of how far that city has come in the past couple decades.

I am all for an inner city stadium, i beleive the benefits will be enormous to bringing vitality to the CBD. Is the railyards the best location? Well, near enough. Ultimately, having the railyards as a part of an entertainment precinct with the stadium close by. If that means as part of an incorporated casino/hotel development, then by all means. The parklands directly opposite HQ would be a great location for a new stadium, with pedestrian foot bridges over port rd linking the precinct to the stadium area.

I have a feeling that the RAH casino plan is not a serious proposal. Because consider the Marj will not open until 2018, and thus taking into account the demolition of the current RAH, remediation of the site and the subsequent constrution of the casino that will probaably mean that any casino would not open until 2021. I strongly doubt that skycity will be that patient. Furthermore I consider the idea of a casino next to a university innapropriate.

So if this is a serious ALP proposal I would call for them to scrap it as fast as they scrapped John Hill's silly Federation Square plan for the RAH site. However if there is anything positive to come from this is that Labor now appears more favourable to actually build something on the old RAH site as oppossed to the brain-numbing idea of returning the site to parklands.

And I too have to add my displeasure at the connotations being made by the Advertiser. They have an obsession with trying to make Adelaide a carbon copy of Melbourne. We should not seek to build a new riverfront casino or a new stadium because Melbourne has one. We should build these things becasue our city needs them. Copying Melbourne is not going to make us a great city, because people are always going to prefer the original.

Pistol wrote:

adam73837 wrote: I totally agree with you Howie. But I'm afraid that until Mike Rann begins to listen to people and until Martin Hamilton-Smith stops being so reckless, the younger people of this state haven't really got anywhere to go; except out. That's where I'll be going (unless either MR or MHS change their ways), anyone care to join me?

So you would rather take the easy way out...

Why yes of course! I did it at school by dropping down from IB to SACE because I believe that the amount of stress that I was putting myself through could not be sustained for two years. I can get to University through SACE, so why semi-kill myself mentally (and take a trip from my place down Greenhill Road) when I can get through Year 11 and 12 the way which most people do it anyway?

Anyway, I agree with the concept which you have rev of turning that vast area of light industry and warehousing into a Docklands-style ( I'm sorry, I don't mean to have something like the Docklands, I just mean to basically revitalise that entire area into a new suburb/extension of the CBD in its own right). This, combined with the Bowden Green Village and a Riverfront precinct like MHS proposed, would tie in perfectly.
NOTE: My opinion about not wishing to stay until MR or MHS shape up has not changed. Shuz, know any good travel agents; I want to get as far away from here as I can!

A high school student saying they are 'stressed'

I sent this Twitter through to Mike Rann and 'he' responded... not sure if he does all of these personally...

From me:
'RAH on rail yards appears to be a waste of prime real estate. Transparency on why this location has been chosen over others would be nice'

Mike Rann's reply:
Why shouldn't a world class central hospital be built on a great site in the centre of our city?

My response:
I agree.BUT,is there any reason other locations aren't being used or why we aren't told why ONLY this location is being used?Fair question?


I'll keep you guys posted


(mods, if this is off topic relocate it to the Twitter thread in the pub section, I only put it here because I felt it was relevant to the Riverside debate, cheers)

cruel_world00 wrote:From me:
'RAH on rail yards appears to be a waste of prime real estate. Transparency on why this location has been chosen over others would be nice'

Mike Rann's reply:
Why shouldn't a world class central hospital be built on a great site in the centre of our city?

Yay for classic deflection. 'Answer' the question with a question.

How about answering the question Rann's mouthpiece?

Why shouldn't a world class central hospital be built on a great site in the centre of our city?

There's a very simple answer to that one. Hospitals don't give a city a sense of life, energy or creativity, hospitals don't bring in tourists, hospitals remind people of sickness and death. Do you really want that to be the centrepiece of your prime waterfront, city location?

Come to Adelaide for the best views from your hospital bed!

That'll keep the youngsters here...

His response,

'PremierMikeRann: There was a massive effort looking at a range of locations: size of site, closeness to unis, transport links (tram, train,road), parking etc'




Thanks for the reply, but why isn't the public aware of this 'massive effort'? We just get told what's happening but no real reason why this location is THE location or why others have been ruled out? I mean, of course, not everything can go through the public scrutiny if we want stuff to happen, but this is a MASSIVE investment, right?

Keep pressing Mr World00. I'd really like these decisions to be made public. I understand why they need be secret when negotiations are under way. But after the decision's been made; while they keep them secret, the more cynical and paranoid of us start to wonder what back room deals are going on.

This one was a little shittily worded but I needed to get everything in so the text talk was a must:


'Thnks 4 the replies but why isn't the public aware of this 'massive effort',why this is the best, why others arent suitable?we deserve 2know'

I don't buy the whole "public transport" argument. If that's the case, why don't they extend the tram line up the other end of North Tce, continue it to the Parade even, and redevelop the RAH(which would apparently cost less then building a brand new hospital), and save the railyards site for an entertainment precinct or stadium development at a later date?
Surely with the way the economy is at the moment, they would want to save all the money they could?

There are plenty of buses that stop in front and around the RAH. It's not like people will walk from the train station to the west tce/north tce/port road intersection, so they will catch the tram up the road if they come in via train.

Arghh.

rev wrote:why don't they .......... redevelop the RAH(which would apparently cost less then building a brand new hospital), and save the railyards site for an entertainment precinct or stadium development at a later date?

For Heaven's sake! I can't believe you can still ask this question after all the discussion on the topic over the last 18 months or so. Rebuilding the RAH is absolutely no substitute for a brand new hospital.

I'm not arguing they should do that, I'm just saying if they see public transportation as a pro for a new hospital on the railyards site, well it's equally a pro for the existing RAH site.
I really could care less if they build a new hospital or redevelop the existing RAH - but like most people here I think the river side railyard site should not be wasted on a hospital.