Railyards... what do you want done to them?

[monotonehell]

I for one don't feel the need to send Mr Rann a letter asking for his reasoning. Why? Because the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital is a ridiculous idea. And the only reason why some people are still defending this ridiculous idea is their own political bias.

That statement seems very biased with no reason given. Why is it a ridiculous idea?

EDIT: I just looked at the website, what a lot of scaremongering. And no where does it say who the site is funded by. Talk about political bias.

[Wayno]

I for one don't feel the need to send Mr Rann a letter asking for his reasoning. Why? Because the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital is a ridiculous idea. And the only reason why some people are still defending this ridiculous idea is their own political bias.

I don't understand your reasoning - please explain. Surely something that appears as a bad idea requires an explanation? and especially if it's a multi-million dollar idea...

[ColonelFlashLight]

I for one don't feel the need to send Mr Rann a letter asking for his reasoning. Why? Because the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital is a ridiculous idea. And the only reason why some people are still defending this ridiculous idea is their own political bias.

That statement seems very biased with no reason given. Why is it a ridiculous idea?

Why is it ridiculous?
1) Spending two billion dollars of taxpayers money to build a 700 bed hospital to replace a 700 bed hospital?
2) Building a new hospital on the only available waterfront land in the entire Adelaide CBD?
3) Building a place of healing on poisonous land?
4) Because experts are suggesting the land is better suited for other purposes.
5) Because staff of RAH don't want it moved.
6) Because The Uni of Adelaide have an interest in the hospital being within a close proximity.

Are these reasons good enough?

[Wayno]

I for one don't feel the need to send Mr Rann a letter asking for his reasoning. Why? Because the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital is a ridiculous idea. And the only reason why some people are still defending this ridiculous idea is their own political bias.

That statement seems very biased with no reason given. Why is it a ridiculous idea?

Why is it ridiculous?
1) Spending two billion dollars of taxpayers money to build a 700 bed hospital to replace a 700 bed hospital?
2) Building a new hospital on the only available waterfront land in the entire Adelaide CBD?
3) Building a place of healing on poisonous land?
4) Because experts are suggesting the land is better suited for other purposes.
5) Because staff of RAH don't want it moved.
6) Because The Uni of Adelaide have an interest in the hospital being within a close proximity.

Are these reasons good enough?

You are certainly showing quite a bit of passion there CFL. I'd love Rann to respond to the 6 points you listed above!

I suppose you have a choice. Wait til the next election and vote against Rann (if he personally runs again), or choose to take action now AND vote accordingly at the next election. Which course of action makes most sense?

[Howie]

I think the heat's been turned up a notch for Rann. I'd like to see a response to those 6 points also.

I've never been satisfactorily convinced that the Marj should be on the railyards site - especially given the time of the marj announcements there was already a good momentum from the south australian public and our very own forum as to what could be built on arguably the best piece of untapped city real estate. If anyone caught that article based around the comments by Former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett on the weekend about creating a vision for 2050 for South Australia - you can get a better understanding as to why we need something of state and global significant built there. And not a hospital (although I do agree with a rebuilding of the current RAH).

Perhaps we should run a front page poll? Someone want to help me out with the wording of the poll question/answers?

[Omicron]

Do you really think that such a document put together by a load of amateurs would be a good idea considering that the Premier is the one with all the information and civil servants' reports behind him? What we want from this letter is an explanation, and possibly a change of plan. We're not going to sway opinion with our ignorance.

BINGO!

People on here dont seem to understand that the reason they were not consulted on the location of the hospital is because they are not experts on where to locate it. I completely disagree with sending a letter etc.

All we ask for is disclosure - the 'holier than thou' attitude that permeates all levels of government is what ultimately fuels the tendency of Australians to distrust politicians. In other words, if it is implied that we are not sufficiently intelligent nor suitably informed to be told of the findings of reports pertinent to the location of a new hospital, then I am not surprised that people are vocally critical of any announcement in this context.

It is not in our nature to simply accept the statements of any Government as absolute and inarguable - it is both a function of common courtesy and of democracy to demand that a governing body justify its position as opposed to seeking refuge behind an upcoming election, or claiming that the wider community is ill-informed. We must never accept the idea that because a Government presents a view, it has been appropriately researched and alternate views have been considered - it is our role as the constituency to ensure that we demand the most open and thorough analysis possible.

[cruel_world00]

Do you really think that such a document put together by a load of amateurs would be a good idea considering that the Premier is the one with all the information and civil servants' reports behind him? What we want from this letter is an explanation, and possibly a change of plan. We're not going to sway opinion with our ignorance.

BINGO!

People on here dont seem to understand that the reason they were not consulted on the location of the hospital is because they are not experts on where to locate it. I completely disagree with sending a letter etc.

All we ask for is disclosure - the 'holier than thou' attitude that permeates all levels of government is what ultimately fuels the tendency of Australians to distrust politicians. In other words, if it is implied that we are not sufficiently intelligent nor suitably informed to be told of the findings of reports pertinent to the location of a new hospital, then I am not surprised that people are vocally critical of any announcement in this context.

It is not in our nature to simply accept the statements of any Government as absolute and inarguable - it is both a function of common courtesy and of democracy to demand that a governing body justify its position as opposed to seeking refuge behind an upcoming election, or claiming that the wider community is ill-informed. We must never accept the idea that because a Government presents a view, it has been appropriately researched and alternate views have been considered - it is our role as the constituency to ensure that we demand the most open and thorough analysis possible.

What he said...

[monotonehell]

Are these reasons good enough?

These reasons are not:
1) Spending two billion dollars of taxpayers money to build a 700 bed hospital to replace a 700 bed hospital?
The existing hospital is old, in need of replacement and inadequate. It needs to be rebuilt, this is an established fact. The proposed plans are more than just a hospital, they are a vastly upgraded and modernised hospital to meet today's standards, they are also extra facilities for research, they are also space for the Adelaide Uni's medical teaching department (which needs to be next to the teaching hospital), and they also include new facilities for the IMVS. - all of these stakeholders are currently bursting at the seams and crying for more space.

3) Building a place of healing on poisonous land?
The land needs to be cleaned up whether it's a hospital or not. Once it's cleaned up it will be fine for hospital or any other use. If it is used as a hospital some of the funds will come from the Federal Government, saving the State some money. If the site is put to any other use the cost will be borne by the State alone.

5) Because staff of RAH don't want it moved.
The staff are right behind a move. They are sick of working in an inadequate rabbit warren. Which staff have you spoken to?

6) Because The Uni of Adelaide have an interest in the hospital being within a close proximity.
See above. The plan includes space for the medical teaching department of Adelaide Uni.


These reasons (which are the same point) is WHY we question the location and WHY we are writing this letter.
2) Building a new hospital on the only available waterfront land in the entire Adelaide CBD?
4) Because experts are suggesting the land is better suited for other purposes.


Sensationalist scaremongering websites are not a way to win friends and influence people. They are a cheap tactic that often backfires.

[Howie]

Are these reasons good enough?

5) Because staff of RAH don't want it moved.
The staff are right behind a move. They are sick of working in an inadequate rabbit warren. Which staff have you spoken to?

Actually, working inside the RAH, very few people I know of support a move to the east. There's even a new petition started by some people in the West Wing. Also the grounds next door to us - i.e. the Botanic Gardens - are absolutely wonderful for staff and patients. They want to see a new hospital, but not at the railyards, and they don't want the name changed either.

[muzzamo]

Actually, working inside the RAH, very few people I know of support a move to the east. There's even a new petition started by some people in the West Wing. Also the grounds next door to us - i.e. the Botanic Gardens - are absolutely wonderful for staff and patients. They want to see a new hospital, but not at the railyards, and they don't want the name changed either.

If this is true its the classic case of the small town attitude that often holds adelaide back. People dont like change.

[Howie]

Think some of you guys are missing the bigger picture here. I'll try to do a sketchup model of what a western entertainment precinct could look like on the banks of the torrens.... when you can visualise what rightfully should be there for future generations of south australians I think you'd change your minds about having a hospital built there.

[Wayno]

V0.3 is attached, and is renamed as master-plan.doc

master-plan-v0.3.doc

It's more of a positive forward looking document now, instead of just a whinge about the railyards. Am i way off the mark? or is this closer to where we want to go?

Here's the text to save you from downloading:

To The Honorable Mike Rann, Premier & The Minister for Economic Development,

We, the membership of SENSATIONALADELAIDE, wish to applaud your intention to build new road, rail and healthcare infrastructure, but request that a comprehensive and visionary master plan for the Greater Adelaide region be created and published within the term of your Government.
Of concern is the recent declaration that the new hospital will be built on the Adelaide Railyard site. This is prime civic land with potential for many alternate purposes. We request you make public the rationale for your decision in the context of a broad reaching master plan. In this way the public's confusion and anger may be quelled.

Composed of around 1200 members (and growing), SENSATIONALADELAIDE is an active, Internet-based, community group engaged in constructive debate regarding development and urban planning in Adelaide.

We believe that a master plan and an open decision making process will deliver benefits that cannot be underestimated. Such a plan would focus largely on infrastructure and use of open space including; public & private transport, expanded role for education, a sporting and entertainment precinct, world class healthcare facilities, parkland invigoration, urban sprawl and density, and water security via storm water reuse & wetlands. The overarching goal being to enrich the South Australian way of life and realise our latent potential.

Our roads and healthcare system requires support and upgrading, and yet they remain just two of our future needs. A Greater Adelaide master plan will give direction and confidence to the general public, act as a catalyst for future private enterprise investment, and actively contribute to our population growth goals.

We thank you for your consideration of our correspondence, and we eagerly await your response.

Yours sincerely,
The membership of SENSATIONALADELAIDE.

i realise my grammar is never the best, and will defer the task of editting to those more worthy Also, feel free to completely rewrite the letter if you think i'm just wasting everyone's time - i promise i won't cry (much)...

I think there is more to this subject than immediately meets the eye. It warrants more attention so i'll soon create a new topic in the "Visions & Suggestions" forum called something like ==> "Submission: Greater Adelaide Master Plan".

I'm not suggesting that S-A members create a detailed master plan (we must leave that to the experts), but instead write a simple submission letter (maybe similar to the one attached above) requesting a master plan be created asap. We are also yet to discuss who should receive such a letter, and this could impact its format and content...

[Will]

I was thinking, and have noticed that there is one issue which I do not think has been raised.

If the railyards are converted into an entertainment precinct, would our relatively small population be able to support and patronise it, or will it drain the life from established lifestyle spots like Hindley Street? Because I think that it is far better to keep the vibe in the square mile than in the 'parklands'.

I think a better solution would be to construct a stadium, entertainment centre, basketball stadium and enlarged convention centre, and possibly some apartments but not any entertainment venues such as cafes, clubs, bars...

[Queen Anne]

That's what I wonder Will, and I think it is an important consideration. I don't think it's ideal to create an entertainment precinct which would be in competition with the CBD, as opposed to enhancing it - we do need to think about our ability to fill these places.

I'd love Adelaide to have an exciting new entertainment/gathering place, but I think it might need to be closer to where the people naturally are. I wonder about the Festival Centre Plaza. It needs a revamp, desperately, and seems to have a fair bit of unused space (admittedly, to my untrained eye). It is in such a great location.
Caroline

[monotonehell]

This thread's become hopelessly derailed. It's not really about whether we should build a new hospital (we really do need to) or whether we should build a stadium or an entertainment precinct or where any of those things should go.

It's about getting Rann to make public the reasons why the hospital is to be located on the railyard site. If the Government has some ironclad reason then they should make it public. Otherwise if their reasons don't add up then we should look at convincing them to build it elsewhere, leaving the railyards free for some better civic purpose.