Search found 1233 matches
- Tue Aug 31, 2021 10:14 am
- Forum: Infrastructure/Transport Development
- Topic: Adelaide Oval Expansion
- Replies: 43
- Views: 18918
Re: Adelaide Oval Expansion
Someone suggested on radio [to keep everyone happy], they just need to build a hill and relocate the scoreboard on TOP of any new Northern grandstand.
- Sat Aug 21, 2021 1:43 pm
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [VIS] New Womens and Childrens Hospital
- Replies: 440
- Views: 124781
[VIS] Re: New Womens and Childrens Hospital
Maybe they could re-plant the olive grove on the roof top or around the new W&C or even move it to the new Urrbrae Gatehouse location. Then they could heritage list it and release a limited edition extra olive oil from it every year to pay for it..
- Wed Aug 11, 2021 10:07 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [U/C] 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
- Replies: 1233
- Views: 389860
[U/C] Re: 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
I think the last approval was 57m high [the Sheraton Hotel etc] and I don't remember any court action threatened/taken over that. I know a sales display was to be built/opened soon, so I wonder if this will stop the developer attempting off the plan sales until this is resolved [even though they do ...
- Thu Jul 29, 2021 11:30 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [SWP] Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)
- Replies: 1044
- Views: 336161
[SWP] Re: Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)
Maybe Bob if you can detail your alternative suggestion [ie a contemporary art gallery or whatever you think] so the forum can assess the merits of your proposal? So your thoughts on build cost, to buy "content", expected visitation numbers, your projected profit/return on investment etc. ...
- Tue Jul 27, 2021 11:18 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [SWP] Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)
- Replies: 1044
- Views: 336161
[SWP] Re: Lot 14 (Old RAH Site)
While I understand/agree with the points mentioned, MONA has been funded/owned by an extremely wealthy individual [some $300m+ spent years ago, so maybe equivalent to $1b today]. Maybe the discussion should be if our Govt should go out and buy/compete for [with taxpayers money] quality Art where jus...
- Mon Jul 26, 2021 4:40 pm
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [COM] Festival Plaza Incl. 115m Tower | $800 million
- Replies: 1996
- Views: 584745
[COM] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million
I am thinking medicine as it’s near the big new bio-medical hub. This new building and great CBD location would certainly help also to attract the big paying international students (or their parents). Is medicine also the most “in demand” degree? As I always remember it’s ATAR being ridiculously hig...
- Sat Jul 24, 2021 12:56 am
- Forum: The Pub
- Topic: SA Lockdown 3.0
- Replies: 11
- Views: 9017
Re: SA Lockdown 3.0
I just feel sorry for the people waiting up to 8 or 9 hours to get tested...
- Mon Jul 12, 2021 3:50 pm
- Forum: Infrastructure/Transport Development
- Topic: [VIS] Passenger Trains to Mount Barker
- Replies: 210
- Views: 46176
[VIS] Re: Passenger Trains to Mount Barker
Any ideas on getting a line re-established and/or a solution for this situation - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Lof ... ay_station.
Would then a big park and ride at say Stirling, Bridgewater etc be a better solution?
Would then a big park and ride at say Stirling, Bridgewater etc be a better solution?
- Fri Jul 09, 2021 10:13 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [COM] Victoria Park Redevelopment
- Replies: 309
- Views: 68138
[COM] Re: Victoria Park Redevelopment
I have just seen major earthworks underway here for wetlands etc. Its been years and I had completely forgot about this site [the last comment to this thread was years ago]. There was a master plan designed and proposed, so does anyone know how far the ACC is going with this?
- Fri Jul 02, 2021 1:11 am
- Forum: The Pub
- Topic: CBD Policing & Behaviour
- Replies: 37
- Views: 14935
Re: CBD Policing & Behaviour
Can you just explain what exactly is the approach you suggest so then we can assess the merits of it?
- Thu Jul 01, 2021 2:43 pm
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: New City Arena
- Replies: 301
- Views: 53808
Re: New City Arena
I think it's more about how the Govt. prioritises the spending of our money [as taxpayers]. Health could be considered a life or death decision [ie a necessity with a more important and pressing need] over say a a new sports stadium which may be considered a luxury and rank lower in relative importa...
- Tue Jun 29, 2021 8:14 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: New City Arena
- Replies: 301
- Views: 53808
Re: New City Arena
I am just a bit bemused that we have an emergency services levy (which I am not sure if any other state has) and the most expensive (and biggest?) new hospital in Australia (if not the world) and with a population of only 1.5m and yet we are in this position.
- Sun Jun 27, 2021 12:07 pm
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
- Replies: 3833
- Views: 919065
Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council
Here you go.... Adelaide City Council to sell assets including beach volleyball court and car park to raise money for ‘future fund’ A popular inner-city volleyball court and car park will be sold by the financially challenged Adelaide City Council. Colin James Follow@ColinJamesTiser January 13, 2021...
- Fri Jun 25, 2021 12:08 am
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [U/C] 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
- Replies: 1233
- Views: 389860
[U/C] Re: 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
The difference is the council was the vendor/seller here and had the power to veto/not sell the site unless the development complied with their own guidelines and thus render the DAC powerless. With the previous 15 storey DAC/Makris approval, the council had no say. Further were developers misled by...
- Thu Jun 24, 2021 8:14 pm
- Forum: CBD Development
- Topic: [U/C] 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
- Replies: 1233
- Views: 389860
[U/C] Re: 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
My point was to highlight the hypocrisy of the ACC.
And Nathan, it was the DAC that approved the former 15 storey plan, not council.
And Nathan, it was the DAC that approved the former 15 storey plan, not council.