Sensational-Adelaide.com

agreed, we have more than enough parklands.

Before we get MORE parklands under some belt, let's make better/more efficient use of the parklands we already have.

I have mentioned the propensity of this forum to gobble up free space for some building or other before. And while I support a better use of the parklands, that's not to say they are at present wasted. Parkland has value just for being- for providing a buffer between the CBD and the suburbs, which people- if the ACC would provide decent footpaths- could use to brighten an otherwise dreary walk home. We have a Chinese exchange student at the moment, he is amazed at the birds- Beijing has no birds.
They have a psychological, physical and aura benefit simply by being. They don't need to be used by humans to provide what they do.

That said, I think we could use them much more to attact people to the City- but not for buildings stadiums, more like for laying out English gardens, or a mallee forest with scrub and billabong in Victoria park, or any number of open-space uses.

But not a stadium, and not a hospital.

[quote="cleverick"]
They have a psychological, physical and aura benefit simply by being. They don't need to be used by humans to provide what they do.[quote]

Exactly. But there are a lot of them, and we can afford to build on them if the space taken by the building (e.g. the hospital) is going to be returned in another part of the parklands (the old hospital site).

[quote]
That said, I think we could use them much more to attact people to the City- but not for buildings stadiums, more like for laying out English gardens, or a mallee forest with scrub and billabong in Victoria park, or any number of open-space uses. [quote]

Good ideas. I walk through either the south parklands or the east parklands almost every morning and evening on my way to/from work, and I certainly appreciate them.

Norman wrote:Before we get MORE parklands under some belt, let's make better/more efficient use of the parklands we already have.

yep, good point. People might not be so "anti-parklands" if the existing space was made to be appreciated rather than rammed down our throats...

cleverick wrote:We have a Chinese exchange student at the moment, he is amazed at the birds- Beijing has no birds.

i travel to china quite a bit for work. Beijing city does have birds, hard to see through the smog though...

If the Adelaide Parklands Preservation Association wasn't quite so absolutist in its views, I suspect many more people would be receptive to the idea of appropriate and sensible parklands preservation. The core objectives of the Constitution are essentially sound - written logically, with clear aims and ideologies, but far too often are brought down by almost juvenile, simplistic and dismissive approaches to proposals and plans.

AtD wrote:Adelaide has too much parklands! Have you ever actually been to any of them other than the east and Torrens?

As someone who has always lived in or near the CBD I actually can't think of any part of the parklands I haven't used or visited at some point in my life.

urban wrote: As someone who has always lived in or near the CBD I actually can't think of any part of the parklands I haven't used or visited at some point in my life.

I don't live anywhere near the CBD but I, too, have used and visited every part of the parklands.

for anybody who has ever played club or school sport (footy, soccer, cricket, golf, etc.) i'm sure they have visited most, if not all, of the parklands.

Including the horse paddocks in the north east? Then there's the unused fields of the south west (aka the Royal Showgrounds overflow car park)

AtD wrote:Including the horse paddocks in the north east? Then there's the unused fields of the south west (aka the Royal Showgrounds overflow car park)

So what you're saying is the only unused areas are... no wait both the examples you gave are used...

Anthropocentrism! All parklands are used by birds and opossums, trees and shrubs. We should value that these things exist, not just because it's lovely to have birds fly past your head as you walk to school in the morning, or watch the parrots pick at the grass on your way home from uni, but simply because they exist. This mantra that all space must be used by humans for something to enrich us further seems... rather unfair to everything else, really.

cleverick wrote:Anthropocentrism! All parklands are used by birds and opossums, trees and shrubs. We should value that these things exist, not just because it's lovely to have birds fly past your head as you walk to school in the morning, or watch the parrots pick at the grass on your way home from uni, but simply because they exist. This mantra that all space must be used by humans for something to enrich us further seems... rather unfair to everything else, really.

Good point. A small portion of our urban environment should be preserved for some animals otherwise the city becomes quite sick.

And by "small portion" you mean the entire area between the terraces and the end of ACC jurisdiction, no?