[VIS] New Womens and Childrens Hospital

[abc]

I'm sorry but this is just a disgrace, it made me register an account just to voice my displeasure
That location is the only place I can access the linear park coming from the west parklands without having to go all the way along Port Road and cross Bonython Park... I like to ride my bike past the police barracks and the horses on the way. As someone pointed out that is one of the most utilised public parks in the ACC area. Its one of the most pleasantly serene parts of the city.

Anyone who thinks this site location is a good idea can only be an apologist or carrying water for the Labor Party. I'm not fan of the Liberals either, but with Labor its like a cult...no offense.

[rev]

So let's keep a list of how many straws will be clutched at over this...

- The cycling paths
- The parklands
- The "heritage" buildings
- The events in Bonython Park

Perhaps the next straw to be clutched will be possible aircraft noise as it's closer to the flight path then nRAH?


- events such as music festivals are held in the surrounding grounds of the Old Gaol, a stones throw from the nRAH.
- a major multi-stage music festival was regularly held at Botanic Park practically next to the oRAH for many years. You may know it as WOMAD.
- major motorsport events, the Formula 1 and V8 Supercars along with concerts on those weekends, a short distance away from oRAH.
- major music festivals were held in Rymil Park and Rundle Park, as were other major events like the Fringe, basically across the road from the oRAH.

If the Old RAH was able to, and the New RAH is able to co-exist with all those major events happening around them, then there shouldn't be a problem with the New WCH co-existing in the new location with some of those events throughout the year.


Absolutely laughable that in typical South Australian fashion, people throw a tantrum over some buildings that they've previously given zero fucks about.
Even more Adelaide that people will bitch and moan about a cycling/walking path. Yeh, because they're not going to include any walkways or paths anywhere nearby. In fact, I have it on good authority they're going to leave the surrounding area a barren wasteland full of construction site rubbish that you will have to navigate as a life of death obstacle course.

Parklands? Who gives a shit in this case.
Does the proposed development benefit the community? Does it have a greater benefit to the community then what's there currently? Yes? Of course it does.

[dsriggs]

Even if you ignore the heritage buildings, the parklands or the imaginary strawman complaints about aircraft noise, it's still a crappy location. The fact the main entrance would be around 700m from the corner of North & West Terraces mean that most people are unlikely to park in the CBD & walk to & from the hospital, especially on hot or rainy days. That means that there'll not only be an increase in vehicle traffic in that local area, there won't even be the benefits for local businesses that increased foot traffic would bring. Plus all the talk about being "in the health precinct" rings kinda hollow when the SAHMRI & university buildings are over a kilometre away. Why even bother?

[bits]

I am not sold the location is good but I am with rev that a very small amount of people would care about the heritage buildings at the site. I have a feeling they would only care because a piece of paper was previously signed to say the buildings were important. And not because those buildings hold a significance in their lives.
I haven't seen any that look interesting enough to investigate even checking if the current barracks is publically accessible for viewing the buildings.

The orah was on parklands. The nrah is on parklands. There is consistent precedence that parklands are available for public buildings, buildings of public importance or very noteworthy buildings such as hospitals, museum, art gallery, train station/tracks, convention centre, horse race course, cemetery, universities, casino, public baths/pools, sport ovals and grandstands, zoo, Parliament, governors house, war memorials etc.

Someone will need to point out which buildings and why at the site are worth keeping.
Parklands does not block a hospital, it never has.
The carpark design will surely change but I also don't care either if it is a rectangle box with cars in it.

[rev]

Even if you ignore the heritage buildings, the parklands or the imaginary strawman complaints about aircraft noise, it's still a crappy location. The fact the main entrance would be around 700m from the corner of North & West Terraces mean that most people are unlikely to park in the CBD & walk to & from the hospital, especially on hot or rainy days. That means that there'll not only be an increase in vehicle traffic in that local area, there won't even be the benefits for local businesses that increased foot traffic would bring. Plus all the talk about being "in the health precinct" rings kinda hollow when the SAHMRI & university buildings are over a kilometre away. Why even bother?

Why does it need to be near the intersection of North & West Terrace? What's so special about that intersection?

Why would you park somewhere in the city and not the hospital car park or nearby?
Why can't people catch a tram into the rest of the city?

Why does it need to be built around existing businesses? if those businesses cant survive without a hospital bringing a few thousand people a day to their vicinity, then perhaps they should adapt to a better business model?

We're lucky to be able to have the opportunity to build two new major hospitals right next to each other, the benefits of which have already been mentioned. Look where Perth's new children's hospital is, see any trams or trains nearby? Just bus stops. The nearest train stations are a half hour walk away. A 5 minute drive to the nearest freeway.

Melbourne's children's hospitals is down the road from the Royal Melbourne. In parklands. A new hospital was built in 2007, on parklands, next to the old one. Old one was demolished and turned into parklands. There's a tram stop in front of it too. 10 minutes drives to freeways that pretty much take you all over Melbourne.

Our proposed nWCH is a 10 minute walk to the nearest train station, a 6 minute walk to the nearest tram stop, and there's bus stops directly in front of it. And a 5 minute drive up George St or even East Tce/Henley Beach Rd to the North South Corridor which at the rate that project and this nWCH are going, both will probably be finished in the 2030's lol.

We have it extremely good.
And they'll probably end up building a tram stop out the front of this. Wouldn't even be surprised if they moved the Mile End train station closer to the north of Glover Avenue.

[rev]

The orah was on parklands. The nrah is on parklands. There is consistent precedence that parklands are available for public buildings, buildings of public importance or very noteworthy buildings such as hospitals, museum, art gallery, train station/tracks, convention centre, horse race course, cemetery, universities, casino, public baths/pools, sport ovals and grandstands, zoo, Parliament, governors house, war memorials etc.

When was the last time any of those sites were actual parklands?
If a patch of lawn is built over, do people in this country town still consider it to be a patch of lawn?

[Algernon]

I am not sold the location is good but I am with rev that a very small amount of people would care about the heritage buildings at the site. I have a feeling they would only care because a piece of paper was previously signed to say the buildings were important. And not because those buildings hold a significance in their lives.
I haven't seen any that look interesting enough to investigate even checking if the current barracks is publically accessible for viewing the buildings.

The orah was on parklands. The nrah is on parklands. There is consistent precedence that parklands are available for public buildings, buildings of public importance or very noteworthy buildings such as hospitals, museum, art gallery, train station/tracks, convention centre, horse race course, cemetery, universities, casino, public baths/pools, sport ovals and grandstands, zoo, Parliament, governors house, war memorials etc.

Someone will need to point out which buildings and why at the site are worth keeping.
Parklands does not block a hospital, it never has.
The carpark design will surely change but I also don't care either if it is a rectangle box with cars in it.

Areas between north terrace and the Torrens aren't necessarily parklands. The site of the nrah was the railyard until it was moved to the existing yards at Islington. I agree though that the police barracks don't warrant much consideration. They have been sleighted for closure the whole time I've been alive. However besides a year of bluster about building a rectangular sports stadium on it, the long held belief was that it would be returned to parklands, as happened with the corner site over the road (and west). So a bit miffed that suddenly it is a full scale development site.

It's proposed far enough away from the nrah to make a mockery of colocating the hospitals.

I don't mind the design of the building itself. Red is a nice contrast to the parkland (for most...). But yes that car park is gobshite...

[bits]

When was the last time any of those sites were actual parklands?
If a patch of lawn is built over, do people in this country town still consider it to be a patch of lawn?

I don't believe the parklands means it is grass or trees. I think it is land reserved for special use by South Australia.
Special use may be a garden or a hospital etc.
The land is still parkland if it remains reserved for special use.

[claybro]

Just an observation from my time living in Adelaide, those old police barracks have been an eyesore since I was a kid. Generic state school style buildings from 100 odd years ago, surrounded by carpark and assorted sheds...its hardly the stuff of great merit. As others have mentioned...parklands is not only for greenspace, and was always reserved for important public buildings of which this surely qualifies. Re the transport-i'm sure an extra tram stop out the front there will not bring the system to a halt, and the train station is not THAT far, and not much different to the distance to the current WCH.
On another note...having been away from Adelaide for nearly a decade, and now looking at it through a visitor eye on my trips back, I have enjoyed the development of the Northern side of North terrace with the medical precinct, the convention center expansion, and now hopefully this. It has created a much more inspiring entry to the city from the northwest..particularly at night -and makes the city feel less disconnected from the inner suburbs along that route, which is the case with some of the other routes into the city.

[Cryptic]

Just an observation from my time living in Adelaide, those old police barracks have been an eyesore since I was a kid. Generic state school style buildings from 100 odd years ago, surrounded by carpark and assorted sheds...its hardly the stuff of great merit. As others have mentioned...parklands is not only for greenspace, and was always reserved for important public buildings of which this surely qualifies. Re the transport-i'm sure an extra tram stop out the front there will not bring the system to a halt, and the train station is not THAT far, and not much different to the distance to the current WCH.
On another note...having been away from Adelaide for nearly a decade, and now looking at it through a visitor eye on my trips back, I have enjoyed the development of the Northern side of North terrace with the medical precinct, the convention center expansion, and now hopefully this. It has created a much more inspiring entry to the city from the northwest..particularly at night -and makes the city feel less disconnected from the inner suburbs along that route, which is the case with some of the other routes into the city.

I agree with this take, I think the location is fine and I think the hospital is a more suitable use for parklands than the police barracks. My main issue with the nWCH plan is the eyesore of a car park which will be on view traveling down port road from the city.

[rev]

When was the last time any of those sites were actual parklands?
If a patch of lawn is built over, do people in this country town still consider it to be a patch of lawn?

I don't believe the parklands means it is grass or trees. I think it is land reserved for special use by South Australia.
Special use may be a garden or a hospital etc.
The land is still parkland if it remains reserved for special use.

Those advocating for no development on 'parklands' want to see grass, trees, etc. That is the definition of a parkland. Whether a developed area is "reserved" for future parklands is another story.
They don't want museums, parliaments, hospitals on what they believe is 'parklands'.
They shit a brick over the obahn tunnel which would have resulted in more 'parkland' then what was currently there and what we ended up with.
You're not dealing with rational, sane people.
Even people on this site have referred to things like Festival Plaza as parkland.

Personally I think they should build on the triangle next to the RAH and go over the rail lines and into the police barracks. They wouldn't need the entire barracks, so they could turn some of it into a park for families with their kids that would make their stay at the nWCH a little easier.

[Nort]

When was the last time any of those sites were actual parklands?
If a patch of lawn is built over, do people in this country town still consider it to be a patch of lawn?

I don't believe the parklands means it is grass or trees. I think it is land reserved for special use by South Australia.
Special use may be a garden or a hospital etc.
The land is still parkland if it remains reserved for special use.

Those advocating for no development on 'parklands' want to see grass, trees, etc. That is the definition of a parkland. Whether a developed area is "reserved" for future parklands is another story.
They don't want museums, parliaments, hospitals on what they believe is 'parklands'.
They shit a brick over the obahn tunnel which would have resulted in more 'parkland' then what was currently there and what we ended up with.
You're not dealing with rational, sane people.
Even people on this site have referred to things like Festival Plaza as parkland.

Personally I think they should build on the triangle next to the RAH and go over the rail lines and into the police barracks. They wouldn't need the entire barracks, so they could turn some of it into a park for families with their kids that would make their stay at the nWCH a little easier.

Rev it's quite possible for us to say no to something and that be ok, no need to insult us by saying we are not "rational" or "sane".

Development on parklands is perfectly fine, and indeed can be desirable. It's treating parklands as free unused plots of land in ways that doesn't improve on them which is a problem.

[Spotto]

If the land wasn't already being developed by Renewal SA, the old LeCornu site on Anzac Highway could've been another perfect location for the nWCH. It's on a major road, reasonably centrally-located, buses run right outside the doorstep, and nothing of heritage significance used to be there (unless you count the Chrysler sign that's apparently being preserved for re-installation at the new development).

[gnrc_louis]

If the land wasn't already being developed by Renewal SA, the old LeCornu site on Anzac Highway could've been another perfect location for the nWCH. It's on a major road, reasonably centrally-located, buses run right outside the doorstep, and nothing of heritage significance used to be there (unless you count the Chrysler sign that's apparently being preserved for re-installation at the new development).

Isn't one of the points of this redevelopment proximity to the nRAH and the North Tce health precinct more broadly though?

[Nathan]

If the land wasn't already being developed by Renewal SA, the old LeCornu site on Anzac Highway could've been another perfect location for the nWCH. It's on a major road, reasonably centrally-located, buses run right outside the doorstep, and nothing of heritage significance used to be there (unless you count the Chrysler sign that's apparently being preserved for re-installation at the new development).

Isn't one of the points of this redevelopment proximity to the nRAH and the North Tce health precinct more broadly though?

Yes, which is undermined by it not being actually adjacent (and further separated by placing the car park in between) — such that emergency transfers to nRAH will need to be done by ambulance. I think once it's reached that point, then it doesn't really matter if its 50m or 500m away and sites like the Coke factory should have at least been on the table.