InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Contribute Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Your views: on "offensive" ACC behaviour, Crows v park lands, Central Market and Stuart O'Grady

Reader contributions

Today, readers comment on differing opinions of offence at Adelaide City Council, the Crow’s park lands HQ bid, a 35-storey tower above Central Market Arcade, and whether it’s right to question the appointment of a champion cyclist and confessed blood doper as Tour Down Under race director.

Print article

Commenting on the story: Lord Mayor’s Christmas appeal to council: stop “offensive” behaviour

Adelaide City Council has ended the year with;

a deal to build one 35-storey and two 15-storey towers on the Central Market Arcade that, I think, are completely out of character with the precinct and with no plan to manage during construction the risk to the ambience and the viability of our much loved Market;

an announcement of a consultation beginning over the holidays for a possible transfer of park lands to the Adelaide Crows that won’t ask South Australians if they support the transfer of park lands to corporations;  

something at 88 O’Connell Street it won’t disclose to the ratepayers who would have to foot any bill;

a request to the State Government to impose an “unworkable” complete ban on alcohol consumption in the park lands which would have done more harm than good;

a drastic reduction in the number of scheduled decision making meetings of Council and Committees from four to just one a month, and a continuing vow of silence on an accumulation of 700 separate secrets accompanied by around a thousand documents.

Our Lord Mayor said this week says she’s worried about offensive behaviour at Town Hall. Me too. – Phillip Martin, Adelaide City Councillor

Commenting on the story: “Hundreds of millions” of dollars to flow from park lands HQ: Crows

For too long, the state government and ACC have treated the park lands as a source of free inner urban development land. 

The Crows HQ is another example and raises many questions, for example: What would be the impact of car parking on the locality? 

What does ‘No permanent liquor license’ mean?  How high in metres is ‘no more than two storeys’? 

The Adelaide park lands are a unique asset. Continual erosion and alienation from public use of the park lands is not in the public interest. 

In this instance, the ACC is relieved of the maintenance bill for the aquatic centre, and the Crows get to build on free land. 

Commercial development in the park lands should not even be considered. – Tim Simpson

I am totally opposed to the Crows’ proposal because I believe it will be the thin end of the wedge.

Once we start allowing commercial organisations to build on the park lands, what is to stop the next proposal?

Let’s stick to the principle that the park lands are for the community, not for private enterprise.

If decision making is largely guided by money, then anything goes.

I believe that the Council and the State Government are responsible for maintaining the Aquatic Centre and need to find ways to make it work – or close it down completely and return the area to parklands. Jane Copeland

Commenting on the story: Central Market Arcade’s $400m redevelopment

I was shocked to see the recently published images of the proposed “upgrade” of the Adelaide Central Market Arcade  area. 

35 storeys? That’s as tall as Adelaide’s current tallest building and three times the height of the Hilton Hotel building next door. And then two further towers, each also taller than the Hilton building.

How long will it take to build such edifices?  How much will the building of them interfere with the operation of that jewel in our crown, the Adelaide Central Market?

What is the likelihood that our wonderful Market will survive long enough to face the sort of competition the new development will bring?

Which Adelaide City Councillors voted yes to such an appalling proposal in the full knowledge that online buying is rapidly overtaking physical shopping and that we already have a glut of city apartments? – Ingrid Vogelzang

Commenting on the opinion piece: Stuart O’Grady and the TDU: an astonishing lack of scrutiny

David Washington, quite frankly you need to read Indaily’s mission statement again…Informative, Intelligent and Inspiring.

I find your writings on the O’Grady appointment lacking relevance and compliance with the above.

It’s pretty obvious you know very little about cycling.

O’Grady’s appointment is probably one of the smarter things Events SA has done.

I have little time for the people in the organisation, particularly a couple of the higher profile ones who have dismissed out of hand a number of very significant opportunities for SA, but that’s a whole story in itself.

Mike Turtur has done a very good job with the TDU despite never having ridden a road race in his life.

O’Grady on the other hand has spent 20 years doing just that. He was the unofficial “godfather” of the peloton and riders and team bosses respected his judgements and listened to him.

His knowledge of all things racing is irrefutable. His network of contacts unsurpassed and this clearly came through in the selection process which included candidates from around the globe.

These attributes I have no doubt will manifest themselves into a much enhanced event over time.

The persistent reference to past indiscretions, which incidentally rank about a 1 on a scale of 1 to 10 given the situation in cycling at the time, are old and monotonous.

Perhaps a better headline could have been: O’Grady to bring new life to TDU.

I trust you have your quill at the ready to write a positive article in the future. Gavan Fox

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.

We value local independent journalism. We hope you do too.

InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.

Powered by PressPatron

More Reader contributions stories

Loading next article