00:00:00
Speaker 1: In the meantime, one of the stories we are covering this morning is all about the I guess redevelopment that we're getting here in Sa Walker Tower and also live golf. We know that that's going to be happening, that we're going to be having a tournament at North Adelaide in the coming few years, and there is a bit of opposition to it. So let's have a chat with Sarah Russo from the Adelaide Parklands, who is the Adelaide Parklands Association President. Sarah, thanks so much for coming on this morning with us on five double a breakfast.
00:00:28
Speaker 2: No problems. Thank you so much for having me this morning.
00:00:30
Speaker 1: Sarah, tell us what are your objections. We've seen the government is fairly keen to get things moving and to I guess expedite the process of getting live up and about what's your issue with it.
00:00:44
Speaker 2: I think that's exactly. One of the things that we're most concerned about is the way that the government's gone about pushing through this legislation really quickly. You know, both houses of government didn't have a very long time to actually review the legislation and with the bill that's been passed now are a number of really concerning things for what the future of the park planes could look like when this type of activity happens by the government. So not least of which is obviously Park twenty seven A is now also part of the proposed new site for the golf course, which is currently you know, a big, sprawling open park with many, many trees. The legislation includes a three for one tree replacement, but there's no consideration in that for what maturity level the tree could be at. So for around the six hundred odds that we had estimated originally would need to be removed from Park one, which obviously those estimations would now increase. With Park twenty seven A also being part of this discussion, we could potentially see you know, six hundred trees replaced with three times as many, but those trees could be saplings. There is nothing in the legislation to prevent a significant gum from coming down and being replaced with anything other than a seedling.
00:02:03
Speaker 3: So, Sarah, would there be anything, any solution that would make that you and your group happy?
00:02:08
Speaker 2: Look, I think the big concern here is what this makes for what this means for the future of the parklands. The really other concerning thing about the legislation is that there's no provision in there that protects other parts of the parklands. And in fact, what this legislation does is it opens up potential for the government to take other parts of parklands as is required by this project. So you know, it's just a continuing pattern that we're seeing of the government not putting in place or not standing by the protections that should be owed to open green and public space.
00:02:44
Speaker 1: And Sarah, you've got quite a few signatures I believe several thousand, is that right, opposing the redevelopment.
00:02:50
Speaker 2: Yes, I'm not entirely certain what the number is up to today, but my understanding was that as that yesterday there were around four thousand signatures.
00:02:58
Speaker 1: Okay, Sarah, we might just get you to hold the line for a moment. We'll also have a chat to the former Premier of South Australia, Lynn Arnold Linn. We've obviously just spoken to Sarah and you've heard that. I would like to get your thoughts. What is your concern Is it the lack of public consultation or where are your chief concerns here?
00:03:17
Speaker 4: Well, I'm certainly worried about them, very much about the lack of consultation. But more seriously, I've also worried about the fact that this is leading to a state of mind where our precious park lands and precious open spaces are being regarded as a land bank quarry that whenever a new project comes up, let's just go there and use this what is being thought of as vacant land. But it's not. It's civic space. You know. In terms of the Walker Tower, which I'm very much opposed to, there's lots of opportunities within the CBD itself, within the square mile where that skyscraper could be put. I'm not opposed to the skyscraper, I'm opposed to being put where it is being proposed.
00:04:01
Speaker 3: How do you believe the tower and they live golf redevelopmental impacts the unique character that we have here our park lands. How's it going to affect our character of Adelaide.
00:04:11
Speaker 4: Well, we have this tombstone tower that's been proposed to be put behind the Parliament House, taking up the Festival Plaza. Now, the Festival Plaza did need redevelopment, there is no doubt about that, but it is a civic space that has lots of potential but not if you're going to put a huge tower shadowing overshadowing Parliament House. Really, you know, you wouldn't put a building like that next to Parliament House, Canber. You wouldn't put it next to the House of the Parliament in London, you wouldn't put it next to the Capitol Building in Washington. Why do they think such an ugly building can be put next to our beautiful Parliament House here in South Australia.
00:04:51
Speaker 1: So where would you like to say it put if you were to put it somewhere?
00:04:54
Speaker 4: Oh, well, within the CBD, we have lots of opportunities there the old State Administration. It's a building well passed, it's so used by day. It's government owned. That could well be offered to the Walker Corporation to build a tower there in Victoria Square. I mean, the CBD was what was originally planned to be where business would be. That's why we call it the Central Business District. The Festival Plaza is part of the whole North Terrace Boulevard precinct behind Parliament House there that is civic space, not meant to be office space.
00:05:29
Speaker 3: What about the park lands land? I mean I feel that the Walker Tower has already got the tick that that's going to go ahead, unfortunately for you for yours, well.
00:05:37
Speaker 4: I wouldn't be so certain about that. By the way, the cranker was changed and it's the Walker Tower. If it goes ahead, you know it'll become a tower of regret, you know, the gateway across the road from Parliament House. Nobody believes that the demolition of the old South Australian Hotel was a good thing. I have not heard anybody say that we all regret the Way tower being put up. The same will happen if Walker two gets put up. It will be a tower of regret that people will look back on and say, how could we as a community have let that happen. And I believe that if enough thinking goes into this beforehand, and there is the opportunities for trade off with other government buildings, that the Walker Corporation can be attracted to. I'm not prepared to say that this is yet a lost cause.
00:06:27
Speaker 3: So what conversations are you still having men to hopefully make it go your way.
00:06:32
Speaker 4: Well, we're obviously going to have to keep an encouraging public debate about this issue. Yesterday, a relatively short notus We've got a very good turnout on the steps of Parliament House and as you've just mentioned with Sarah, over four thousand signatures have been obtained already and it's growing every day. So I'm confident that we could keep this going. And certainly with this whole issue of the landbak quarry idea, do we want our spaces are parklands to be a landbank querry? Surely not. Yesterday the figures were given us to just how much erosion there has been of the parklands over the last twenty years, how many hundreds of hectares have been sequested for other purposes.
00:07:18
Speaker 1: Lynn, thank you so much for joining us this morning. Really appreciate your time.
00:07:21
Speaker 4: Thank you very much.
00:07:22
Speaker 1: Tom Lennardel they're the former Premier of South Australia. And also Sarah Russo from the Adelaide Parklands who is the association president.
Speaker 1: In the meantime, one of the stories we are covering this morning is all about the I guess redevelopment that we're getting here in Sa Walker Tower and also live golf. We know that that's going to be happening, that we're going to be having a tournament at North Adelaide in the coming few years, and there is a bit of opposition to it. So let's have a chat with Sarah Russo from the Adelaide Parklands, who is the Adelaide Parklands Association President. Sarah, thanks so much for coming on this morning with us on five double a breakfast.
00:00:28
Speaker 2: No problems. Thank you so much for having me this morning.
00:00:30
Speaker 1: Sarah, tell us what are your objections. We've seen the government is fairly keen to get things moving and to I guess expedite the process of getting live up and about what's your issue with it.
00:00:44
Speaker 2: I think that's exactly. One of the things that we're most concerned about is the way that the government's gone about pushing through this legislation really quickly. You know, both houses of government didn't have a very long time to actually review the legislation and with the bill that's been passed now are a number of really concerning things for what the future of the park planes could look like when this type of activity happens by the government. So not least of which is obviously Park twenty seven A is now also part of the proposed new site for the golf course, which is currently you know, a big, sprawling open park with many, many trees. The legislation includes a three for one tree replacement, but there's no consideration in that for what maturity level the tree could be at. So for around the six hundred odds that we had estimated originally would need to be removed from Park one, which obviously those estimations would now increase. With Park twenty seven A also being part of this discussion, we could potentially see you know, six hundred trees replaced with three times as many, but those trees could be saplings. There is nothing in the legislation to prevent a significant gum from coming down and being replaced with anything other than a seedling.
00:02:03
Speaker 3: So, Sarah, would there be anything, any solution that would make that you and your group happy?
00:02:08
Speaker 2: Look, I think the big concern here is what this makes for what this means for the future of the parklands. The really other concerning thing about the legislation is that there's no provision in there that protects other parts of the parklands. And in fact, what this legislation does is it opens up potential for the government to take other parts of parklands as is required by this project. So you know, it's just a continuing pattern that we're seeing of the government not putting in place or not standing by the protections that should be owed to open green and public space.
00:02:44
Speaker 1: And Sarah, you've got quite a few signatures I believe several thousand, is that right, opposing the redevelopment.
00:02:50
Speaker 2: Yes, I'm not entirely certain what the number is up to today, but my understanding was that as that yesterday there were around four thousand signatures.
00:02:58
Speaker 1: Okay, Sarah, we might just get you to hold the line for a moment. We'll also have a chat to the former Premier of South Australia, Lynn Arnold Linn. We've obviously just spoken to Sarah and you've heard that. I would like to get your thoughts. What is your concern Is it the lack of public consultation or where are your chief concerns here?
00:03:17
Speaker 4: Well, I'm certainly worried about them, very much about the lack of consultation. But more seriously, I've also worried about the fact that this is leading to a state of mind where our precious park lands and precious open spaces are being regarded as a land bank quarry that whenever a new project comes up, let's just go there and use this what is being thought of as vacant land. But it's not. It's civic space. You know. In terms of the Walker Tower, which I'm very much opposed to, there's lots of opportunities within the CBD itself, within the square mile where that skyscraper could be put. I'm not opposed to the skyscraper, I'm opposed to being put where it is being proposed.
00:04:01
Speaker 3: How do you believe the tower and they live golf redevelopmental impacts the unique character that we have here our park lands. How's it going to affect our character of Adelaide.
00:04:11
Speaker 4: Well, we have this tombstone tower that's been proposed to be put behind the Parliament House, taking up the Festival Plaza. Now, the Festival Plaza did need redevelopment, there is no doubt about that, but it is a civic space that has lots of potential but not if you're going to put a huge tower shadowing overshadowing Parliament House. Really, you know, you wouldn't put a building like that next to Parliament House, Canber. You wouldn't put it next to the House of the Parliament in London, you wouldn't put it next to the Capitol Building in Washington. Why do they think such an ugly building can be put next to our beautiful Parliament House here in South Australia.
00:04:51
Speaker 1: So where would you like to say it put if you were to put it somewhere?
00:04:54
Speaker 4: Oh, well, within the CBD, we have lots of opportunities there the old State Administration. It's a building well passed, it's so used by day. It's government owned. That could well be offered to the Walker Corporation to build a tower there in Victoria Square. I mean, the CBD was what was originally planned to be where business would be. That's why we call it the Central Business District. The Festival Plaza is part of the whole North Terrace Boulevard precinct behind Parliament House there that is civic space, not meant to be office space.
00:05:29
Speaker 3: What about the park lands land? I mean I feel that the Walker Tower has already got the tick that that's going to go ahead, unfortunately for you for yours, well.
00:05:37
Speaker 4: I wouldn't be so certain about that. By the way, the cranker was changed and it's the Walker Tower. If it goes ahead, you know it'll become a tower of regret, you know, the gateway across the road from Parliament House. Nobody believes that the demolition of the old South Australian Hotel was a good thing. I have not heard anybody say that we all regret the Way tower being put up. The same will happen if Walker two gets put up. It will be a tower of regret that people will look back on and say, how could we as a community have let that happen. And I believe that if enough thinking goes into this beforehand, and there is the opportunities for trade off with other government buildings, that the Walker Corporation can be attracted to. I'm not prepared to say that this is yet a lost cause.
00:06:27
Speaker 3: So what conversations are you still having men to hopefully make it go your way.
00:06:32
Speaker 4: Well, we're obviously going to have to keep an encouraging public debate about this issue. Yesterday, a relatively short notus We've got a very good turnout on the steps of Parliament House and as you've just mentioned with Sarah, over four thousand signatures have been obtained already and it's growing every day. So I'm confident that we could keep this going. And certainly with this whole issue of the landbak quarry idea, do we want our spaces are parklands to be a landbank querry? Surely not. Yesterday the figures were given us to just how much erosion there has been of the parklands over the last twenty years, how many hundreds of hectares have been sequested for other purposes.
00:07:18
Speaker 1: Lynn, thank you so much for joining us this morning. Really appreciate your time.
00:07:21
Speaker 4: Thank you very much.
00:07:22
Speaker 1: Tom Lennardel they're the former Premier of South Australia. And also Sarah Russo from the Adelaide Parklands who is the association president.
