World-class new Women’s and Children’s Hospital has a new home – on the Parklands
Adelaide’s new Women’s and Children’s Hospital will have 394 patient beds – so where will they go? See the plans and watch the flyover video.
SA News
Don't miss out on the headlines from SA News. Followed categories will be added to My News.
The new Women’s and Children’s Hospital will be built on the Thebarton Police Barracks site after a review considered six locations and found it was easily the best.
The new WCH is now forecast to cost $3bn to $3.2bn and not be finished until 2030-31.
Premier Peter Malinauskas will take special legislation to parliament to allow demolition of the heritage-listed barracks, saying the government is planning a hospital for the next 100 years rather than the next election.
The new WCH was originally planned to cost $1.9bn but a review found this had blown out to $2.8bn. The Royal Adelaide Hospital cost $2.4bn.
The new hospital will have 394 beds with room for 20 more as needed, compared with 344 in the original plan, meeting Labor’s promise of 50 additional beds.
Of the additional beds, Labor has proposed 24 paediatric medical beds (20 immediately, 4 future capacity), 10 mental health beds and 4 oncology beds to offer a significant boost to children’s mental health and cancer services.
Health Minister Chris Picton said Labor had now embarked on a consultation phase with clinicians to ensure “the mix of extra beds were going to the areas of most need”.
“In a Women’s and Children’s Hospital there are a range of different services where there is always increasing need,” Mr Picton said.
“We have heard repeatedly how paediatric mental health is under pressure. We need to make sure we have additional mental health capacity in the hospital as well.
“But we want to get the scope right.”
The review chaired by former chief executive of the Department of Premier and Cabinet Jim Hallion found the triangle of land next to the Royal Adelaide Hospital where the hospital was originally slated to go was simply too small, and would also end hopes of future expansion for the RAH or the WCH.
The new site is 40,000sqm compared with the 20,000sqm original site.
The new building now will be 117,000sqm compared with the 109,000sqm of the old site and have 394 beds with room for 20 more as needed compared with 344 of the original plan, meeting Labor’s election promise of 50 extra beds.
It will have more than 1300 carparks compared with 1215 of the original plan, and a helipad.
The new hospital will not have direct access to the RAH’s intensive care unit — instead, it will have a four-bed women’s intensive care unit on site, staffed by RAH clinicians.
Critical care services will all be on one floor including birthing, theatres, paediatric intensive care and neonatal intensive care. This could not be achieved with the original plan.
SAPOL has been granted a $2m business case for the relocation of their operations at the barracks.
SA Heritage Council chairperson Keith Conlon said selection of the site was a “full blown tragedy”.
“This site should never have been on the list,” he said.
“It’s inconceivable that it was available. It was available at the price of risking the very essence of what state protection is about.”
Mr Conlon said he had suspected for the past several days that the Thebarton site had been chosen, but the announcement was nonetheless “confronting and distressing”.
The Greens also flagged their strong opposition to the project, accusing the state government of forcing South Australians to choose between a new hospital and iconic buildings and parklands.
“Surely the government can find another site or alternatives that don’t result in destruction of so much of our city’s heritage,” Greens spokesman Robert Simms said.
“This whole process makes a mockery of our state’s heritage protection processes.”
Mr Malinauskas said Labor had engaged with a “suite of experts” to assess every single option available to build a “bigger hospital that gets the right clinical outcomes”.
“It would be a lot easier politically for us to go back down the old path and build a smaller hospital on the constrained site,” he said.
“There are greater considerations that we have to take into account in government and none are more important than delivering the best possible care for women and children.”
Lord Mayoral candidate and former Rann government Labor minister Jane Lomax-Smith told The Advertiser she was disappointed in the hospital site decision, because it was a parklands and heritage issue.
“I don’t know the finances intimately, but it seems to me if you’ve got a $3bn project, then you might have to spend one per cent of that buying land and there’s plenty of land that people want to sell. They need development and I think it should be off the parklands,” she said.
Asked her view about the Premier’s argument that heritage considerations were outweighed by women’s and children’s health and the need for a hospital lasting generations, Dr Lomax-Smith said she had sympathy for Health Minister Chris Picton having to “fight to sort out a mess he inherited”.
“I’m a doctor and I like hospitals. I love new hospitals. I think it’s a great way to spend money and the community needs a decent hospital,” she said.
“ … But the reality is that everybody has a good idea. Everybody says their idea is important. And if we think everything’s important, we’ll have no parklands.
“ … The reality is that if you look at the iconic shape of the parklands, it’s a figure of eight by taking that bite out of about 23 hectares, you’re actually turning it into a number three.
“And that’s not what we want, if we were going to get our parklands heritage listed on the World Heritage List.”
The review considered six options in the biomedical precinct including the original site, and a new design on the original site.
It considered a City West site across the road from the RAH but this would have required closing Hindley St, high cost property acquisition and difficulties for ambulances and for transfers to the RAH.
Building over the railyards was cost-prohibitive and was ruled out as “not considered a feasible option”.
A hybrid solution was also considered — a smaller women’s hospital on the original site and a separate children’s hospital on the barracks site, but this would have had the largest construction and ongoing operational costs, fragment services and require duplication of some services.
There were two options for the police barracks site. The first was to build it right on Port Rd but this would have seen Port Rd closed for months as it would require a rebuild of the Port Rd bridge.
The option that has won approval will be set much further back on the barracks site.
Each option was judged on criteria including clinical and clinical support; master planning; construction; transport; site factors; and external factors.
The chosen site was the clear winner including on the crucial clinical and clinical support category.
Premier Peter Malinauskas said the government was thinking long-term.
“The previous proposal would have cost $2.8bn for a hospital which had only one more paediatric overnight bed than the existing WCH and no room to grow in the future,” he said.
“The RAH would also lose the opportunity to expand. It was short term thinking.
“We want to do this properly the first time and the state government’s new WCH delivers the best outcomes for mothers and their babies for generations to come.
“I promised South Australians at the election we would make decisions in the interests of the long term, not the short term, this is an example of that.”
Mr Malinauskas acknowledged there are heritage issues with the barracks site but noted he told the review to make their decision based on the best possible site.
Health Minister Chris Picton said the new site would allow clinical services not possible on the previously proposed site.
“The direct connection to the parklands will also enhance recovery and wellbeing for mothers, children and babies,” he said.
“We have listened to the clinicians and their concerns — and will now build a new hospital that will deliver world class facilities and have expansion capacity for the future.”
Early work is expected to start in 2023 with construction commencing in early 2024.
The original hospital was scheduled to start construction this year with a planned opening in 2027, however the government described this timeline put out by the former government as a “fantasy”.
When asked how the current Women’s and Children’s site would be funded for the additional three years it would remain operational throughout construction, Mr Picton failed to quantify the investment needed beyond the already committed $30m.
The Health Minister said even if the government had continued with the Liberal’s previous building proposal, $30m would not have covered the “sustainment works” required to maintain an acceptable standard at the Women’s and Children's Hospital.
“There has been ongoing sustainment works at the current hospital for a long time now and $30m is being spent at the moment,” he said.
“We will take the advice of the engineers and the experts in terms of what needs to be done.”
More Coverage
Join the conversation
Daughter’s horror after finding videos of boyfriend raping mum
The partner of a man who worked for a SANFL club was left scarred for life after she found videos on his phone of him raping her mother.
Read more
Embattled Gupta vows he can deliver on Whyalla promise
Sanjeev Gupta says despite a “crisis” in the steel industry which has helped push the Whyalla steelworks into the red, he can deliver a bright future for the industrial city.
Read more