Light's Vision & The City Grid

Message

Nathan · #1 Post by **Nathan** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:10 pm

I thought I'd throw this out to the crowd, as I can't find anything online in regards to some aspects of the original city grid for Adelaide.

It's always puzzled me why Light included the area between Hutt St and East Tce, and cut short the 3 north-east city blocks (they're all short by 1 lot), rather than have the city square a perfect rectangle with 4 equal quadrants. I figure some of the alignment of the parkland edges on the outer western and eastern edges may have something to do with the topography of the area, although it does irk me a little that they're not parallel with the grid. In all the history documented about the grid, there's no mention as to the reasoning for these decisions. Does anyone have any ideas?

#2 Post by **Howie** » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:29 pm

I've read about this, much like the folk of today planners were pandering to the requests of an elite few. The wealthy wanted a quadrant of their own in the SE away from the commoners and industry (remembering adelaide cbd at its peak reached 100k people, so it was quite a bustling place).

#3 Post by AG » Mon Dec 12, 2011 11:41 pm

The northeastern corner of the grid was cutaway to avoid building directly on top of First Creek, which still runs through the eastern parklands. This area also has steeper and "boggier" terrain which was not deemed suitable for developing.

This document discusses the reasoning for the layout generally:

"At the northern end of East Terrace between Botanic Road and Bartels Road, the surveyed city
which is about forty metres above sea level falls away to about thirty metres onto the Park Lands
creating a low lying wet boggy area, through which First Creek runs. Between Bartels Road and
southwards of Wakefield Street the land rises gently to fifty metres above sea level. The southeastern
corner of the city that stretches from Halifax Street to the middle of Victoria Park
Racecourse is, along with a point around the junction of Tynte Street and Lefevre Terrace, the
highest point in the city. Southwards of East Terrace from Pirie Street, where the land is suitably
level at a height between forty and fifty metres above sea level, Colonel Light squeezed in a
further eighty Town Acres which enabled the creation of an extra north-south road of Hutt Street."

#4 Post by **Will** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 4:39 pm

I am not sure whether this is true, but when I was in high school, I remember we had an Aboriginal elder come in to talk to us, and he said the shape of the City of Adelaide plan was because the spirit of the red kangaroo had infiltrated Col. Light. What this means is that the plan for the City of Adelaide is meant to replicate the shape of the red kangaroo.

[Shuz] · #5 Post by **[Shuz]** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 8:05 pm

=

ac83 · #6 Post by **ac83** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 8:07 pm

Yeah... No... I can't see it. Must've been one hell of an abstract kangaroo!

metro · #7 Post by **metro** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 9:28 pm

that aboriginal elder must have had a bit of 'sniff' before coming to your high school

crawf · #8 Post by **crawf** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:02 pm

Howie wrote:I've read about this, much like the folk of today planners were pandering to the requests of an elite few. The wealthy wanted a quadrant of their own in the SE away from the commoners and industry (remembering adelaide cbd at its peak reached 100k people, so it was quite a bustling place).

Interesting..

I'm glad the design was changed, the earlier proposal looks a little boring.

Omicron · #9 Post by **Omicron** » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:05 pm

In those days they were all blitzed on gin half the time, so it's not surprising that there are some idiosyncrasies left over from the period.

#10 Post by AG » Tue Dec 13, 2011 10:25 pm

Omicron wrote:In those days they were all blitzed on gin half the time, so it's not surprising that there are some idiosyncrasies left over from the period.

Well, there were what are now entire inner Sydney suburbs that were transferred ownership between individuals over a bottle of rum.

spiller · #11 Post by **spiller** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 10:49 am

Im amazed to hear that the city once had a population of 100,000 people! What year was this? What is it now, 25K? Where were the main residential areas? AFAIK the northern parts of the CBD were always industiral/office/retail properties and the South more residential...

#12 Post by AG » Wed Dec 14, 2011 12:05 pm

100,000 sounds a little high... my sources indicate that the CBD population peaked at a bit over 40000 around World War I and then dropped off significantly after World War II as the suburbs expanded. Household sizes were also larger back then than they are now (talking at least 4 people per household rather than the 2.5 or so now).

#13 Post by **Howie** » Wed Dec 14, 2011 11:07 pm

I've been told inner adelaide was included in city boundaries, so it could very well be off the mark. 40,000 in the square mile not including north adelaide sounds about right. It's hovering around the mid 10's right now? Still a decent way off it's peak.

#14 Post by **Ben** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 9:20 am

A couple of years old now but this is the latest I've found.

City Profile
Adelaide City Council monitors change in the City on a regular basis, including changes to the City User Populations, number of dwellings and environmental factors affecting the City. Below are the figures as reported in Council’s 2008-2009 Annual Report:

Area 15.57km²
Estimated average daytime population 205,000
Estimated overnight population 27,400
Estimated permanent residents 19,800
Visitors resident overnight 7,600
Workers 118,500
Students enrolled in City Institutions 86,700
Visitors (daily from metro area) 74,000
Number of dwellings* 11,338
Office space 1,442,657m²

rev · #15 Post by **rev** » Thu Dec 15, 2011 4:07 pm

With our city council, why would anyone want to move into the city to live?
I was just thinking actually, about those shitty rows of wall to wall town houses that all look the same..there should be a minimum height level for residential buildings in the city. 5 stories or something.
Build up population density, and really bring back life into the city.