News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Message
Author
User avatar
Algernon
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1102
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Moravia
Has thanked: 308 times
Been thanked: 146 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3571 Post by Algernon » Tue Mar 19, 2019 7:04 pm

SRW wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:18 pm
SBD wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:05 pm
SRW wrote:
Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:16 pm
I can imagine there may be some situations where protrusions may be undesirable. For instance, I don't like the metallic thing that solely sticks out from the Bendigo & Adelaide Bank on Grenfell Street. But I'm not sure the aim of enforcing a 'city wall' effect throughout the whole of the city is itself well-reasoned. Seems that we might be missing out on more interesting architecture in a misguided attempt to reflect the city's grid plan. I'd rather the council put in place a stronger setback/stepback policy so that we don't end up with so many boxes for buildings with blank walls to boot. As far as balconies go, given we want to encourage not only residential construction but construction of liveable residences, I hope council pays mind to unintended consequences.

For example of the protruded balconies on the street grid, reposting Ben's photo of Kodo:
Do all of Kodo's balconies protrude into the street space, or only the bottom three?
Tbh, I'm unsure but giving this example from the article the benefit of the doubt as I can't recall Bohem's balconies being past the boundary.
Don't know about these 2 buildings, but the balconies on the student building on the corner of Austin St and North Terrace certainly hang over the street.

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1339
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 252 times
Been thanked: 287 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3572 Post by ChillyPhilly » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:18 am

I feel this proposed ACC measure is to curtail greedy developers who overstep their boundaries (literally and metaphorically).
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 306 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3573 Post by SBD » Wed Mar 20, 2019 6:26 pm

ChillyPhilly wrote:
Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:18 am
I feel this proposed ACC measure is to curtail greedy developers who overstep their boundaries (literally and metaphorically).
Verandahs and balconies on them can be nice as part of the streetscape, but higher than that is definitely just expanding the footprint.

One of the contributing factors to the Great Fire of London was apparently that the buildings cantilevered over the narrow streets so far that there were no natural firebreaks at streets so the fires just kept going for blocks. Not saying any Adelaide buildings are anywhere near that, but I guess it's the natural extension of continuing to test the boundaries.

OlympusAnt
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 293
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2015 7:31 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3574 Post by OlympusAnt » Wed Mar 20, 2019 8:03 pm

ACC needs to stop worrying about that and fix the North Adelaide empty block disgrace
Follow me on Flickr

http://www.flickr.com/photos/135625678@N06/

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2234
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 487 times
Been thanked: 199 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3575 Post by SRW » Thu Mar 21, 2019 2:55 pm

Speaking of the Lecornu lot, bold idea: build a new aquatic centre there. The council keeps having to spend millions of dollar just to keep the old centre going structurally, so maybe it's time to throw in the towel (no pun) and demolish it to return to parklands or allow some minimal Crows training facility in its place. There's no huge demand for more retail or commercial space on O'Connel Street, but the activity of an aquatic centre could boost surrounding tenancies. The downside is probably no residential component, but hotel above could still work.
Keep Adelaide Weird

User avatar
[Shuz]
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2566
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 5:26 pm
Has thanked: 936 times
Been thanked: 256 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3576 Post by [Shuz] » Thu Mar 21, 2019 4:49 pm

I was just thinking that as I read the article on InDaily. This is a perfect opportunity before us, for the council to build a new swimming facility on O'Connell Street, in the heart of North Adelaide. Doing so will massively improve accessibility for residents and visitors alike and everyone benefits from having a genuine community facility which will be a good use of the now council-owned land at the LeCornu site. The existing Aquatic Centre can be demolished and the site returned to Parklands. A win-win for everyone.
Any views and opinions expressed are of my own, and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organisation of which I have an affiliation with.

how good is he
Legendary Member!
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:26 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 43 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3577 Post by how good is he » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:35 am

I think while the idea has merits it would be very hard for the council to justify or get a return on the $34m they spent on the land plus the cost to build (the last Aquatic centre cost $100m to build at Marion). Further the current one looses money every year. Similarly the Govt could buy out Next Gen. (say for a re-development) and move it here. But I still think it would need hotels, shops, cafes & residential above it all to make it stack up financially.

Nort
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1047
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:08 pm
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 125 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3578 Post by Nort » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:05 am

The site doesn't seem like it would be big enough for a decent aquatic center.

Bob
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:16 pm
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3579 Post by Bob » Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:11 pm

The ex-LeCornu site (AKA Eighty Eight O'Connell) has already moved on to Stage 2 of the EOI for the redevelopment of the site (the ACC review & selection decision was more than a week ago). The shortlist consists of proposals put forward in Stage 1 of the EOI process.

Those that have been selected have now been asked to provide their detailed proposals as per the requirement for Stage 2 of the EOI. They have been given a couple of months to submit.

Unless an Aquatic Centre is already included in the EOI, that option has missed the boat I'm afraid.

SBD
Legendary Member!
Posts: 991
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview
Has thanked: 306 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3580 Post by SBD » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:19 pm

Nort wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:05 am
The site doesn't seem like it would be big enough for a decent aquatic center.
The site looks to be about half the size of the North Parklands aquatic centre (without parking). The swimming pool would need to be upstairs from the diving pool (or vice versa). Either way would make for some "interesting" engineering, but get international recognition if it works.

Bob
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 86
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:16 pm
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3581 Post by Bob » Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:15 am

SBD wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:19 pm
Nort wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:05 am
The site doesn't seem like it would be big enough for a decent aquatic center.
The site looks to be about half the size of the North Parklands aquatic centre (without parking). The swimming pool would need to be upstairs from the diving pool (or vice versa). Either way would make for some "interesting" engineering, but get international recognition if it works.
The problem is an Aquatic Centre does not met the Guiding Principles for the redevelopment of the site.
The short list that did meet those development guidelines in their concept proposals (stage 1) have been asked to provide their detailed proposals (stage 2).
FYI here is the Guiding Principles guidelines link
https://www.cityofadelaide.com.au/plann ... rinciples/

Nort
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1047
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:08 pm
Has thanked: 202 times
Been thanked: 125 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3582 Post by Nort » Mon Mar 25, 2019 2:03 pm

Bob wrote:
Mon Mar 25, 2019 11:15 am
SBD wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:19 pm
Nort wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:05 am
The site doesn't seem like it would be big enough for a decent aquatic center.
The site looks to be about half the size of the North Parklands aquatic centre (without parking). The swimming pool would need to be upstairs from the diving pool (or vice versa). Either way would make for some "interesting" engineering, but get international recognition if it works.
The problem is an Aquatic Centre does not met the Guiding Principles for the redevelopment of the site.
The short list that did meet those development guidelines in their concept proposals (stage 1) have been asked to provide their detailed proposals (stage 2).
FYI here is the Guiding Principles guidelines link
https://www.cityofadelaide.com.au/plann ... rinciples/
This is also a good point, such a development would bring a lot of traffic into North Adelaide without doing much to improve the liveliness of the area.

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 411 times
Been thanked: 640 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3583 Post by Llessur2002 » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:44 pm

ACC arguing amongst themselves like a bunch of children again.
Detour for east-west city bikeway

The future of an east-west bikeway along Flinders and Franklin Streets is up in the air, with Adelaide City Council rehashing debate over the preferred location for its second city bike route.

At a meeting on Tuesday night, city councillors were called to express their views on where the $5.5 million east-west bikeway through the CBD should be located – despite the council approving Flinders and Franklin Streets as the preferred location in September last year.

At the time it was argued Flinders and Franklin Streets were already popular with cyclists, featured no bus stops and had the potential for widened footpaths and more street trees.

The other two bikeway options – Pirie and Waymouth Streets, and Grote and Wakefield Streets – were deemed less suitable, as they are narrower and have heavier traffic flow.

The council decided in May last year that work on the east-west bikeway would be put on hold until the completion of the north-south bikeway on Frome Street.

Meanwhile, tensions have brewed in the council chamber over how and when to start work again on the east-west route.

At Tuesday night’s meeting council staff called for views on where the east-west bikeway should be located.

Deputy Lord Mayor Houssam Abiad – who moved to approve Flinders and Franklin Streets for the east-west route last year – told the meeting he was now “inclined to remain open”.

“I think I’m more inclined to remain open to have a chat around Pirie and Waymouth, but I wouldn’t mind seeing the data and understanding the improvements to the public realm in that space,” he said.

Abiad was supported by area councillors Franz Knoll and Anne Moran, who argued Pirie and Waymouth Streets were already popular with cyclists.

“Pirie and Weymouth already have a strong bicycle traffic if not the most,” Knoll said.

“I see that as being an indicator that for the sake of the bikes that is a better way to do the east-west.”

Moran alluded to a report on the Flinders-Franklin separated bikeway presented to the council in 2017, which said it would require “changes to traffic and parking arrangements (which) will cause concern to some members of the community” – and there may be “some impacts to existing outdoor dining areas”.

“We have had our consultation on that street and that was definitive – it cannot go down there because at the end of the day the people that own the buildings and work in businesses do have a say,” Moran said.

But councillors Helen Donovan, Phil Martin and Rob Simms threw their support behind Flinders and Franklin Streets.

Martin said he “wished that council would just get on and bloody do it (start work on the east-west bikeway).”

Simms agreed, telling InDaily yesterday that the council’s continued discussion on where to put an east-west bikeway was “a bit of a roadblock”.

“I think the community is seeing us doing U-turns on the bikeways and it’s probably very frustrating for them to see us taking two steps forward and three steps back,” he said.

But central ward councillor Jessy Khera warned at Tuesday’s meeting that the council needed to be careful of propagating “an element of moral hazard” through the bikeways project.

He gave the example of his friend’s mother – who he said endured permanent brain damage while riding her bike – to argue, “there can’t be a separated bikeway everywhere”.

“We want to encourage a huge number of people to get on bicycles and I think as a government we ought to be careful and not take the word of sectional interests who want to push the idea that there are no risks involved,” he said.

“There are risks involved in all these decisions.”

Work is continuing on the north-south bikeway along Frome Street, which is currently stalled due to the ongoing construction of the 36-storey Adelaidean hotel complex.

The council’s director of operations, Beth Davidson-Park, revealed last month that if the council were to replicate the standard of the Frome Street section of the north-west bikeway on a second east-west route, it would need to spend up to $20 million, exceeding the current $5.5 million in council and State Government funding set aside for the project.

However, a State Government spokesperson said the Government “would be happy to work with the council to explore alternative funding options” for the east-west route.

Davidson-Park – who will resign from the council later this month – told InDaily yesterday that no firm direction was given from Tuesday’s meeting.

“While the previous Council approved Flinders-Franklin as the preferred East-West route, administration is now working with elected members on the options for the East-West Bikeway before commencing this stage of the Bikeways project,” she said.

“Pirie Street and Waymouth Street, together with Grote Street and Wakefield Street remain as other considered options for Council to discuss.”

A report presented to councillors on Tuesday night shows 60 per cent of Adelaide’s population are “interested but concerned” about bike riding and would not ride unless safe, separated bike facilities, such as the bikeway on Frome Street, were provided.
From: https://indaily.com.au/news/local/2019/ ... y-bikeway/

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3090
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 188 times
Been thanked: 598 times
Contact:

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3584 Post by Nathan » Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:10 pm

I firmly believe the continued debate is entirely in bad faith. It's not about believing in a better route than proposed, it's about continuing to hold up the project so that nothing ever happens.

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 411 times
Been thanked: 640 times

Re: News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

#3585 Post by Llessur2002 » Thu Apr 04, 2019 3:59 pm

Nathan wrote:
Thu Apr 04, 2019 2:10 pm
I firmly believe the continued debate is entirely in bad faith. It's not about believing in a better route than proposed, it's about continuing to hold up the project so that nothing ever happens.
^ absolutely this.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests