News & Discussion: Adelaide Urban Sprawl & Density

All other development discussion.
Message
Author
urban
Legendary Member!
Posts: 575
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:59 am
Location: City of Unley
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 15 times

#16 Post by urban » Wed May 09, 2007 10:04 am

Outer suburban areas such as Nourlunga, Mt Barker, Elizabeth and Gawler should not be planned as an extension of Adelaide. They should be developed along the lines of strong regional centres with their own identities, city centres, services and transport networks. Link all of the centres together with fast efficient mass transport systems with limited stops.

EG Nourlunga could have a CBD containing retail, residential and offices developed above and around the train station.

The gaps should be left to help reinforce the separate identities of the centres and provide some vegetated relief to our suburban sprawl.

User avatar
Bulldozer
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:00 am
Location: Brisbane (nee Adelaide)

#17 Post by Bulldozer » Wed May 09, 2007 2:33 pm

urban wrote:EG Nourlunga could have a CBD containing retail, residential and offices developed above and around the train station.
That was the plan back in the 60's or 70's when Noarlunga became Old Noarlunga and Noarlunga Centre was established. In fact, it's pretty much already like that - major public transport hub, shopping centres, schools, offices, recreation and entertainment facilities. Still a lot of vacant land that needs to be developed though. If the Housing Trust sells up all the scumholes around the area then it probably wouldn't be long until it gentrifies - it's a damn shame when you see the ocean views from some of the streets!

urban
Legendary Member!
Posts: 575
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 10:59 am
Location: City of Unley
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 15 times

#18 Post by urban » Wed May 09, 2007 2:49 pm

The strategy always seems to get lost or forgotten after a few years. A major increase in density is required at Nourlunga Centre. There would be very few people living and working within walking distance of the train station. Most of the recent developments have turned their backs on the station.

User avatar
shuza
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:13 pm

#19 Post by shuza » Wed May 09, 2007 6:45 pm

Mabye these satellite CBD's is where Adelaide can get its 300m tower.
I'd love to see Hi-rises around Elizabeth, Noarlunga, Mount Barker and the Port. The tram services radiating from outer centres sounds like a great idea, and then to link it with high speed transport between the major centres. With the shape of Adelaide;s urban sprawl, this is probably the best solution possible to allievting our growth and transportation problems.

alfer7_3
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:19 pm
Location: Adelaide

#20 Post by alfer7_3 » Wed May 09, 2007 7:09 pm

In the 60's and 70's i think it was there was an idea from the dunstan government of decentralisation. so the government bought up land where monarto is planning to build a satellite city which would have been self sufficient. instead Noarlunga centre and Elizabeth were chosen for this decentralisation. They were well planned at the time to be self sufficient but with urban sprawl they have become outer suburbs of Adelaide and haven't been maintained as sustainable cities on their own. Id like to see Noarlunga Centre, Elizabeth Centre, Port Adelaide and Mt. Barker to be hubs for Commercial and medium to high density housing where people can live and work close by with all services in the area without having to commute into the Adelaide CBD, (ALTHOUGH I WOULD HATE FOR THE ADELAIDE CBD TO LOSE ITS IMPORTANCE as the main cbd) places in Sydney such as Parramatta and Chatswood already have this concept. This would also make these outer suburbs easer to provide a transport service as for example in Noarlunga buses could all feed to the Noarlunga train station. Cheers

alfer7_3
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:19 pm
Location: Adelaide

#21 Post by alfer7_3 » Wed May 09, 2007 7:18 pm

I forgot to mention that Elizabeth was already planned (IN THE 50'S) and this is probably also why monarto didnt ever go ahead

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

#22 Post by Cruise » Wed May 09, 2007 7:32 pm

so what became of the monarto government owned land?

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

#23 Post by Cruise » Wed May 09, 2007 7:38 pm

shuza wrote:Mabye these satellite CBD's is where Adelaide can get its 300m tower.
Familar with the concept of supply and demand?
Adelaide dosent need/require a 300m tower.
period

User avatar
shuza
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:13 pm

#24 Post by shuza » Wed May 09, 2007 7:41 pm

You do know that was a joke right?

User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

#25 Post by Cruise » Wed May 09, 2007 7:55 pm

^^^^^ sorry shuza, i honestly thought you were being serious
sorry :oops:

alfer7_3
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 50
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2007 6:19 pm
Location: Adelaide

#26 Post by alfer7_3 » Wed May 09, 2007 9:59 pm

I'm not entirely sure what has happened to all of it. i know they made some of it into the monarto zoo.

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

#27 Post by AtD » Thu May 10, 2007 10:24 am

Mawson Lakes is a poor example of urban planning simply because it turns its back on the train line while favouring Main North Road. The central area should have been built around the interchange, rather than it being in an empty field. The same thing, of course, could have been said for the UniSA campus which has been there for decades longer than the suburb.

User avatar
jimmy_2486
Legendary Member!
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Glenelg-Marion Area

#28 Post by jimmy_2486 » Thu May 10, 2007 11:41 am

Yeah but they do have a loop bus setup to take people to the interchange, Uni, etc. Besides it is currently growing around the interchange with greenfield.

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

#29 Post by AtD » Thu May 10, 2007 12:21 pm

Yes but my point is that bus shouldn't need to exist. The area could have been a lot more 'green' by being PT friendly.

User avatar
rhino
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2925
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 4:37 pm
Location: Nairne
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 111 times

#30 Post by rhino » Thu May 10, 2007 12:27 pm

AtD wrote:Mawson Lakes is a poor example of urban planning simply because it turns its back on the train line while favouring Main North Road. The central area should have been built around the interchange, rather than it being in an empty field.
Very true, I don't quite understand how Delfin were allowed to get away with that. Govt should have specified some common sense clauses when approving the Mawson Lakes development in the first place.
cheers,
Rhino

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest