[U/C] SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
EBG
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2487
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:49 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by EBG »

It was not so much the change of government but the people of Norwood, when given a choice between the prestige of having a tram or keeping the gum trees in the centre of the parade, most decided the gum trees were more important. so the liberals quietly dumped the tram plan because they did not have the money any way.
User avatar
AndyWelsh
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:44 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by AndyWelsh »

New trees, paving and SkyCity signage:

Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2160
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by claybro »

Having not been able to get to Adelaide at all this year, can anyone confirm if the paving on the North terrace front footpath of the station and casino entry has been/is being upgraded? The old concrete paving and bitumen surface used to really let down the whole precinct. Also the outside of the station always looked like it needed a good scrub and looked grubby. the lighting was always a bit dull as well. Hopefully they pay some attention to the front with the upgrade. Always great photos BTW Andy.
User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by SRW »

claybro wrote:
Fri Oct 09, 2020 3:28 pm
Having not been able to get to Adelaide at all this year, can anyone confirm if the paving on the North terrace front footpath of the station and casino entry has been/is being upgraded? The old concrete paving and bitumen surface used to really let down the whole precinct. Also the outside of the station always looked like it needed a good scrub and looked grubby. the lighting was always a bit dull as well. Hopefully they pay some attention to the front with the upgrade. Always great photos BTW Andy.
Only the North Terrace path at the top of the station ramp and in alignment with Station Rd has been upgraded so far.

I agree about the bitumen/concrete pavers letting down the precinct, especially in front of Parliament House. Grenfell/Currie Street is even worse in my opinion given the quantity of pedestrian traffic.

The station building itself looks fine at the moment. The western façade is being restored currently.
Keep Adelaide Weird
User avatar
AndyWelsh
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:44 pm

[U/C] SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by AndyWelsh »

claybro wrote:Having not been able to get to Adelaide at all this year, can anyone confirm if the paving on the North terrace front footpath of the station and casino entry has been/is being upgraded? The old concrete paving and bitumen surface used to really let down the whole precinct. Also the outside of the station always looked like it needed a good scrub and looked grubby. the lighting was always a bit dull as well. Hopefully they pay some attention to the front with the upgrade. Always great photos BTW Andy.
Thanks for letting me know about the photos claybro! I’m part of a similar group for my hometown in the U.K. and the photos posted there help me keep in touch with the place, so I try to do the same here in Adelaide for people who might be living away like yourself.

Hopefully in this photo below from last month you can see how the new paving comes round from Station Road up to the station entry bollards, but quickly stop on the North Terrace front footpath. As mentioned by SRW, futher up, the path is pretty shocking outside of Parliament House too.

Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
Algernon
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1217
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Moravia

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by Algernon »

AndyWelsh wrote:
Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:36 pm
Thanks for letting me know about the photos claybro! I’m part of a similar group for my hometown in the U.K. and the photos posted there help me keep in touch with the place, so I try to do the same here in Adelaide for people who might be living away like yourself.
Really appreciate your work also. I haven't lived in Adelaide for years and it looks like I can't even get to Australia in the medium term. Unfortunately I have no photos to provide for expats here as a trade, not unless they hail from central Europe :)
User avatar
AndyWelsh
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:44 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by AndyWelsh »

Hoardings removed outside Sean’s Kitchen on Station Road.

Image

Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
AndyWelsh
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:44 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by AndyWelsh »

Had a good walk around this afternoon:

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
AndyWelsh
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 404
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2017 11:44 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by AndyWelsh »

Also took some photos of the new link between the casino and the station:

Image

Image

Image

And a few of the new areas around SkyCity and the station:
Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2909
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by SRW »

Fantastic series of shots, Andy! :applause:
Keep Adelaide Weird
User avatar
1NEEDS2POST
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 281
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2018 5:01 pm

[U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by 1NEEDS2POST »

EBG wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:09 pm
It was not so much the change of government but the people of Norwood, when given a choice between the prestige of having a tram or keeping the gum trees in the centre of the parade, most decided the gum trees were more important. so the liberals quietly dumped the tram plan because they did not have the money any way.
There's no reason we can't have both, the Parade is wide enough as it is. People didn't want to lose their precious street parking spaces (which are only available to lucky people).
Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3550
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm

[U/C] [U/C] [U/C] Re: [U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by Waewick »

1NEEDS2POST wrote:
EBG wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:09 pm
It was not so much the change of government but the people of Norwood, when given a choice between the prestige of having a tram or keeping the gum trees in the centre of the parade, most decided the gum trees were more important. so the liberals quietly dumped the tram plan because they did not have the money any way.
There's no reason we can't have both, the Parade is wide enough as it is. People didn't want to lose their precious street parking spaces (which are only available to lucky people).
How are they only available to lucky people? Or can't you reverse park? But that's not luck either Image

Many of those trees have a limited life span left (10 or so years)from what I heard so they will be removed. Hopefully by then someone has a decent tram plan

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk



Patrick_27
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2032
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA

[U/C] Re: [U/C] [U/C] Re: [U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by Patrick_27 »

Waewick wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:41 am
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
EBG wrote:
Mon Oct 05, 2020 11:09 pm
It was not so much the change of government but the people of Norwood, when given a choice between the prestige of having a tram or keeping the gum trees in the centre of the parade, most decided the gum trees were more important. so the liberals quietly dumped the tram plan because they did not have the money any way.
There's no reason we can't have both, the Parade is wide enough as it is. People didn't want to lose their precious street parking spaces (which are only available to lucky people).
How are they only available to lucky people? Or can't you reverse park? But that's not luck either Image

Many of those trees have a limited life span left (10 or so years)from what I heard so they will be removed. Hopefully by then someone has a decent tram plan

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk
Way off topic, but just to add to this before it wraps up.

That line of trees down the Parade are barely 40-years-old, and almost all of them have been replaced once or twice. They are possibly the worst type of tree one could have in the centre of a main road; unsightly for what is intended of them, bulky base root structures and an excessively droopy canopy (not that I think the alternative - plane trees - would be any better). I think parking was the chief reason for people voting against trams along the Parade, which will still need to be address with or without such a tram exertion because parking is limited along that strip and it's hindering the success of the Parade's businesses. Personally I want to see trams back along the Parade but I cannot for the life of me understand what they were thinking terminating it outside Norwood Place... Either terminate it at George Street so it goes as far as the cinemas, or go one better and terminate it at Port Rush Road.
User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2510
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

[U/C] Re: [U/C] [U/C] Re: [U/C] Re: SkyCity Adelaide Casino Expansion | 55m | 12 Levels | Hotel

Post by Ho Really »

Patrick_27 wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 3:17 pm
Waewick wrote:
Sat Oct 24, 2020 9:41 am
1NEEDS2POST wrote:
There's no reason we can't have both, the Parade is wide enough as it is. People didn't want to lose their precious street parking spaces (which are only available to lucky people).
How are they only available to lucky people? Or can't you reverse park? But that's not luck either Image

Many of those trees have a limited life span left (10 or so years)from what I heard so they will be removed. Hopefully by then someone has a decent tram plan

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk
Way off topic, but just to add to this before it wraps up.

That line of trees down the Parade are barely 40-years-old, and almost all of them have been replaced once or twice. They are possibly the worst type of tree one could have in the centre of a main road; unsightly for what is intended of them, bulky base root structures and an excessively droopy canopy (not that I think the alternative - plane trees - would be any better). I think parking was the chief reason for people voting against trams along the Parade, which will still need to be address with or without such a tram exertion because parking is limited along that strip and it's hindering the success of the Parade's businesses. Personally I want to see trams back along the Parade but I cannot for the life of me understand what they were thinking terminating it outside Norwood Place... Either terminate it at George Street so it goes as far as the cinemas, or go one better and terminate it at Port Rush Road.
If you want to run double carriageways, no parking and no median strip then The Parade is wide enough. In reality if you take out the parking it will narrow too much for traffic to run smoothly. There is also the problem of the slope. Mostly on the northern side. The Parade would definitely have to be flattened out more and the trees would have to go. Even if the trams ran without an overhead catenary system the ironbarks would have to go to even out the road and rid the roots from lifting up the pavement. As for the trees it is possible the ironbark may have a further 10 years of good life left before they become a hazard. Only a few have been replaced and those are the ones that have already fallen. In actual fact I think at least one hasn't been replaced. The one across from the apartments at The Bath. I agree the ironbarks were a bad choice. I think this may have been done while Vini Ciccarello was Lord Mayor. European plane trees would have been much better. You remember North Terrace before the tram line was put in? Look at Hutt Street or better still Frome Road. They make superb canopies. Also they now have acclimatised to our hot weather in summer. They will snap in high winds but rarely do unless they are diseased. Gum trees are way worse, including the ironbarks. As for the tram and parking that's something that won't be addressed for a while. I would rather see Adelaide mature and look at underground rail. Kent Town and Norwood first need more 5-6 storey apartments along The Parade and other main thoroughfares to build up the population. Then seriously look at an East-West line to augment Gawler-Seaford and OH-Belair CBD tunnels.

Regarding where the tram was terminating. At George Street intersection you would have to eliminate the turning lanes on The Parade. Which had been a hot issue recently. Same if you terminated at the Portrush Road intersection. What happens if they want to widen the intersection like the Magill and Portrush Road intersection? The terminus would have to be similar to what has been done on North Terrace near East Terrace leaving plenty of room for a turning lane.

Cheers

P.S. Moderators please shift the last few posts to the trams topic or where there was talk about trams up The Parade, Norwood. Thanks.
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.
Post Reply