Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in areas other than the CBD and North Adelaide. Includes Port Adelaide and Glenelg.
User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by PeFe »

Norman wrote:
Wed Mar 03, 2021 11:01 pm
Only took an hour, but I have carefully picked out all the Buckland Park stuff into this thread.
Thanks for that Norman.......the joys of being a moderator.
dbl96
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 4:31 pm

Re: Housing Developments | Northern Suburbs

Post by dbl96 »

SBD wrote:
Tue Mar 02, 2021 11:36 pm
rev wrote:
Tue Mar 02, 2021 7:04 pm
The loser ABC and loser Greens collaborating..what a shock. Lol

Its a state and local government failure.
Instead off proper on/off ramps they're putting traffic lights in. That should spell it out.
The majority of residents will be travelling for work, obviously. They're solution is to slow and impede traffic flow, but further down the line they've spent billions and will spend billions more to create a non stop corridor.

This land and much more has been marked for residential development for ages and its been within the metropolian boundary for a long time as well.
They can call it a town, village, satellite city or whatever else they want. Within 30 years its going to be just another suburb of Adelaide proper. Just another post code.

It'll be 30, 40 years before they build proper on/off ramps for access via port wakefield rd, the sort we see say at PREXY/Hanson road. When 30,000 people live in this development, and God knows how many thousands more in the surrounding areas.

And new housing developments are needed whether a minority agrees or not, we cant all and more importantly the majority DO NOT want to live in a tiny box called an apartment.
There is huge demand for housing, ACTUAL housing not shoe boxes.
There's an undersupply. That might be great for my family with multiple properties, but it doesn't help first home buyers, young people or young families, new arrivals from interstate etc.
I find it surprising that the most recent development time extension(s) didn't include additional conditions to require that the intersection be built grade-separated. It will soon be the only set of traffic lights between the River Torrens and Port Augusta.

I suspect that intersection is already one of the three worst crash sites between the Northern Expressway and Port Augusta. Copper Coast Highway is getting grade separated as we speak. I suspect that Angle Vale Road and Warnertown Road (near Port Pirie) are the other two worst ones. Traffic lights will probably help, but it seems like a missed opportunity while there are trucks and scrapers driving around moving dirt to not build a couple of approach ramps while they are at it.
Classic example of privatise the profits, socialise the costs. Walker Corporation gets to make a heap of cash out of building a ridiculous number of houses in a location without any supporting infrastructure. The taxpayer later gets to pick up the tab for building the infrastructure that is required to support the vastly increased population.

Why didn't the government require Walker Corporation to build a grade separated intersection? Because the government is in cahoots with Walker Corporation. Look at all the shady business that went on with the Festival Plaza development.

If the government was actually acting in the public interest with regard to this development, it would have killed it when it had the chance. As everyone has already pointed out, this is an absolutely horrendous development that has no obvious redeeming features.

It is completely absurd that in a development of this size there no corridor being reserved for future rail access. I really can't understand why Walker couldn't have at least done that.
bits
Legendary Member!
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by bits »

Stamp duty, council rates, levies and general tax increase due to population increase surely does something to pay for infrastructure.
People could live there for the rest of time, the cost of a train line or whatever seems cheap.

Not that trains have at all been a popular public transport service in South Australia.

If you subscribe to an idea of Adelaide increasing in population being a positive, then allowing a private company to create Adelaide as a destination to move to or give birth within is easy to accept.
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4848
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by rev »

Why should the rest of us pay for the infrastructure upgrades to accommodate apartment buildings in inner suburbs?
Or do people think that you can just plonk an apartment with 50+ residents anywhere and all will be sweet?

I think people need to put their own prejudices aside, and accept that we need both new housing developments and higher density options.
Both serve a purpose.
Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 767
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by Eurostar »

rev wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 10:53 am
Why should the rest of us pay for the infrastructure upgrades to accommodate apartment buildings in inner suburbs?
Or do people think that you can just plonk an apartment with 50+ residents anywhere and all will be sweet?

I think people need to put their own prejudices aside, and accept that we need both new housing developments and higher density options.
Both serve a purpose.
But why up whoop whoop, land cheap because its swamp or something why not brownfield or sites in general close to Adelaide. Redevelop the Wool Stores area in Port Adelaide , I wonder if there is any of those warehouse buildings could be cleaned and made ready for warehouse apartments, likewise with land where Gillman? yard used to be. Or reuse sites like Strathmont Centre, former Panorama TAFE, former Highways Department land at Ingle Farm (Wright Road). Reusing old sites rather than building estates in Buckland is best.
Attachments
3879a5b63e4feb70661f0f8918fa653f.jpg
Warehouse Apartments example
User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by PeFe »

I would love to see a cost analysis comparing new totally isolated suburban builds (ie Buckland Riverlea) of 30,000 residents, compared to urban infill.....

The cost of new roads, new sewerage systems, new schools, new public transport and new shopping centres versus in-fill development where existing infrastructure is expanded or upgraded.

My guess is the urban infill is way way cheaper.
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4848
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by rev »

Eurostar wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 11:27 am
rev wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 10:53 am
Why should the rest of us pay for the infrastructure upgrades to accommodate apartment buildings in inner suburbs?
Or do people think that you can just plonk an apartment with 50+ residents anywhere and all will be sweet?

I think people need to put their own prejudices aside, and accept that we need both new housing developments and higher density options.
Both serve a purpose.
But why up whoop whoop, land cheap because its swamp or something why not brownfield or sites in general close to Adelaide. Redevelop the Wool Stores area in Port Adelaide , I wonder if there is any of those warehouse buildings could be cleaned and made ready for warehouse apartments, likewise with land where Gillman? yard used to be. Or reuse sites like Strathmont Centre, former Panorama TAFE, former Highways Department land at Ingle Farm (Wright Road). Reusing old sites rather than building estates in Buckland is best.
Because how are you going to redevelop that area at Port Adelaide, without demolishing everything? Not everyone wants an apartment, most people still prefer the traditional type of housing.

Places like Gillman and the former salt pan area will only be viable (as in not turning into a ghetto), when the Wingfield dump and associated recycling centres are moved. Nobody is going to spend 300-500k on a house and land package when every morning they get that fresh dump air to breath in. Unless it's turned into more industry.

Another thing that most people haven't considered, and I only thought of when I saw an article on AdelaideNow. Schools and overcrowding. Many are beyond capacity.

-Sturt St Community School in the city 126%, will be at 115% in 2022. Adelaide Botanic High School will be at 109% in 2022. Adelaide High School is at 107% and will be the same in 2022. Hundreds of new residents in new apartment buildings in the city.
-Woodville High School is at 102% and will be at 106% in 2022. The next door St Clare development has added thousands of new residents, including hundreds in new apartment buildings.
-Nailsworth Primary School is at 113%, 103% in 2022. Prospect Road is filling up with apartment buildings.
-Norwood Morialta High School is at 84% but will hit 102% in 2022. Norwood is going to be filling up with apartment buildings in the years ahead.

Just as couple of examples, you get the idea.
What's going to happen when there's even more apartment buildings going up in and around these areas?
Should apartment building developers pay for new school infrastructure?
Even in new developments in the north some schools are beyond capacity.
Just another fine example of the lack of planning in this state. Just imagine if people actually sat down and thought about every aspect of society. Politicians would run out of excuses very quickly.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by SBD »

PeFe wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:57 pm
I would love to see a cost analysis comparing new totally isolated suburban builds (ie Buckland Riverlea) of 30,000 residents, compared to urban infill.....

The cost of new roads, new sewerage systems, new schools, new public transport and new shopping centres versus in-fill development where existing infrastructure is expanded or upgraded.

My guess is the urban infill is way way cheaper.
  • Seventy years ago, that is exactly what Elizabeth was.
  • Fifty years ago, Monarto was proposed, but didn't happen.
  • Forty five years ago, West Lakes was built on swampland.
  • Forty years ago, Noarlunga Centre was established
  • Thirty five years ago, Gillman failed to become a multi-function-polis.
  • Twenty years ago Mawson Lakes was built on farmland.
It seems we have along history of building new towns that eventually become suburbs. There are also lots of urban infill suburbs such as Bowden, Lightsview, St Clair.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: Housing Developments | Northern Suburbs

Post by SBD »

dbl96 wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 3:26 pm
...

Classic example of privatise the profits, socialise the costs. Walker Corporation gets to make a heap of cash out of building a ridiculous number of houses in a location without any supporting infrastructure. The taxpayer later gets to pick up the tab for building the infrastructure that is required to support the vastly increased population.

Why didn't the government require Walker Corporation to build a grade separated intersection? Because the government is in cahoots with Walker Corporation. Look at all the shady business that went on with the Festival Plaza development.

If the government was actually acting in the public interest with regard to this development, it would have killed it when it had the chance. As everyone has already pointed out, this is an absolutely horrendous development that has no obvious redeeming features.

It is completely absurd that in a development of this size there no corridor being reserved for future rail access. I really can't understand why Walker couldn't have at least done that.
I don't know if anything is "reserved", but a glance at Google Maps looks like a spur from a junction north of Virginia could branch along the alignment of Womma Road to Old Port Wakefield Road, then continue with a slight left curve into the Riverlea Development area. I assume that there would be resistance to a new level crossing on Port Wakefield Road/Highway, so there would be a new bridge, and perhaps that would achieve grade separation of the Angle Vale Road intersection at the same time.

Given the resistance in other threads to closely-spaced stations, how many stations should be built between Salisbury and a terminus in Buckland Park? Where would they be optimally located, and for what purpose? Let's assume for the purpose that either Adleaide Metro gets track access on the ARTC line or the corridor is wide enough to add suburban tracks.
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by SBD »

rev wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 4:03 pm
...

Another thing that most people haven't considered, and I only thought of when I saw an article on AdelaideNow. Schools and overcrowding. Many are beyond capacity.

-Sturt St Community School in the city 126%, will be at 115% in 2022. Adelaide Botanic High School will be at 109% in 2022. Adelaide High School is at 107% and will be the same in 2022. Hundreds of new residents in new apartment buildings in the city.
-Woodville High School is at 102% and will be at 106% in 2022. The next door St Clare development has added thousands of new residents, including hundreds in new apartment buildings.
-Nailsworth Primary School is at 113%, 103% in 2022. Prospect Road is filling up with apartment buildings.
-Norwood Morialta High School is at 84% but will hit 102% in 2022. Norwood is going to be filling up with apartment buildings in the years ahead.

Just as couple of examples, you get the idea.
What's going to happen when there's even more apartment buildings going up in and around these areas?
Should apartment building developers pay for new school infrastructure?
Even in new developments in the north some schools are beyond capacity.
Just another fine example of the lack of planning in this state. Just imagine if people actually sat down and thought about every aspect of society. Politicians would run out of excuses very quickly.
Schools seem to come and go. I don't know if that's "Adelaide doesn't plan" or typical of everywhere.

The Elizabeth/Smithfield area (City of Playford) had about 6 high schools built in the 1950s and 1960s. They gradually closed and consolidated to Playford International (Elizabeth), Craigmore and Smithfield Plains. Smithfield Plains then closed and merged with a couple of primary schools to create Mark Oliphant superschool, which has expanded and is full again.

The young couples who bought houses in the new suburbs of Elizabeth had families that needed schools built to educate them. The kids grew up and moved away, just like country towns, the parents remained as empty-nesters, but the kids bought new houses in other areas instead of coming back "home". The schools closed due to lack of students, but now that the original residents are dying out and new young couples are buying their houses (or blocks with new houses) there is a growing demand for schools again, but many of the old school sites have been redeveloped as housing - the urban infill that people on this forum generally support instead of greenfields development like Buckland Park and expanded Angle Vale (which is getting its first high school as we speak).
bits
Legendary Member!
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 9:24 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by bits »

There will be infill and there will be new land released. People will buy what they want and can afford. Maybe they need proximity to the city, maybe they need remoteness from the city.

Buckland Park to Gawler to Aldinga Beach is surely all destined to be suburbs. There is plenty of that land to the South and even more to the North.

I would prefer to buy in Buckland Park over Gawler or Mt Barker.
User avatar
PeFe
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1295
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 9:47 am

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by PeFe »

SBD wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 9:32 pm
PeFe wrote:
Sun Mar 07, 2021 2:57 pm
I would love to see a cost analysis comparing new totally isolated suburban builds (ie Buckland Riverlea) of 30,000 residents, compared to urban infill.....

The cost of new roads, new sewerage systems, new schools, new public transport and new shopping centres versus in-fill development where existing infrastructure is expanded or upgraded.

My guess is the urban infill is way way cheaper.
  • Seventy years ago, that is exactly what Elizabeth was.
  • Fifty years ago, Monarto was proposed, but didn't happen.
  • Forty five years ago, West Lakes was built on swampland.
  • Forty years ago, Noarlunga Centre was established
  • Thirty five years ago, Gillman failed to become a multi-function-polis.
  • Twenty years ago Mawson Lakes was built on farmland.
It seems we have along history of building new towns that eventually become suburbs. There are also lots of urban infill suburbs such as Bowden, Lightsview, St Clair.
Elizabeth was a "new town"....a 1950's planning concept that involved "starting from scratch" (a reaction to the destruction of WW2) building new housing to a proscribed formula, usually very cheaply, at a distance from an established centre. Cookie cutter houses with a small shopping centre in the centre of the suburb. One large urban centre with a shopping mall and other government services. Employment would be provided by a large factory, captive workforce in a captive enviroment. Resilience to change.....0.....as soon as the major employer fails the whole pack of cards comes tumbling down.

Gillman and Monarto never got to the detailed planning stage so we never got to see the type of urban landscape that would have been built. Gillman would have simply become another suburb........Monarto would have been a total disaster in my mind, no employment bar government...the whole thing would have ended up as a "white elephant".

Noarlunga Centre was a 70's afterthought......put a train station in the light industrial area next to the shopping centre. That was the extent of the planning. The kids and the losers who needed public transport could get the bus home.

West Lakes was "suburban infill".....quite a change of direction for its day. The surrounding suburbs were quite poor at the time, lots of housing trust homes with everyone on welfare. Port Adelaide was a run down port full of rough pubs and Semaphore/Exeter had lots of old houses but no-one was going to renovate them.....why bother.....you would never get your money back in the re-sale. West Lakes was a revised "suburban dream" but more upmarket and closer to town than its competitors.

And getting back to Riverlea/Buckland Park......those renders really are shocking in their lack of actual detail.....wide empty roads with a mere 2 cars.....pedestrians walking to somewhere that doesn't seem visible. No visible urban centre/shops....no public transport.

Riverlea.........."Brasilia on the Gawler River floodplain"
SBD
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 3:49 pm
Location: Blakeview

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by SBD »

The "master plan" diagram shows a district centre, at least four local centres, a couple of "employment centres" and at least one school. I guess it is up to the customers/ residents how quickly any of these things might develop. Hopefully the developer makes a loss leader start to get it going like in Blake's Crossing rather than waiting like in Almond Grove.

Early residents need to establish the habit and culture of shopping local, so they don't already have other routines before local starts.
Eurostar
Legendary Member!
Posts: 767
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 3:44 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by Eurostar »

SBD wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:10 pm
The "master plan" diagram shows a district centre, at least four local centres, a couple of "employment centres" and at least one school. I guess it is up to the customers/ residents how quickly any of these things might develop. Hopefully the developer makes a loss leader start to get it going like in Blake's Crossing rather than waiting like in Almond Grove.

Early residents need to establish the habit and culture of shopping local, so they don't already have other routines before local starts.
I say yes to expanding rural towns/cities like Victor Harbor has room to expand a little more, same with Port Elliot, Mount Compass, Myponga, Murray Bridge, Renmark, Loxton (former rail yard area) etc.
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4848
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

Re: Riverlea (Buckland Park) | 12,000 dwellings | $3b

Post by rev »

Eurostar wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:45 am
SBD wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 5:10 pm
The "master plan" diagram shows a district centre, at least four local centres, a couple of "employment centres" and at least one school. I guess it is up to the customers/ residents how quickly any of these things might develop. Hopefully the developer makes a loss leader start to get it going like in Blake's Crossing rather than waiting like in Almond Grove.

Early residents need to establish the habit and culture of shopping local, so they don't already have other routines before local starts.
I say yes to expanding rural towns/cities like Victor Harbor has room to expand a little more, same with Port Elliot, Mount Compass, Myponga, Murray Bridge, Renmark, Loxton (former rail yard area) etc.
Victor, Port Eliot, Middleton, Goolwa should just merge into one rural city, plenty of room for new housing between them.
Post Reply