ONH: [Port Adelaide] Newport Quays | $1.2b

[rev]

Well. It looks as though the ALP under Weatherill will be as slippery as it ever was under Rann.

There’s a bye-election coming up in the Port, so the Labor heads get together and decided that dangling the bright jewel of a re-visited Port redevelopment might pull votes.

Since when do governments not act in accordance with trying to win elections and staying in government?
Just how stupid do you take people for when you post your usual propaganda?

I'm sure the only reason they want to kick-start such a large stalled development in a key area like the Port is to win a bi-election.
I'm sure there's no other reason. I'm sure they are as slippery as you claim they are. Like, really.

You said once that you only want to hold governments accountable, regardless if they are Labor or Liberal.
Yet the new Premier has barely had time to warm his seat in parliament and you are already at it again with the usual anti-Labor...sorry, excuse me, anti-government, rants.
The guy hasn't had a chance to screw up yet, and you're nailing him to a cross.

I do agree with one thing though..

To have the old red brick mill towering empty and unregarded over the failed Newport Quays development is a joke.

They should demolished it long ago.

Anyway, the only thing I don't like the sound of is their intention to involve the council.

[Will]

From the Advertiser:

Port project back to drawing board

by: State Editor Greg Kelton From: The Advertiser November 01, 2011 12:00AM


A NEW Port Adelaide with a revitalised town centre and light rail transport is planned by the State Government after progress in the Newport Quays redevelopment stalled.

The Government will pay $5.9 million to buy Urban Construct, the principal developer in the project, out of the development agreement, a move that could prompt legal action.

It will now draw up a new masterplan for the port, which could involve a range of private developers.

The masterplan will be based on the plan drawn up by the Government for the old Clipsal site at Bowden and the process could take as long as 18 months.

Premier Jay Weatherill said the current work had been stalled for about three years and there was a need to reinvigorate Port Adelaide.

Under the original plan, agreed to by the previous Liberal government, the Land Management Corporation drew up the agreement to remediate and transfer about 50ha of former industrial waterfront land to be redeveloped for housing.

The project has been delayed by environmental concerns raised during the assessment process.

Mr Weatherill said the community and the Port Adelaide Enfield Council would be asked to take part in drawing up the new masterplan.

He said all development would be reviewed by an independent panel to be established with the Integrated Design Commission.

But he and Infrastructure Minister Patrick Conlon denied the timing of the decision had anything to do with a by-election in Port Adelaide expected early next year.

Urban Construct chief executive Todd Brown said the consortium was disappointed by the decision.

"The majority of the issues that have stalled the Port Adelaide Waterfront Redevelopment - such as the global economic downturn and local environmental problems - have been outside the control of the consortium," he said, adding the group would seek legal advice.

A waterfront-living dream enticed Sara Gobell to Newport Quays. However, the stalled development has left her "disappointed and frustrated," she said.

Ms Gobell and her partner spent more than $1 million on their three-bedroom townhouse and hope the government takeover will revitalise the project.

[stumpjumper]

Rev, I've had long experience of the softly spoken Mr Weatherill, and it's the timing of the Port announcement as much as anything else that bears Weatherill's unmistakeable hand. Nailing Mr Weatherill to a cross, or to anything else, would be almost impossible. He is a master at dominating and finalising discussion by speaking softly, calmly and rationally, putting everyone at ease but actually saying precisely nothing. It's a rare skill that has served him well over the years.

The new Premier said on radio this morning that the whole development is 'one of a number of developments of the last Liberal government that clearly should have had a much stronger partnership with the community.' He added that '..all my government is doing is to take advantage of a pause in the development to refocus it.'

Yet Weatherill's government accepted only a few days ago an application for a three year extension of the halt in the project, and has now responded by forcibly buying out Urban Construct. In my opinion, the government was shocked by Urban Construct's application under its agreement with the government, had to say yes, realised how bad it would look going into a bye-election with the development stalled for another three years, then took a few days to work out a useful response - the use of $6 million of public money to get rid of Urban Construct and assure people that all is well in the Port again.

Weatherill has neatly pork-barrelled the electorate, while blaming the problems with the Newport Quays development on the previous Liberal government.

The precipitate nature of the whole decision is obvious in an analysis of what Weatherill actually said in his radio interview this morning. He said nothing - not a fact, figure, number or time in relation to the Port.

My friend in PlanningSA told me yesterday that the proposal to reboot the Port development was a total surprise and had come directly from the Premier's department.

Over a year ago, Urban Construct decided to sell, at any price, units which had remained unsold since they were released in 2007 (despite people like Russell Ebert being told in 2007 that they were purchasing the 'last one' in the case of the 'waterfront villas'. Properties which did not sell at $900,000 in 2007 have been sold recently for $400,000. Ebert and others are suing the development consortium.

Why didn't the government act then? Weatherill was there, and could see what was happening. I suspect that the government, the LMC and the developers. all being on the same side, didn't want to use the phrase 'failure to deliver', particularly given the numerous court cases trying to prove fault to gain compensation. Now though, it's worth upsetting the government's good friend and cash supporter Urban Construct, because a crucial seat is at stake.

But let's give Jay Weatherill a chance as you say - although in announcing the reworking of this failed development just in time to get it off the agenda for a bye-election, you would think he would have a few facts and figures at hand, or at least an idea or two for the revitalised development. But Weatherill has nothing definite to say. No wonder people are calling it pork-barelling; a purely political response, about votes, with no background in urban design.

As to demolition of the old red brick mill - it's buildings like that which could have been used imaginatively to give the failed development some interest beyond generic waterfront housing.

And what's wrong with involving the council? Or the people directly for that matter. Right now, though, no-one knows who will 'redraw' the development. Last time, LMC held endless (and as it turned out, mostly ignored) 'public consultations'. Let's hope for better leadership and better process this time.

Finally, what does the admission that 'we (or according to Weatherill the previous Liberal government) got it all wrong with Newport Quays' mean for other LMC/private partnership developments, such as the Buckland Park swamp and the Mt Barker agricultural land redevelopments? Who says those developments aren't misguided as well? The same decision-makers were involved.

[rhino]

No wonder people are calling it pork-barelling

One person, so far .....

Mt Barker agricultural land redevelopments.

To be sure, you can talk some shite sometimes. "Agricultural Land" that was sold off to hobby farms (mainly 5 acres or less) years and years ago, and stopped being used for productive agriculture back then, and was never going to be used for agriculture again. You must be a lobbyist.

[rogue]

I wonder if the announcement of a broader plan for Port Adelaide has anything to do with the recent sale of the old Messenger Newspapers building on Commercial Rd. (http://www.nearmap.com/[email protected],1 ... d=20111017)

This site, and the one on the other side of the train line are ripe for a community housing type development.

Does anyone know who purchased the old Messenger site?

[ynotsfables]

"a master at dominating and finalising discussion but actually saying precisely nothing."
sounds familiar.

[Will]

SJ - I am slightly confused. Have you not for years been advocating that the state government should halt the current arrangement and start afresh, but this time incorporating the local community and council's input as well as ensuring any plans are sympathetic to the Port's history?

Isn't this what they are now doing?

Seriously, give credit where credit is due. Or else, people may start to think you are a mouthpiece for the Liberal party.

[baytram366]

I have been a fan of the Port Adelaide for a number of years now and never wanted to see it turned into another boring apartment complex which is what I see when I look at the current development facing Hart's Mill.
My wishlist for the Port would have to include restoration of many heritage buildings and re use (eg. The Wool Stores, Harts Mill, Customs House etc) and of course a tram line. Also, would be good to see the tram museum relocated down there into the Wool Stores area with a loop connecting to the main street but now I think I'm just dreaming.
I just think SA needs to learn the 3 "R's" - Reduce, Reuse Recycle especially when it comes to heritage buildings which are safe to re use.

[ozisnowman]

Yes old building are safe to reuse problem is they are much more costly to maintain and cannot easily be modified.
Hence the reason that the people with the money shy away from them because they are just a money pit.
After a while of neglect due to costs they become derelicht buildings.

Problem with Urban Construct in PA and Precinct is that they started getting too greedy and building
expensive dog boxes. Look at that ugly small building that was developed as part of the Precinct it is just
an eyesore. No wonder that people have woken up quickly to Urban Constructs poor quality and small size apartments.

[crawf]

There needs to be a good mix of old and new in Port Adelaide.

Harts Mill should be restored to it's former beauty and transformed into a funky arts space/ dining area. While the rest of the waterfront area should be developed into modern mid-high rise apartments to take advantage of waterfront views, which is very rare in Adelaide. A few waterfront cafes, bars and tourist things would also be fantastic aswell.

The Port Adelaide Town Centre should be given the same treatment aswell - old/new. Many of those lovely old vacant buildings would look amazing as warehouse-style apartments or art studios. While more trees and under-grounding of high voltage power-lines would also make the Port much more attractive.

Port Adelaide already has some redeeming features, which are it's history, untapped waterfront location and it's many pubs. Port Adelaide just needs some cash and will-power, then it will be amazing. Oh and one last thing hopefully this means the two derelict train stations alongside the Newport Quays will actually now be completely overhauled.

[stumpjumper]

I've been away for a while and my rhetoric's a bit rusty. Here's a short version of what I meant.

It's a good thing that the government has stopped the Port redevelopment. The development had stopped some time ago, but was still under the control of the developers who had applied under their contract to formalise the cessation of work and to request at no cost the option to restart within three years.

The government didn't want work formally halted for three years, especially during an important bye-election, so they bought the developer out (using public funds) and announced a comprehensive restart.

So the reasons might be ugly and political, but the outcome should be good, if the government is serious about good design. However, remember that the same government, its LMC and most of the same personnel were very closely involved in the now previous development. What has happened is exactly what the long-time opponents of the Newport Quays development said would happen, although there will be no apology from the suits responsible, just a demand for $5.9 million to pay out the formerly applauded, now reviled Urban Construct outfit.

This is an opportunity to look at the whole project, and to consider similar projects around the world. Let's hope they do a better job this time around.

'Hart's Mill', by the way, is a low sandstone building. The multi-storey red brick building was the Adelaide Milling Company'y building.

I still think there's a fundamental, expensive question to be answered before any development in the Port can be successful.

That question is about heavy industry on the Le Fevre Peninsula. If that were sent to the 'mainland' near Dry Creek or St Kilda, then the whole peninsula could flourish as a residential area. Without heavy rail and trucks, the Port's future would be assured.

[SRW]

So the reasons might be ugly and political, but the outcome should be good, if the government is serious about good design. However, remember that the same government, its LMC and most of the same personnel were very closely involved in the now previous development.

The government might be the same, but the scene has changed. Better appreciation of the value of urban planning and design has come to fore in policy circles, and we now have the IDC to shepherd things along. Admittedly, we've little experience of that particular body, but I'm hopeful.

[Vee]

Hart's Mill has been mentioned in recent posts about redevelopment in the Port waterfront.
I was keen to find out more about Hart's Mill and, by coincidence, found out about this upcoming event.

In a timely ??? announcement, the Hart's Mill Project is advertising a celebratory "Harty Party" at the Mill on Saturday 5 November (7pm) to celebrate the mooted change of focus in redevelopment of the Port. Check the website and blog for more details.
http://www.hartsmillproject.org/our-blog.html

Here is some information about the project from their website.

The Hart’s Mill Project is a community alliance that has been formed to campaign for a more sustainable model of development at the Hart’s Mill precinct in Port Adelaide.

The Hart’s Mill and Adelaide Milling Co buildings are unique and speak of the history of the working port and its importance in the founding of South Australia, and we believe that the current plans for this area of the precinct need to be re-thought.

With the Port waterfront undergoing huge change, the Hart’s Mill precinct offers us all one last opportunity to get it right, to build diversity into the redevelopment of the Port waterfront through an inspired and sensitive conversion of the Mills.

The website provides examples of what is possible and seeks further input from the community.
http://www.hartsmillproject.org/

I think Hart's Mill is a treasure and an integral part of the Port's history.
It has fabulous potential and the Mill (and surrounding space) deserves a special and iconic place in the revitalization of the Port.

[stumpjumper]

I agree wholeheartedly, Vee. It's very useful to have a 'hero project' within a project whose values etc stand for the desired values of the whole project. The 'The Mills' (to avoid having to distinguish the actual Hart's Mill all the time) were redeveloped with flair and enthusiasm, it would be a great thing for the Port, as well as for the property values of the people who have bought Newport Quays properties.

The redevelopment of the mills, followed by the arrival of the City of Adelaide ship, then perhaps the re-establishment of Searle's and the other timber boatyards, could create enough impetus to see the Port really drive its own redevelopment, rather than need expensive subsidies etc.

[crawf]

Lighting up waterfront
http://portside-messenger.whereilive.co ... aterfront/
16 NOV 11 @ 02:00PM BY TIM WILLIAMS

CHEERS: Liz McCaskill and Jillian Floyd raise a glass to the new Lighthouse Market at the Port.
A NEW market on the Port waterfront will become a major attraction bringing thousands of visitors to the town centre each week, organisers say.

The Lighthouse Markets will be launched next month by Lighthouse Hotel owner Jillian Floyd and Cafe 101 owner Liz McCaskill.

The market, set to include a mix of food, arts and crafts, clothing and live music, will be held in Black Diamond Square on Friday evenings and Saturdays.

Ms Floyd was confident at least 60 stallholders would take part in the opening night on Friday, December 9.

She said she was determined to build the market up to 300 stalls, rivalling Hobart’s waterfront Salamanca Markets, and to keep it open all year round.

“You have to dream big if you want big,” Ms Floyd said.

“You have to build it so they’ll come. My gut feeling is this is the time to do it,” Ms Floyd said.

The advent of the Lighthouse Markets comes in the wake of funding cuts that saw the Celtica Festival axed and the Art at the Hart market scaled back within a shortened Port Festival.

The market could help boost businesses throughout the Port’s heritage precinct, Ms Floyd said.

“I see the market bringing people into this area but also having an effect down the street,” she said.

The positivity generated by last month’s State Government takeover of planning for the waterfront and town centre made it the perfect time to launch a new event in the Port, Ms Floyd said.

The market is being backed by a 10-member organising committee of local business identities, including Lighthouse Hotel co-owner Colin Paterson, Maureen Jones from the Australian Maritime and Fisheries Academy, Hanna Grant from Party on Wheels in Alberton and Pancakes at the Port owner Justin Penman.

Mr Penman said the Port would benefit from having a regular visitor drawcard.

“Whenever there are events down here there’s always a good turnout. People are always looking for things to do down here.”

He predicted a spin-off for local businesses “for sure”, including his own. Port Adelaide Enfield Council last week voted to give $12,000 to help advertise the market, which Ms Floyd said would be managed on a not-for-profit basis.

She said stallholder fees would cover security and insurance, with anything left over ploughed back into promoting the market.
The market will not directly compete with the neighbouring Fishermen’s Wharf market.

The new market will be held on Fridays from 6-10pm and Saturdays from 9am until at least 3pm.