Sensational-Adelaide.com

As it is inevitable a major development will occur here and be discussed / announced sometime soon I assume a dedicated threat is required.

Is anybody able to post the following article?

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/subscrib ... our=append


Property sale listing;

https://www.realcommercial.com.au/for-s ... -504167591


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Code Amendment Application from Lion Nathan to State Government currently underway (& I assume summarised in the above article).

https://plan.sa.gov.au/have_your_say/co ... tid=Zxz2cZ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:38 pm

This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

But that would cost money for land, whereas the parklands are just free unused land waiting to be developed!

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:38 pm

This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

Aren't the new WACH and NRAH to be directly linked? -Or did that bit drop off the latest incarnation. Bit of a hike up Port Road between these two sites in case of an emergency requiring RAH facilities, -albeit the tram reserve could be used for emergency ambulance.

claybro wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 3:14 pm

[Shuz] wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 12:38 pm

This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

Aren't the new WACH and NRAH to be directly linked? -Or did that bit drop off the latest incarnation. Bit of a hike up Port Road between these two sites in case of an emergency requiring RAH facilities, -albeit the tram reserve could be used for emergency ambulance.

That already got dropped. If they're not directly next door (which by moving it across the rail lines it's not), then all transfers need to be done by ambulance.

Regardless of the next door location in the parklands they've already admitted that all transfers will be done by ambulance anyway. There's no special access footbridge or tunnel in the nWCH plans to connect to the RAH.

.

[Shuz] wrote:This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

This would be a good site for hundreds of new inner city dwellings with the opportunity to be masterplanned. Particularly considering we are facing a housing crisis.
Also there would be limited NIMBY / neighbourhood opposition for high rise / density due to its primarily industrial setting.

Also noting a lot of people here are against the latest ‘sprawl’ announcements. So if this opportunity is wasted, where do people actually see new housing developments taking place to meet current and future demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vasco wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:04 pm

[Shuz] wrote:This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

This would be a good site for hundreds of new inner city dwellings with the opportunity to be masterplanned. Particularly considering we are facing a housing crisis.
Also there would be limited NIMBY / neighbourhood opposition for high rise / density due to its primarily industrial setting.

Also noting a lot of people here are against the latest ‘sprawl’ announcements. So if this opportunity is wasted, where do people actually see new housing developments taking place to meet current and future demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering the current policy direction, I won't be surprised if this site ends up being underutilised in terms of density.

As far as land for future development - the three areas I see as having the highest potential for larger-scale Bowden-style TOD developments are:
- Islington Rail Yards (unfortunately currently in the process of being partly wasted on big-box shopping centres)
- Keswick Rail Yards (same as the above)
- Edwardstown (area between the railway and South Rd, including the industrial area near Emerson, the old Hills site, and Castle Plaza itself)

Vasco wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:04 pm

[Shuz] wrote:This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

This would be a good site for hundreds of new inner city dwellings with the opportunity to be masterplanned. Particularly considering we are facing a housing crisis.
Also there would be limited NIMBY / neighbourhood opposition for high rise / density due to its primarily industrial setting.

Also noting a lot of people here are against the latest ‘sprawl’ announcements. So if this opportunity is wasted, where do people actually see new housing developments taking place to meet current and future demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That argument could be used to build over all the parklands.

However, that whole area, not just the brewery could eventually be used for redevelopment for housing. Much of the old river frontage and back streets between the brewery and South Rd too. There's such a potential area there that the hospital would be a small portion.

But that's what politicians of both parties have missed. Thebarton, as a whole could be redeveloped, but they just look at things piecemeal.

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:22 pm

Vasco wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:04 pm

[Shuz] wrote:This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

This would be a good site for hundreds of new inner city dwellings with the opportunity to be masterplanned. Particularly considering we are facing a housing crisis.
Also there would be limited NIMBY / neighbourhood opposition for high rise / density due to its primarily industrial setting.

Also noting a lot of people here are against the latest ‘sprawl’ announcements. So if this opportunity is wasted, where do people actually see new housing developments taking place to meet current and future demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering the current policy direction, I won't be surprised if this site ends up being underutilised in terms of density.

As far as land for future development - the three areas I see as having the highest potential for larger-scale Bowden-style TOD developments are:
- Islington Rail Yards (unfortunately currently in the process of being partly wasted on big-box shopping centres)
- Keswick Rail Yards (same as the above)
- Edwardstown (area between the railway and South Rd, including the industrial area near Emerson, the old Hills site, and Castle Plaza itself)

I think these areas are more likely to be at the scale of Tonlsey or Glenside than Bowden. Given the proximity to parklands/transport/amenties, the West End should absolutely be as high or higher density than Bowden. RenewalSA should acquire.

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:22 pm

Vasco wrote: ↑

Wed Feb 22, 2023 10:04 pm

[Shuz] wrote:This would be a better site for the women's and children's hospital rather than on the parklands.

This would be a good site for hundreds of new inner city dwellings with the opportunity to be masterplanned. Particularly considering we are facing a housing crisis.
Also there would be limited NIMBY / neighbourhood opposition for high rise / density due to its primarily industrial setting.

Also noting a lot of people here are against the latest ‘sprawl’ announcements. So if this opportunity is wasted, where do people actually see new housing developments taking place to meet current and future demand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering the current policy direction, I won't be surprised if this site ends up being underutilised in terms of density.

As far as land for future development - the three areas I see as having the highest potential for larger-scale Bowden-style TOD developments are:
- Islington Rail Yards (unfortunately currently in the process of being partly wasted on big-box shopping centres)
- Keswick Rail Yards (same as the above)
- Edwardstown (area between the railway and South Rd, including the industrial area near Emerson, the old Hills site, and Castle Plaza itself)

The problem with the railyard sites is that new railyards will need to be built.
Where will they be built?
At Islington there's the freight depot yard on the other side of the metro train line. Not really an ideal place to have housing bordering on. Where will that be moved to?
Gillman would make sense to move these rail yards to.
The Aldi distribution centre is there, Mainfreight has a new facility which I think is connected to the freight train line, Northline is there, they're building another new massive warehouse in between them too not sure for who. Pacific National freight trains are there.
Islington is better further developed as a logistics/freight hub & terminal as it already pretty much is.

Keswick should be turned into parklands. It's next to a cemetery. Let the dead rest peacefully.

If the aim is to create high density housing, then what's wrong with the City it self? It's so under developed. We have town houses within the boundaries.
Lets be honest the majority of the City is under developed. Probably more then 70% if you look at it. West of Morphett St, south of Grote and Wakefield, east of Pulteney.
Filling it up with high rises, and amenities such as cafes, bars, restaurants, would create a whole new vibrancy for Adelaide.
That much talked about CBD tram loop we're all desperate to see built, will have ample justification then.

What's going to happen to the Christmas decorations thing by the river?

1NEEDS2POST wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 24, 2023 8:55 pm

What's going to happen to the Christmas decorations thing by the river?

Council has taken them over, they'll be staying.