News & Discussion: Height Limits

[Pistol]

Yet again another reason to delete the ACC from existence.

I have said it once and I will say it again, the ACC is only good (well half decent) at one thing and that is rubbish collection. Let them do what they are good at and give control of Adelaide to the State Government that was elected by a majority of South Australians.

[eKwatee]

When will large developers just bite the bullet and (secretly) employ younger and more agressive people to run for council on their behalf that aren't worried about a bunch of old timers that actually vote for these wanna be politicians not voting for them. The developers could provide these young go getters with big fat wallets full of big fat checks to promote themselves and then Adelaide can start to become what the majority of us actually want to see Adelaide become. HIGH RISE. Surprising the ACC aren't still living in caves and dragging women around by their hair.

[Bulldozer]

When will large developers just bite the bullet and (secretly) employ younger and more agressive people to run for council on their behalf that aren't worried about a bunch of old timers that actually vote for these wanna be politicians not voting for them. The developers could provide these young go getters with big fat wallets full of big fat checks to promote themselves and then Adelaide can start to become what the majority of us actually want to see Adelaide become. HIGH RISE. Surprising the ACC aren't still living in caves and dragging women around by their hair.

Ever heard of Sir Joh Bjelke-Petersen or the recent happenings with the Wollongong Council? In the last ACC election there were a number of pro-development candidates, but unfortunately for the rest of Adelaide, ACC voters didn't vote for them.

Like I've said before, the solution to this is to dilute the influence of the regressives in the ACC area by expanding the ACC to cover much more of metropolitan Adelaide. Most people want to see progress and many times more people than live in the ACC area commute to it every day, but still live within what we call Adelaide. E.g. If you go interstate and someone says "where are you from?" you don't say "Unley" or "Marion" or some other "city of" council name - you say Adelaide.

Another solution that's not as drastic as annexing councils would be to make local government elections compulsory (I believe they used to be) so that we don't end up with only the motivated interest groups voting. (QLD council elections are all next Saturday and are compulsory) Also, developers could contribute to the public debate by proposing buildings that exceed the height restrictions. I'm sure the reaction of the public would be positive and send a signal to the ACC.

[monotonehell]

When will large developers just bite the bullet and (secretly) employ younger and more agressive people to run for council on their behalf that aren't worried about a bunch of old timers that actually vote for these wanna be politicians not voting for them. The developers could provide these young go getters with big fat wallets full of big fat checks to promote themselves and then Adelaide can start to become what the majority of us actually want to see Adelaide become. HIGH RISE. Surprising the ACC aren't still living in caves and dragging women around by their hair.

Youch! That's a royal commission waiting to happen.

Corruption isn't the answer to poor representation (which is tantamount to the same thing).
Although I'd say that pretty much everyone on any city council has an agenda. There's not much reason to stand for a seat otherwise...

[Wayno]

When will large developers just bite the bullet and (secretly) employ younger and more agressive people to run for council on their behalf that aren't worried about a bunch of old timers that actually vote for these wanna be politicians not voting for them. The developers could provide these young go getters with big fat wallets full of big fat checks to promote themselves and then Adelaide can start to become what the majority of us actually want to see Adelaide become. HIGH RISE. Surprising the ACC aren't still living in caves and dragging women around by their hair.

Youch! That's a royal commission waiting to happen.

Corruption isn't the answer to poor representation (which is tantamount to the same thing).
Although I'd say that pretty much everyone on any city council has an agenda. There's not much reason to stand for a seat otherwise...

Surely the majority of people buying apartments in the new "high-rise" buildings will vote differently to the existing 2-storey town-house owners...change within the ACC might occur quicker than we think! and without risk of a royal commission too

[AtD]

Surely the majority of people buying apartments in the new "high-rise" buildings will vote differently to the existing 2-storey town-house owners...change within the ACC might occur quicker than we think! and without risk of a royal commission too

Nope. As Holdfast Bay has shown us, owners of apartments resist the construction of more apartments for selfish reasons. More appartments means more supply, which could mean a lower price. Apartment prices are much more speculative and thus more volatile than house prices.

[Wayno]

Surely the majority of people buying apartments in the new "high-rise" buildings will vote differently to the existing 2-storey town-house owners...change within the ACC might occur quicker than we think! and without risk of a royal commission too

Nope. As Holdfast Bay has shown us, owners of apartments resist the construction of more apartments for selfish reasons. More appartments means more supply, which could mean a lower price. Apartment prices are much more speculative and thus more volatile than house prices.

dang!

[eKwatee]

When will large developers just bite the bullet and (secretly) employ younger and more agressive people to run for council on their behalf that aren't worried about a bunch of old timers that actually vote for these wanna be politicians not voting for them. The developers could provide these young go getters with big fat wallets full of big fat checks to promote themselves and then Adelaide can start to become what the majority of us actually want to see Adelaide become. HIGH RISE. Surprising the ACC aren't still living in caves and dragging women around by their hair.

Youch! That's a royal commission waiting to happen.

Corruption isn't the answer to poor representation (which is tantamount to the same thing).
Although I'd say that pretty much everyone on any city council has an agenda. There's not much reason to stand for a seat otherwise...

Yeah all said tounge in cheek but there wasnt a smiley for it. I do believe that more people should make an effort to vote in the council elections as surely there would be councilers that have an Agenda on changing the planning regulations that dont get elected.

[david]

Councillor Stephen Yarwood's motion got more support than the vote suggested.
Other Councillors were anxious to wait and see how the updated Development Plan of 2006 impacted on CBD development especially through the Mixed Use Zones and other incentives to better developments.
And believe it or not the majority of the new councillors are not anti-development!
Just give us time - remember Rome wasn't built in a day!

[Wayno]

Councillor Stephen Yarwood's motion got more support than the vote suggested.
Other Councillors were anxious to wait and see how the updated Development Plan of 2006 impacted on CBD development especially through the Mixed Use Zones and other incentives to better developments.
And believe it or not the majority of the new councillors are not anti-development!
Just give us time - remember Rome wasn't built in a day!

hi david, can you please provide more information...sounds like you have some unpublicised knowledge?

[Howie]

Councillor Stephen Yarwood's motion got more support than the vote suggested.
Other Councillors were anxious to wait and see how the updated Development Plan of 2006 impacted on CBD development especially through the Mixed Use Zones and other incentives to better developments.
And believe it or not the majority of the new councillors are not anti-development!
Just give us time - remember Rome wasn't built in a day!

Thank you for posting David. Yes I certainly do believe you that the new councillors are not anti-development, even the previous council set the bar for their excellent approval-to-rejected ratio for developments applications, hopefully this council can set the bar again.

However, will the current council look into increasing city height limits again in this term? As you probably are aware so far of the excellent things that are going on in CBD councils across the country at the moment (e.g. Brisbane's lifting of height limits and its resulting contribution to their great skyline).

Hope you can help clarify this for us David.

Regards,

Howie

[rogue]

Councillor Stephen Yarwood's motion got more support than the vote suggested.
Other Councillors were anxious to wait and see how the updated Development Plan of 2006 impacted on CBD development especially through the Mixed Use Zones and other incentives to better developments.
And believe it or not the majority of the new councillors are not anti-development!
Just give us time - remember Rome wasn't built in a day!

Is this Mr David Plumridge AM?

[ozisnowman]

ONE STEP FORWARD TWO STEPS BACK... GOTTA LOVE THE ACC...

Maybe we can expect to the some ACC councillors on the next
version of Dancing with the Stars or So You Think You Can Dance
where they can demonstrate the ACC Three Step Tango -
One Step Forward Two Steps Back....

Seriously Adelaide with all this development might get a bit
more dense but it sure is starting to look like a pancake design
with a cherry in the middle...

[Ho Really]

[...]

Seriously Adelaide with all this development might get a bit
more dense but it sure is starting to look like a pancake design
with a cherry in the middle...

I love it. Good onya ozisnowman.

Cheers

[phenom]

As someone who rents in Adelaide, voted in the last election and who also nearly purchased a townhouse in the square mile last year, I can assure SA members I carefully looked at each of the candidates at the last council election and frankly, the choices for what I would call a 'realistic pro-development' candidate were very limited. I live in the south-west ward/area or whatever and most candidates were openly against pretty much any development of any scale (and boastful of it) and I actually despaired at the limited choice. Grass roots democracy is nice and all but it gets tiresome when it gets disconnected from reality.

Even if I had become an owner rather than a renter (and thus presumably more financially connected to longer term developments), I still would see it in my interests to support (for lack of a better shorthand) 'tall buildings', if only to keep them away from my residential area but to keep city council revenue sources growing from something other than my rates and taxes. I really don't see how, say, another half dozen 20 to 40 storey commerical or apartment towers near the core of the CBD would in any way have a detrimental impact on the parts of Adelaide time seems to have forgotten in the south-west and south-east. I don't see that most of the potential purchasers of skyhomes are really going to be interested in one bedroom crumbling cottages with no aircon and no car-park as an alternative so where's their beef.

The problem isn't NIBMYism, it's the fact that most of the people I had the choice to elect were not even rational about their anti-development stance.