News & Discussion: Other Metropolitan Developments

[Norman]

Looks good! I would love this to continue North along Goodwood Road to the old heritage building and get rid of the old, derelict shops.

[Patrick_27]

This one has just started popping up ads on my FB feed, also a sign out the front of the site. 134-138 Goodwood Road, Goodwood. The former BankSA building and the neighbouring building.

[SRW]

This one has just started popping up ads on my FB feed, also a sign out the front of the site. 134-138 Goodwood Road, Goodwood. The former BankSA building and the neighbouring building.

Noted on previous page. But yeah, I've seen a heavy social media marketing push on this.

[PeFe]

There is a dilapidated block of Housing Trust apartments awaiting renovation in Parkside.

The state government could redevelop this site, building new apartments for sale and incorporating some "social housing".

Sell the land to developers, with a caveat stipulating that 10 of the new apartments must be "social". The government can then take the money from the sale of the land and build more "social housing" elsewhere in the metropolitan area.

I am not against "social housing" per se.....but not all bunched together, that is a disaster all over the world (perpetuates welfare culture and encourages continuation of lower socio economic outlook......much harder to break the cycle of poverty.)

From In Daily

Millions unspent as Parkside public housing block sits empty

Twenty-one State Government-owned public housing units in one of Adelaide’s most desirable city-fringe suburbs have remained empty and dilapidated for three years, despite $4 million being set aside for renovations in 2018.


A 21-unit public housing block in Parkside has been empty since 2017. Photo: Tony Lewis/InDaily

The SA Housing Authority confirmed to InDaily that the apartment block on George Street in Parkside had been made progressively vacant since 2017, with plans to renovate the 21 single and two-bedroom units still under consideration.

The former State Government committed $4 million to renovate the block and a neighbouring 45-unit block on the same site – known as “Rosslyn Court” – in February 2018.

At the time, the then Public Housing Minister Stephen Mullighan said it was important for social housing to be located in all parts of Adelaide “including our eastern suburbs and especially in Parkside, where land is both scarce and expensive”.

“These properties are close to the CBD and have good access to public transport and a range of other services and facilities including schools and community facilities,” he said.

A SA Housing Authority spokesperson told InDaily in a statement yesterday that it had spent $600,000 of the $4 million budget fixing “non-structural” problems to the 45-unit block, including minor internal works and removing a “small amount” of asbestos.

InDaily asked the spokesperson what had happened to the remaining $3.4 million set aside in the budget and why the 21-unit apartment block had not yet undergone renovations, but the spokesperson was unable to clarify.

InDaily also asked Human Services Minister Michelle Lensink if the Government was planning to sell all, or a portion of, 40 George Street Parkside.

The question was referred to the SA Housing Authority, which was unable to provide a response.


The former State Government committed $4 million to redevelop Rosslyn Court in 2018. Photo: Tony Lewis/InDaily

Two other 45-unit apartment blocks also located at Rosslyn Court were refurbished in 2011 in a separate upgrade funded by the former Federal Government.

The SA Housing Authority, which has owned the property since 1965 when the apartment blocks were first built, said from the three 45-unit blocks that are currently tenanted, four units remain vacant.

It said the 21-block was empty “due to an ongoing renewal program targeted at this type of accommodation”.

“The authority is currently considering options for the future of Block 1 (the 21-unit bloc),” the authority’s spokesperson said.

Photos taken by InDaily of the 21-unit block show broken blinds and windows, and rubbish strewn out the front of the building.

Full article : https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/01/15/ ... its-empty/

[SRW]

There is a dilapidated block of Housing Trust apartments awaiting renovation in Parkside.

The state government could redevelop this site, building new apartments for sale and incorporating some "social housing".

Sell the land to developers, with a caveat stipulating that 10 of the new apartments must be "social". The government can then take the money from the sale of the land and build more "social housing" elsewhere in the metropolitan area.

I am not against "social housing" per se.....but not all bunched together, that is a disaster all over the world (perpetuates welfare culture and encourages continuation of lower socio economic outlook......much harder to break the cycle of poverty.)

From In Daily

Millions unspent as Parkside public housing block sits empty

Twenty-one State Government-owned public housing units in one of Adelaide’s most desirable city-fringe suburbs have remained empty and dilapidated for three years, despite $4 million being set aside for renovations in 2018.


A 21-unit public housing block in Parkside has been empty since 2017. Photo: Tony Lewis/InDaily

The SA Housing Authority confirmed to InDaily that the apartment block on George Street in Parkside had been made progressively vacant since 2017, with plans to renovate the 21 single and two-bedroom units still under consideration.

The former State Government committed $4 million to renovate the block and a neighbouring 45-unit block on the same site – known as “Rosslyn Court” – in February 2018.

At the time, the then Public Housing Minister Stephen Mullighan said it was important for social housing to be located in all parts of Adelaide “including our eastern suburbs and especially in Parkside, where land is both scarce and expensive”.

“These properties are close to the CBD and have good access to public transport and a range of other services and facilities including schools and community facilities,” he said.

A SA Housing Authority spokesperson told InDaily in a statement yesterday that it had spent $600,000 of the $4 million budget fixing “non-structural” problems to the 45-unit block, including minor internal works and removing a “small amount” of asbestos.

InDaily asked the spokesperson what had happened to the remaining $3.4 million set aside in the budget and why the 21-unit apartment block had not yet undergone renovations, but the spokesperson was unable to clarify.

InDaily also asked Human Services Minister Michelle Lensink if the Government was planning to sell all, or a portion of, 40 George Street Parkside.

The question was referred to the SA Housing Authority, which was unable to provide a response.


The former State Government committed $4 million to redevelop Rosslyn Court in 2018. Photo: Tony Lewis/InDaily

Two other 45-unit apartment blocks also located at Rosslyn Court were refurbished in 2011 in a separate upgrade funded by the former Federal Government.

The SA Housing Authority, which has owned the property since 1965 when the apartment blocks were first built, said from the three 45-unit blocks that are currently tenanted, four units remain vacant.

It said the 21-block was empty “due to an ongoing renewal program targeted at this type of accommodation”.

“The authority is currently considering options for the future of Block 1 (the 21-unit bloc),” the authority’s spokesperson said.

Photos taken by InDaily of the 21-unit block show broken blinds and windows, and rubbish strewn out the front of the building.

Full article : https://indaily.com.au/news/2020/01/15/ ... its-empty/

I don't know what you're suggesting by ''welfare culture", but I will agree that I've seen it argued that there are more inclusive outcomes for social housing that is intermixed with other housing (primarily by overcoming the stigma that your comment suggests). However, if the site is to be redeveloped, the redevelopment should require either a maintenance of or net increase to social housing units, whether on site or by plowing profits back into desperately needed social housing across the state. I used to live on George Street, and I remember how large this site is -- there's plenty of scope to increase density while providing homes for people in need. Given the top end of George Street (Greenhill Rd) has higher density under construction or planned, it wouldn't be totally out of character to go up to about 5-6 levels.

[PeFe]

As I said....sell the block to a developer who can can build 40 new apartments and the government can buy 10 at "build" cost.

Then the government uses the profit from the sale of the land and invests in another development somewhere else ( ie buys 5 apartments at cost price by "investing" with the developer) at another location.

If some developers don't want 'social housing" at all in their new developments, then the government doesn't invest with them. A smart developer would realise that having to borrow 5 millions dollars less (because the government will buy a certain number of apartments at cost) to fund their developments is a winning proposition.

West Lakes has quite a bit of "social housing" spread around the suburb.

[TorrensSA]

The numbers of units in this article is wrong, the empty block is 21 units, but there's not 3 X 45 unit blocks. There's the 21 unit block, the next block is un renovated and has 24 units and the back two blocks which are renovated have 15 and 6 units, this is from looking on Google maps. The article is saying theres 156 units, theres about 66 units.

[Allkai]

Cant recall if there's an earlier post about the old Schweppes factory re-development on Payneham Rd, but the project has been canned in any case.

One resident objected to the already approved proposal, and won.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenge ... e89b390228

One man’s appeal against a recently-approved, $6 million shopping precinct in Payneham has been upheld in court.

Payneham South resident Steven Beltrame, who appeared as an “aggrieved neighbour”, successfully argued in the Environment, Resources and Development Court earlier this month the 382 Payneham Rd development – the former home of a Schweppes factory – would impact on residential amenity.

Billed as a “service trade premises”, it would have sold boats, caravans and trailers.

In court documents seen by The Messenger, Mr Beltrame said the proposal was not fit for purpose and its “likely extended hours” would ensure glare from lights and car headlights.

[SRW]

Cant recall if there's an earlier post about the old Schweppes factory re-development on Payneham Rd, but the project has been canned in any case.

One resident objected to the already approved proposal, and won.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenge ... e89b390228

One man’s appeal against a recently-approved, $6 million shopping precinct in Payneham has been upheld in court.

Payneham South resident Steven Beltrame, who appeared as an “aggrieved neighbour”, successfully argued in the Environment, Resources and Development Court earlier this month the 382 Payneham Rd development – the former home of a Schweppes factory – would impact on residential amenity.

Billed as a “service trade premises”, it would have sold boats, caravans and trailers.

In court documents seen by The Messenger, Mr Beltrame said the proposal was not fit for purpose and its “likely extended hours” would ensure glare from lights and car headlights.

Without being able to read the article, the excerpt you posted makes it sound as though the proposal was akin to a car yard. In which case, probably a good thing it was rejected.

[how good is he]

I have a feeling they intended to use the old shell/framework of the factory as it hasn't been demolished. Probably council could/should have changed the industrial zoning before it was sold if they wanted residential etc. Not sure what the plan "B" is for the developer, if anyone knows more?

[Allkai]

Without being able to read the article, the excerpt you posted makes it sound as though the proposal was akin to a car yard. In which case, probably a good thing it was rejected.

There's a render in the article, it was akin to a Mile End Home Centre type setup.

I have a feeling they intended to use the old shell/framework of the factory as it hasn't been demolished.

Correct.

[Llessur2002]

Five storeys, shops, slated for old derelict industrial site at Kilkenny

Five-storey, high-density residential buildings and shops could be allowed on an derelict graffiti-riddled industrial site at Kilkenny, right next to the train station, under a new development plan.



A block of industrial land in Kilkenny would be rezoned to allow five-storey residential buildings under a new proposal.

The former Bianco factory site, at the corner of David Terrace and Kilkenny Station, is slated to become a mixed use zone under the development plan amendment (DPA) now out for consultation.



It backs on to MJ McInerney Reserve and is a kilometre from Arndale Shopping Centre. The site has been derelict for more than a decade, serving as a sore point for neighbouring residents and a perfect canvas for graffiti vandals.

“Low intensity” commercial development, such as shops, would be allowed on David and Wilpena Terraces and homes to a maximum of two storeys on Mundulla St.

But residential buildings of up to five storeys would be allowed on some parts of the block, set back from the street.



It is surrounded by a mix of low density houses and businesses.

The owner of the land approached Charles Sturt Council in 2018 and was given approval to investigate a privately funded DPA.

The council agreed the land was “no longer suitable” as an industrial block and would be more suited to residential development given its proximity to the train station.

Records show the property was bought by Gregs and Pty Ltd for $3 million in October 2008.

Charles Sturt’s industrial land study, done in 2018, said the block was “ripe for redevelopment”.

It also recommended rezoning the “old and largely run-down precinct north of the railway line for high density residential use”.

The DPA is out for public consultation until Tuesday, April 14.

From: https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenge ... 93608a2684

[PeFe]

Great news ! I have been arguing for years that the Kilkenny site should a transit orientated development. (Not that it is guaranteed to become a tod, but will be a "development")

I believe that the rail line should be grade separated (and why not do Woodville Road at the same time!) and the station should be redevelopped and become part of the new development......not a run down train station situated next to brand new apartments.

You could even demand that the developer rebuild the train station as part of a "master plan" with the developer given concessions in exchange.

The balls in your court SA Liberal government......I know they struggle with anything verging on "vision" relating to urban/transport issues but they could try googling Chatswood or St Leonards train stations in Sydney to see what is possible (Yes Chatswood would probably never happen in Adelaide but something of the scale of St Leonards could....)

[Llessur2002]

You'd really have to hope that there will be some redevelopment of the station when this development goes ahead - other than the community art and plantings it's in a pretty shocking state. There's plenty of scope to build a new station slightly further south-east away from David Terrace which would enable the line and existing station to remain open during the works.

As a local to this area I'm really looking forward to this development taking place - I can't believe there's even any question over rezoning land like this, just a few km out from the CBD, as residential. The sooner the OI factory relocates the better - although I suspect this won't be for a while yet given the massive new warehouse they've just built (although this could easily be re-purposed as large commercial fronting Port Road)..

[rev]

The only part of that red outlined area that should have 5+ storeys is the train line side & the reserve side, maybe up to 5 along the end of Pinda near the reserve.
The rest of the area facing north is residential.