News & Discussion: Other Metropolitan Developments

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in areas other than the CBD and North Adelaide. Includes Port Adelaide and Glenelg.
Message
Author
User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#106 Post by Ho Really » Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:36 pm

Cruise Control wrote:Wouldn't that render new bridges practically useless?
Probably would, but the rail line could be diverted to connect to the Outer Harbor line at Glanville/Birkenhead and then encircle Port Adelaide back to the old Port Dock line to Alberton. The road bridge would always have a use regardless, even if there would be a little less traffic. Interesting though isn't?

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#107 Post by Ho Really » Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:37 pm

rogue wrote:Aren't there contamination issues with the soil within the old MFP area?
I think this was minimal.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

crawf
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5527
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Adelaide

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#108 Post by crawf » Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:20 pm

What does MFP stand for? :?:

User avatar
rogue
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 659
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 8:45 am
Location: Over here

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#109 Post by rogue » Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:40 pm

crawf wrote:What does MFP stand for? :?:
Multi Function Polis

stumpjumper
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1497
Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#110 Post by stumpjumper » Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:20 pm

Whoops! In my utopioa, the old Glanville to Outer Harbor line would stay, and the twin river crossings would go, allowing yacht mooring in the Inner Harbor and helping the development along.

As for cost, I was thinking that the high price of land in the 'Golden Finger' of Le Fevre peninsula would be high enough to make it all work.

It's interesting about the salt pans. You certainly do learn something every day. Maybe we could have pepper pans there too and corner the market.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#111 Post by Ho Really » Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:03 pm

stumpjumper wrote:Whoops! In my utopioa, the old Glanville to Outer Harbor line would stay, and the twin river crossings would go, allowing yacht mooring in the Inner Harbor and helping the development along.
The road and rail bridges could have easily been substituted by tunnels under the channel. In Holland they have dropped large precast tunnel sections into canals and then sealed them. This technique could easily have been the solution at Port Adelaide thus keeping the Inner harbor accessible to large pleasure boats and tall masted yachts. Albeit, we have idiots in government.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
ynotsfables
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:15 am

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#112 Post by ynotsfables » Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:36 pm

rogue wrote:
crawf wrote:What does MFP stand for? :?:
Multi Function Polis
Multi functinal city. Polis is greek for city such as in the word metro-polis. I can't remember what metro means though.

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Adelaide SA

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#113 Post by AG » Mon Oct 15, 2007 6:48 pm

Ho Really wrote:The road and rail bridges could have easily been substituted by tunnels under the channel. In Holland they have dropped large precast tunnel sections into canals and then sealed them. This technique could easily have been the solution at Port Adelaide thus keeping the Inner harbor accessible to large pleasure boats and tall masted yachts. Albeit, we have idiots in government.

Cheers
I think you'll find economic and space related issues (moreso on the Le Fevre Peninsula side) led to the Government's decision to build opening bridges instead of higher bridges or tunnels instead. I haven't seen that many tall ships pass into Port Adelaide any time I have been there. I would've rather seen a higher bridge or a tunnel instead as well though.

User avatar
Ho Really
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2712
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: In your head

Re: Parcels of undeveloped land?!

#114 Post by Ho Really » Mon Oct 15, 2007 11:38 pm

AG wrote:I think you'll find economic and space related issues (moreso on the Le Fevre Peninsula side) led to the Government's decision to build opening bridges instead of higher bridges or tunnels instead. I haven't seen that many tall ships pass into Port Adelaide any time I have been there. I would've rather seen a higher bridge or a tunnel instead as well though.
Space may have been an issue on the Le Fevre Peninsula side if tunnels were built, but this would have depended on what depth the prefabs were laid and how much land could have been acquired if the tunnel went deeper. As for the money, an opening bridge is more expensive than a static one, even if it was a little higher. A prefab tunnel with some dredging would not have been any more expensive than what we have now. I am not sure if at any stage the government considered this option and whether any info was released to the public. I know there was one letter written in The Advertiser and I'm not sure if there were more. As you know the whole point of keeping the Inner Harbor accessible is for tourism and leisure. There's always the possibility of foreign naval ships, training ships and even small cruise ships visiting. We need these options to keep the Inner Harbor alive. Let's hope the developers around Docks 1 and 2 keep this in mind.

Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.

User avatar
sensational_myes
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 11:33 pm

Re: New Development in Park Holme!

#115 Post by sensational_myes » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:19 pm

jimmy_2486 wrote:Hope you can keep us informed pikey.....good stuff there
any news Pikey? :wink: I can't wait to hear the news about the park holme developments!

User avatar
jimmy_2486
Legendary Member!
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 9:28 pm
Location: Glenelg-Marion Area

Re: New Development in Park Holme!

#116 Post by jimmy_2486 » Mon Dec 10, 2007 11:46 pm

Yes, ive been wanting to know the same as myess..... Hope you can keep us informed...

User avatar
Pikey
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 2477
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Sitting Down

Re: New Development in Park Holme!

#117 Post by Pikey » Tue Dec 11, 2007 1:52 pm

Only just saw this again!

My DA was a pergola - nothing fancy! However the council planner has said that the amount of knock downs and subdivides are on the increase.

Apartment wise, not sure. The big rumour that the planner heard was around the Tonsley Mitsubishi site. Doubt it'll happen now, but when it looked as though Mitsubishi was going to leave, the site masterplan had "premium" apartment buildings, up to 10 lvls on the high side of the block (near south road) as the towers would have views of the city and Glenelg, with the rest of the site developed into a premium housing estate, along the lines of Blackwood Park.

A council member was on 5AA last night suggesting the same site as a potential location for an all purpose stadium!! I think not!
Walking on over....

| Sensational-Adelaide.com Moderator |

User avatar
thechap
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 100
Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2007 10:53 am

Re: New Development in Park Holme!

#118 Post by thechap » Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:11 pm

Pikey wrote:A council member was on 5AA last night suggesting the same site as a potential location for an all purpose stadium!! I think not!
Yeah cause that would achieve heaps. Same bloody distance away from the city but in a different direction! Southsiders (which i'm not) would love it though :lol:
"The Beauty of Grace is that it makes life not fair." - Relient K

User avatar
The_Q915
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:24 pm

Re: Sheridan Site Development Woodville

#119 Post by The_Q915 » Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:52 pm

Image

Most of the site has been cleared
Im dead serious

User avatar
AG
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2005 9:44 am
Location: Adelaide SA

Re: Sheridan Site Development Woodville

#120 Post by AG » Mon Jan 07, 2008 1:53 pm

That is one large site there to be developed!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests