News & Discussion: CBD Real Estate & Market Conditions

[Will409]

I good idea but there is one thing that concerns me, will the new developements being proposed by high density (I can only hope) or the more traditional 3/4 acre block that we all know from the former Housing Trust? Nothing relating to the building style was mentioned in the article.

[AG]

I good idea but there is one thing that concerns me, will the new developements being proposed by high density (I can only hope) or the more traditional 3/4 acre block that we all know from the former Housing Trust? Nothing relating to the building style was mentioned in the article.

I'm sure that if apartments of good quality can be funded for homeless people like those above the bus station, then good quality apartments can be built under affordable housing schemes.

[JAKJ]

If it is in the CBD (as I believe the article is pointing to) they will have to be apartments, or at the very least town houses (apartments are cheaper and hence more likely).

[AtD]

As long as they've learnt the lesson to not put all the public housing together, but instead distribute it around the city. Perhaps a PPP where the council develops the low cost housing and investors develop the rest of the site.

[Snorkie]

Errrrr... guys i dont think you realise how massive this is. 1000 homes every year is massive. Given that the precinct is about 1300 apartments, this will almost match the number of apartments within that project, except every year. That means, if this does happen we will get about 9 precinct sized developments. Surely there is not enough room in the CBD to build that through individual houses, and i think we may see some seriously tall buildings as a result of this. I think it may also mean bending some height limits here and there, cause that is a massive amount of proposed apartments. Keep in mind that developers will continue proposing new apartment buildings, so if that is the case, many years of massive apartment developments are ahead of us. I think if this happens it will absolutely transform our city more than any other current projects... Good times...

[Zender]

He's lost his marbles! 10'000 homes... in the city? Its a CITY, not mawson lakes. The city is meant for buildings, high rises, not those disgusting repetitious boxes they call townhouses. And I know I might get flamed here, but putting housing trust in the city probably isnt the best idea. I have a mate who lives in the city south and the housing trust homes are constantly causing problems. They're littered with dero drug dealers, the cops are over there several times a week, and its scary for any female to walk down the side streets even in the day time. Why not let the people who can afford the high sums to buy real estate in the city have it? And on the flip side of not being fair, is it not fair to offer this low priced real estate when other people have worked their ass off to buy their dream apartment in the city? (and by this i mean you cant have $1m+ apartments on south terrace, and then housing trust right next to it).

[Shuz]

10,000 homes is a staggering figure. 10,000 homes equates to at least 15-20 thousand extra people in the CBD, which will bring some much needed vitality into the city.

I do ask for several things to come of this, that height limits are raised throughout the city to meet the demand, that the apartment towers are of some quality design, and do NOT resemble infamous communist blocks seen in the suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne, and that areas adjacent to the new apartment buildings are transformed in conjunction to raise its profile.

Should this come to fruitition, I would have a strong feeling that the housing projects will be directed around the south west and south east sections of the CBD built as multi-storey townhouses, or at least 5-15 level blocks.

[Edgar]

Harbo is better off encouraging more high density high rise apartment living in the city.

[Will]

He's lost his marbles! 10'000 homes... in the city? Its a CITY, not mawson lakes. The city is meant for buildings, high rises, not those disgusting repetitious boxes they call townhouses. And I know I might get flamed here, but putting housing trust in the city probably isnt the best idea. I have a mate who lives in the city south and the housing trust homes are constantly causing problems. They're littered with dero drug dealers, the cops are over there several times a week, and its scary for any female to walk down the side streets even in the day time. Why not let the people who can afford the high sums to buy real estate in the city have it? And on the flip side of not being fair, is it not fair to offer this low priced real estate when other people have worked their ass off to buy their dream apartment in the city? (and by this i mean you cant have $1m+ apartments on south terrace, and then housing trust right next to it).

So an apartment can't be a home?

Furthermore I think you mis the entire point of the idea. Why should the city be the exclusive reserve for rich baby boomers? Surely you can see how a wide variety of residents is what is required to bring vitallity to the city. And somehow I think that these apartments would not be appealing for high-income earners. For one they probabaly won't have pools, spas, cinemas, zen gardens or feng-shui designs...

These apartments will appeal for a completely different market than the high-end apartments currently being developed.

[crawf]

And who says Adelaide doesn't have vision

This is great news and a clear sign that our skyline and CBD is set for major overhaul, theres quite a few areas that can not be developed so the only answer is Up!.

Is this plan also apart of the ACC's plan of 65,000 living in the city council area?

[Omicron]

Just as long as the public housing does not actually look like traditional public housing, this will be a fine achievement. Far too many Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney developments are so lacking in design inspiration, and have tiny little windows rising 30, 40 or 50 floors with little concern for how cheap they appear. We must always demand more from our residential developments, so that we don't end up with staid, tall lumps that are popping up all over Brisbane and Melbourne especially.

[ozisnowman]

He talks about homes not houses, thus they are most certainly to be
appartments with a few townhouses etc.

You are right they should be spread out and not clumped together
to create a ghetto. What should really happen is that any approved
appartment development in the city should have say a 25%-33%
affordable appartment allocation. The difference would not be
from the structural cost of production but the fitout. IE luxury
appartment all mod cons, best carpets, tiles, exotic bathrooms
etc. Affordable appartment cheap kitchen possibly no applicances
ie bring your own fridge, oven etc... basic bathroom, cheap
carpets etc, no furniture, no built in robes etc etc.... It certainly
could be done..... From the outside they would look all the same,
also you would mix the affordable appartments throught the
building and not on particular floors... excluding the penthouses

[Edgar]

Public Housing in the forms of apartment living/ condominium need not be ugly. Here's a few samples that would look good for such a high-density-scale vision.







Note, I took these renders out of the currently under-construction apartments/condos in Kuala Lumpur, the home to large scale condos/apartments in Asia I must say.

Anyway, I think something like picture no.2 and no.3 would fit in Adelaide perfectly.

[Cruise]

He's lost his marbles! 10'000 homes... in the city? Its a CITY, not mawson lakes. The city is meant for buildings, high rises, not those disgusting repetitious boxes they call townhouses. And I know I might get flamed here, but putting housing trust in the city probably isnt the best idea. I have a mate who lives in the city south and the housing trust homes are constantly causing problems. They're littered with dero drug dealers, the cops are over there several times a week, and its scary for any female to walk down the side streets even in the day time. Why not let the people who can afford the high sums to buy real estate in the city have it? And on the flip side of not being fair, is it not fair to offer this low priced real estate when other people have worked their ass off to buy their dream apartment in the city? (and by this i mean you cant have $1m+ apartments on south terrace, and then housing trust right next to it).

So you support turning the city into a rich-only "you must have this much to enter" soulless enclave?

having people of all demographics in one place is fantastic for vitality

[wilko91]

Doesnt he mention "key workers"? Wouldnt this kind of development be aimed at nurses, policemen, and other civil servants? Not that we would have 15-20K of them but you get the idea. How many people working in the city would be under such duress that they would let their subsidised living arrangements become a ghetto?

I dont think that it would (well hope that it doesnt) become a ghetto, but if it does I will be seeling my place asap and moving to the burbs....