Victoria Square Visions

[SRW]

It's a crazy building. Something similar but uniquely Adelaidian could be interesting.

Ahem, it's properly spelt Adelaidean...

I think Adelaidean is the name of the Universitys monthly publication.

There's no real consensus, much like Melbournian and Melburnian.

I was just being facetious vis-à-vis m-hell's stickler for correct spelling, but I think you'll find that almost all the published literature use Adelaidean (and, for that matter, Melburnian).

But we digress...

[monotonehell]

I think Adelaidean is the name of the Universitys monthly publication.
There's no real consensus, much like Melbournian and Melburnian.
I was just being facetious vis-à-vis m-hell's stickler for correct spelling, but I think you'll find that almost all the published literature use Adelaidean (and, for that matter, Melburnian).

I admit that I couldn't find the right spelling at the time and I'd appreciate if someone could supply the "correct" version. None of my spell checkers recognise any of the spellings above (to be expected) and both are in the dictionary.

[Howie]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

[Omicron]

Giorgio's photo here brought something to my attention.

With the tram line extension, KWS has been narrowed down to two lanes, with the third left-hand turning lane where required and enforcement of the no right-hand turn policy. I see absolutely no reason why the diamond effect needs to have 4 lanes of traffic each direction? Can't we simply follow through, using the western deviant to cut it down to two lanes on either side of the tram tracks, so to follow suit with the traffic management policy enforced along its northern apex, with the provision for a right hand turning lane both southbound and northbound onto Franklin/Flinders street. This will have a tidier and more manageable affect on traffic flows along KWS, also to Grote/Wakefield streets and the same principle should also be applied down the southern apex of KWS, reserving the tram corridor as a designated tram zone.

In all of this, we would have a much more open Victoria Square, where Reserve Bank and its cousin, and the Carnegie Mellon University all fronting directly onto a public space, free of cars. St Xavier's Cathedral's grassed space would be incorporated as part of a larger park, and SA Water would have a larger dominance over the space.

A pedestrian plaza, fitted out with cafes and the like, directly outside the Central Markets and SGIC buildings would act as the thoroughfare between the south and north, leaving a sizable portion to pedestrians, but still returning the rest of the space into a landscaped park. If Hindmarsh Square can be so desirable as it is, the best solution would be to follow its image, and improve accessibility where the amenities are.

Sometimes, asymmetry works better than symmetry and I think this would be a vision that works out for the better.

An interesting idea - one that would be reliant upon a traffic movement study to determine if the traffic movements and volumes experienced on KWS North are applicable to Victoria Square. At times like this, I wish that all such studies conducted by governments and transport bodies could be made public so that submissions made by we observers can be properly informed and argued.

[Joely]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

That proposal looks absolutely stunning. Not as 'out-there' as I would like to be seen proposed for the square but it's very attractive and looks very useful and functional. Atleast more so than the silly 'wiggle' proposal we have seen recently. Does anyone know why Harbison rejected this proposal? What was his resoning behind it? I can only think of one possible reason. Traffic congestion maybe?

[SRW]

That proposal looks absolutely stunning. Not as 'out-there' as I would like to be seen proposed for the square but it's very attractive and looks very useful and functional. Atleast more so than the silly 'wiggle' proposal we have seen recently. Does anyone know why Harbison rejected this proposal? What was his resoning behind it? I can only think of one possible reason. Traffic congestion maybe?

He ditched it so he could win the mayoralty. To win support of the market traders, he campaigned against the plan on the scaremongering basis that closing the square would discourage people from shopping at the Central Market. Of course, this is nonsense.

Not Harbi's finest moment. I only hope he's not precluded from supporting a plan which closes the square now.

[cruel_world00]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

That proposal looks absolutely stunning. Not as 'out-there' as I would like to be seen proposed for the square but it's very attractive and looks very useful and functional. Atleast more so than the silly 'wiggle' proposal we have seen recently. Does anyone know why Harbison rejected this proposal? What was his resoning behind it? I can only think of one possible reason. Traffic congestion maybe?

I think it had something to do with the closure of grote street through the square. But bloody hell, it would have been awesome to see something like this at the very least...possibly with a tunnel underneath. And technically, this isn't even the best result out there, but it's a heck of a lot better than what we currently have!

[SRW]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

Thanks muchly for uploading that. It really is a marvellous plan, and I think it suggest perhaps the most practical form for the square to take. The only thing I'd add to it is a central vista (tower, oblesik, sculpture etc) and some built attractions (museums and such) either scattered around the periphery or concentrated where KBR located the pavilion.

I really wish it were put back on the table.

[Joely]

I agree. Definitely some sort of tower or iconic structure is needed for the square.



P.S: Sorry for bothering everyone with this image again, but I'm really considering sending this idea to the ACC's Victoria Square design competition which closes on May 30th. It just looks very amateur and crappy though, like a 5 year old has drawn it. Has anyone got any ideas for how I can improve the quality of this image or redo it entirely? It's so annoying as I can visualise exactly what this will look like in my head but just cant get it to look any good. Any help appreciated

[Howie]

That proposal looks absolutely stunning. Not as 'out-there' as I would like to be seen proposed for the square but it's very attractive and looks very useful and functional. Atleast more so than the silly 'wiggle' proposal we have seen recently. Does anyone know why Harbison rejected this proposal? What was his resoning behind it? I can only think of one possible reason. Traffic congestion maybe?

I don't think he 'rejected' it, the voters at the city council elections rejected it - much like the victoria park issue at the last council election. It was a controversial proposal at the time, and harbison's election platform was that there were more pressing matters in the city of adelaide than victoria square then - e.g. attracting more students, more investment into the cbd etc. The then Lord Mayor Alfred Huang also wasn't as aggressive his campaign, and also promised to stay on just one term and later changed his mind. There were many many factors as to why Alfred Huang's plan to revitalise Victoria Square was defeated then.. i'm sure i've only scratched the surface.

[Shuz]

I don't like the deisgn at all. It would've caused more chaos than there is now.

I was surprised no-one responded to my idea on the previous page?

[Wayno]

Giorgio's photo here brought something to my attention.

With the tram line extension, KWS has been narrowed down to two lanes, with the third left-hand turning lane where required and enforcement of the no right-hand turn policy. I see absolutely no reason why the diamond effect needs to have 4 lanes of traffic each direction? Can't we simply follow through, using the western deviant to cut it down to two lanes on either side of the tram tracks, so to follow suit with the traffic management policy enforced along its northern apex, with the provision for a right hand turning lane both southbound and northbound onto Franklin/Flinders street. This will have a tidier and more manageable affect on traffic flows along KWS, also to Grote/Wakefield streets and the same principle should also be applied down the southern apex of KWS, reserving the tram corridor as a designated tram zone.

In all of this, we would have a much more open Victoria Square, where Reserve Bank and its cousin, and the Carnegie Mellon University all fronting directly onto a public space, free of cars. St Xavier's Cathedral's grassed space would be incorporated as part of a larger park, and SA Water would have a larger dominance over the space.

A pedestrian plaza, fitted out with cafes and the like, directly outside the Central Markets and SGIC buildings would act as the thoroughfare between the south and north, leaving a sizable portion to pedestrians, but still returning the rest of the space into a landscaped park. If Hindmarsh Square can be so desirable as it is, the best solution would be to follow its image, and improve accessibility where the amenities are.

Sometimes, asymmetry works better than symmetry and I think this would be a vision that works out for the better.

yep, i agree - an asymmetric design would work very well, and there is little need for 4 lanes of traffic in each direction.

[ozisnowman]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

That proposal looks absolutely stunning. Not as 'out-there' as I would like to be seen proposed for the square but it's very attractive and looks very useful and functional. Atleast more so than the silly 'wiggle' proposal we have seen recently. Does anyone know why Harbison rejected this proposal? What was his resoning behind it? I can only think of one possible reason. Traffic congestion maybe?

I think the plan is very doable and the tram line would not require adjustment but could be accomadated within the plan...
The plan was rejected by the businesses complaining that it would divert traffic away from the markets etc. That is pretty
damn stupid because i doubt many of their customers are spontaneous window shoppers. If they came to the market to
get something then a closed road/detour would not stop them.

Anyway i believe the plan was excellent with the exception that an underpass for grote street - wakefield street would have
been ideal as would the current tram route on one side as compare to the then proposed closing of grote street/wakefield
and the tram loop around victoria square.

We have the perfect plan that needs a few additions and we would have truely identifiable square that is functional
and useful and would be an ideal place to have outdoor concerts and new years eve parties, carols by candle light etc.

[rhino]

We have the perfect plan that needs a few additions and we would have truely identifiable square that is functional
and useful and would be an ideal place to have outdoor concerts and new years eve parties, carols by candle light etc.

Do we? There seems to be an interactive water feature right where I would expect the crowd for such an event to be the thickest - 50 to 100m in front of the stage. What's all that about?

There doesn't seem to be anywhere in this design for the cafes and restaurants that you have all been going on and on about - have you suddenly cooled on that one?

Why can traffic flow around the southern end of the square but not the northern end? You can go around the square from Wakefield St to Grote St, but not from Grote to Wakefield.

I like the idea of a statue of a Kaurna elder to balance out the statue of Queen Victoria, but I would like to see them both closer to the centre of the square - the square is named for Queen Victoria after all. Nitpicking - I know.

How are pedestrians going to access the square? I must confess I haven't had time to read the report, but I did pour over the maps and pictures. I saw pedestrian access points but are they via bridges, underpasses, pedestrian crossings?

[AtD]

Thanks for that.. i've uploaded it for everyone's benefit

http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/ima ... roject.pdf

Gee that looked fantastic didn't it?!

I still think that's the best proposal we've seen to date.