News & Discussion: Adelaide City Council

[Pikey]

Wow, so they are obviously taking people's suggestions/proposals seriously... a distraction huh?

Another day, the ACC credibility takes a dive. :wank:

[Norman]

"The views expressed herein are those of Cllr Plumridge and do not purport to be those of the Adelaide City Council"

[UrbanSG]

I find Parnell to be incredibly annoying. His manner is terrible. He is always very sarcastic and he is akward. Whenever he is on TV I either change the channel or walk away, I find him that annoying.

The policies he comes up with often reflect this akward manner. At a national level some of greens are okay but this guy is terrible at a State level.

[stumpjumper]

Sorry about the $100 mill. I've sacked my stenographer.

It's an interesting move. The Greens are well known for looking for votes from any disaffected group not being looked after by the mainstream parties, but in this case at least Parnell has a legal/planning background.

In theory, both DAP and DAC should deliver identical results - architecture of the same quality, as they both work to the same development legislation and have the same constraints.

As for payback, you'd have to be sceptical. The first 'Grandstand Survey' undertaken by two young electoral assistants in Foley's office. An unknown number of questionnaires with questions which were fundamentally flawed were distributed at random during the Clipsal race and at other places. There was no guarantee against multiple entries, push polling etc and the survey was thrown out after it was estimated that its statistical error was up to 30%. The $180,000 the survey cost (including colour brochure, tents, glamour girls, was a dead loss.

A second survey,again commissioned by Foley but this time properly conducted by a professional survey outfit producing results with a statistical error of 3%. They questioned 295 city residents, 372 metropolitan residents, 96 city workers, 61 visitors and so on. The survey cost about $50,000.

The results: 744 oppose; 19 in favour; 3 don't know.

My information is that Foley couldn't speak for two days. I have the results in pdf if anyone wants them. There are 54 pages of every single opinion written down and analysed under 11 supporting headings and 38 opposing headings.

So how can it be payback, when Foley's side scored so few supporters?

[Wayno]

In todays AdelaideNow the ACC are defending their pro-development credentials. Well excuse me but they did not actually make the $1b in projects occur - Developers simply lodged applications with them! It's the wider economy that made the $1b happen.

So apart from rubber stamping several new buildings, what have the ACC achieved in recent memory? let's see - parklands invigoration (no), vic square (maybe, but don't hold your breath), vic park (no), alleys & lanes (nothing ffs!), north terrace footpaths (no), rundle lantern (yes - i'll give them that one), clarify max building height situation (no), bicycle safe streets (no)...so not much at all in my opinion...am i being too harsh, what have I missed?

anywho, here's the article:

ADELAIDE City Council has defended its development credentials by pointing to the $1 billion of development it approved last financial year.

The council approved 1232 projects valued at $1 billion last year, more than double the $494.2 million approved in the preceding financial year.

Lord Mayor Michael Harbison said the results showed council's true attitude toward city development.

"Development in the city continues at record levels and the Adelade City Council is playing a central role in ensuring our City grows for the future," he said.

"The facts speak for themselves. The claims that council is in some way blocking development in the city are simply wrong."

The defence of Council's attitude to City development follows the State Government's move this month to strip Council of its powers to approve developments costing more than $10 million.

The Advertiser reported yesterday that the council is seeking a meeting with Planning Minister Paul Holloway and City of Adelaide Minister Jane Lomax-Smith to explain why Aspen Group's $180 million Tower 8 proposal was rejected rather than deferred for negotiation.

The decision was described as "intolerable" by Planning Minister Paul Holloway and motivated the State Government to strip Council of its development powers for projects costing more than $10 million.

I'd like to see the SA Govt go a step further and mandate the ACC divert resources towards improving many street level issues - this is actually much harder work, and requires much more skillful attention than reviewing/approving applications for tall buildings...

[Cruise]

Goes to prove lefties are idiots.

[crawf]

I'll give them credit for giving us one of the worst bus terminals in the country and a cheap makeover for Grote St.

[Jim]

Goes to prove lefties are idiots.

On the contrary they must be the most conservative party there is. Only they just don’t realize it (They never want any change)
conservative""disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change." Dictionary.com

[Queen Anne]

In todays AdelaideNow the ACC are defending their pro-development credentials. Well excuse me but they did not actually make the $1b in projects occur - Developers simply lodged applications with them! It's the wider economy that made the $1b happen.

So apart from rubber stamping several new buildings, what have the ACC achieved in recent memory? let's see - parklands invigoration (no), vic square (maybe, but don't hold your breath), vic park (no), alleys & lanes (nothing ffs!), north terrace footpaths (no), rundle lantern (yes - i'll give them that one), clarify max building height situation (no), bicycle safe streets (no)...so not much at all in my opinion...am i being too harsh, what have I missed?

anywho, here's the article:

ADELAIDE City Council has defended its development credentials by pointing to the $1 billion of development it approved last financial year.

The council approved 1232 projects valued at $1 billion last year, more than double the $494.2 million approved in the preceding financial year.

Lord Mayor Michael Harbison said the results showed council's true attitude toward city development.

"Development in the city continues at record levels and the Adelade City Council is playing a central role in ensuring our City grows for the future," he said.

"The facts speak for themselves. The claims that council is in some way blocking development in the city are simply wrong."

The defence of Council's attitude to City development follows the State Government's move this month to strip Council of its powers to approve developments costing more than $10 million.

The Advertiser reported yesterday that the council is seeking a meeting with Planning Minister Paul Holloway and City of Adelaide Minister Jane Lomax-Smith to explain why Aspen Group's $180 million Tower 8 proposal was rejected rather than deferred for negotiation.

The decision was described as "intolerable" by Planning Minister Paul Holloway and motivated the State Government to strip Council of its development powers for projects costing more than $10 million.

I'd like to see the SA Govt go a step further and mandate the ACC divert resources towards improving many street level issues - this is actually much harder work, and requires much more skillful attention than reviewing/approving applications for tall buildings...

I agree. All the impressive buildings in the world can't make up for a sterile street, where most of us go about our business and form our impressions of what it is like to be in the city, so I think this issue should have a much higher profile.

[Jim]

I also agree now the council should be able to concentrate on street issues, lanes arcades, trees, removing power poles making the city more liveable. I like the concept Melbourne uses and previously talked about having several different architectural firms working at street level than the rest of a major development. Maybe as in Melbourne the council could make more things happen at street level.

[Will]

Goes to prove lefties are idiots.

There are different classes of left-wing politics. It would be like saying that all right-leaning people are idiots because of people like Pauline Hanson.

[adam73837]

I heard today that the ACC want to challenge the fantastic move that has been made by the state government.
Now when the ACC Challenges this, the conservative vocal minorities will follow them and I am REALLY worried that Lomax-Smith and Rann will buckle (again) under the pressure.
We can only hope that Holloway and Conlon can keep those two in line...

[Cruise]

I'll give them credit for giving us one of the worst bus terminals in the country and a cheap makeover for Grote St.

Huh? what is wrong with the new bus terminal? Besides the lame "BUS" sign emblazed on the front?

[monotonehell]

Goes to prove lefties are idiots.

There are different classes of left-wing politics. It would be like saying that all right-leaning people are idiots because of people like Pauline Hanson.

I don't think the political spectra works anymore. It's not as black and white as commies on the left conservatives on the right and everyone else inbetween these days. Most parties have moved to the right in recent years. Labor's a lot further to the right than it was back in the '80s for example, and the Greens are a lot less loony left than they used to be perceived. It's really hard to pin them down to any particular place on the scale, as well as that there's many different kinds of lefts and rights...

*boggles*

[crawf]

Exterior is brilliant, while the interior is a joke.