ONH: [Port Adelaide] Newport Quays | $1.2b

[Professor]

Yes 1050 was a good year.

But 16 years later the Normans invaded the south coast and that changed bloody everything!


PS
working for a few days here in Perth - not my kind of place.

[Cruise]

our very own Norman was in an invasion? lol

[Norman]

our very own Norman was in an invasion? lol

Yeah, the War on Boganism. Trillions were invested but we never seemed to win in the end

[Will409]

And I'll constantly remind you of that loss too!

[omada]

By Professor:

Yes 1050 was a good year.

But 16 years later the Normans invaded the south coast and that changed bloody everything!

PS
working for a few days here in Perth - not my kind of place.

A bit off topic here, but Professor - please elaborate on your opinion of Perth...

[Pikey]

I'm over in Perth now. The construction goin on is crazy. I'm staying at the Burswood Casino, and from my window I can see a small section of the CBD between other buildings in the casino to which I counted 9 cranes. There's a 6, 16 level building development going right next to where I'm staying. It's nuts over here!

[Jim]

They have had there day, time for the buldozer!

[fishinajar]

As lacking in merit as these sheds might be, there is actually a fair point in amongst the shrill noises coming from the heritage proponents -- that the redevelopment as proposed is not addressing the character or history of the Port. And the disappointing thing is that it's hardly a difficult thing to do. It's just that cookie-cutter apartment stacks deliver more profit.

Pardon me if I'm being dumb, but how exactly were they "cookie-cutter apartment stacks". I'm not nit picking but have heard the term cookie-cutter being thrown around a bit lately on s-a and in the media and I don't really get what it means.
Can someone please explain it to me?

[Wayno]

As lacking in merit as these sheds might be, there is actually a fair point in amongst the shrill noises coming from the heritage proponents -- that the redevelopment as proposed is not addressing the character or history of the Port. And the disappointing thing is that it's hardly a difficult thing to do. It's just that cookie-cutter apartment stacks deliver more profit.

Pardon me if I'm being dumb, but how exactly were they "cookie-cutter apartment stacks". I'm not nit picking but have heard the term cookie-cutter being thrown around a bit lately on s-a and in the media and I don't really get what it means.
Can someone please explain it to me?

cookie cutter = exact replica, and is mostly correct in this case. There's nothing unique or "architecturally special" about the apartments being constructed at The Port. The Govt could have easily mandated the port development include a "maritime feel" into the waterfront highrise properties.

Don't get me wrong, i'm all for knocking down the sheds and developing The Port, but let's make it something special that builds on the history of the area, and will age with grace...

[Norman]

A few photos from Sunday

Marina Cove


















Edgewater

[fishinajar]

As lacking in merit as these sheds might be, there is actually a fair point in amongst the shrill noises coming from the heritage proponents -- that the redevelopment as proposed is not addressing the character or history of the Port. And the disappointing thing is that it's hardly a difficult thing to do. It's just that cookie-cutter apartment stacks deliver more profit.

Pardon me if I'm being dumb, but how exactly were they "cookie-cutter apartment stacks". I'm not nit picking but have heard the term cookie-cutter being thrown around a bit lately on s-a and in the media and I don't really get what it means.
Can someone please explain it to me?

cookie cutter = exact replica, and is mostly correct in this case. There's nothing unique or "architecturally special" about the apartments being constructed at The Port. The Govt could have easily mandated the port development include a "maritime feel" into the waterfront highrise properties.

Don't get me wrong, i'm all for knocking down the sheds and developing The Port, but let's make it something special that builds on the history of the area, and will age with grace...

Thanks Wayno, understood.

[AtD]

Thank you Norman. I'm glad to see things are progressing well. Marina Cove does look good. Interesting that they chose a "blank" western facade. Surely there'd be gulf views from those penthouses?

Interesting to see how a little bit of green makes the rail line look so much better!

[Wayno]

Not exactly related to Newport Quays, but i wonder if a major high-rise hotel (think Hilton, Hyatt, etc) on the Port Adelaide waterfront could be justified? It could have lush lawns, a swanky pool, and an outside bar area right on the waterfront!

It would certainly pump more cash and vitality into the Port region...

[Wayno]

Port Redevelopment Off Quay?

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 82,00.html

RESALES in the $2 billion Newport Quays development have plummeted as hearings begin today to decide the go-ahead for the latest stage in the development, including 507 new apartments.

Real estate agents have told The Advertiser they believe an oversupply is causing values to nosedive as investors buying off-the-plan were hoping to make a quick profit, but now face a dismal reality.

"It's shocking I feel for a lot of people, they're stuck with them . . . It's quite bleak," one agent who did not wish to be named said.

Another agent quoted a park villa which sold off-the-plan for around $670,000 and 12-months later went for $520,000.

"People are taking a bit of a hit ... anyone who buys one and then tries to sell is having big trouble," he said.

Realestate.com.au has more than 50 apartments and villas at Newport Quays, but agents have told The Advertiser that many properties are not being marketed in an attempt to hide the problem.

The Port Adelaide Enfield Council estimates that only about a third of apartments and about half of the villas are regularly occupied a year after residents first moved in.

Newport Quays expects to have 442 apartments complete by year's end as part of Stages 1 and 2.

But the developer maintains that buyers need to hold on to their investment until infrastructure such as the tram/rail corridor and commercial properties are built.

"Like many other projects across the country . . . purchasers are encouraged to take a long-term view to their investment in order to realise any potential gains such as that already witnessed in popular waterfront locations around Australia," Newport Quays spokesman Todd Brown said.

This comes as the final arbiter, the Port Waterfront Redevelopment Committee will today hold hearings into the $300 million Precinct 2B.

Precinct 2B has been at the centre of a row with developers on one side and the Port Adelaide Enfield council, National Trust and community interests on the other.

The council's issue with the four apartment blocks, 28-berth marina and water's edge promenade include:
* EXCEEDING height restrictions on the buildings which range from seven to 14 storeys.
* THE WATERFRONT will be blocked by a "wall of tall buildings".
* WIND tunnel created by the positioning of the four buildings.
* PUBLIC space too small for the size of the development.
* AT LEAST 127 apartments have bedrooms without windows.
* 123 APARTMENTS face south – with no direct sunlight, while other apartments exposed entirely to the western sun creating heat issues.
* 263 BALCONIES undersized.

[muzzamo]

i do not feel sorry for those specuvestors that bought into this hoping to make a quick buck. By definition they speculated on someone else in the market being a greater fool than them and paying more for shelter and they borrowed money to do so.