Adelaide Hills | Developments & News

[crawf]

Stirling, Aldgate, Bridgewater etc are classified as outer suburbs of Adelaide. I also think Mt Barker is included in Greater Adelaide (same with Gawler and Aldinga Beach).

Mt Barker and Hahndorf will never join up, the local council, residents would declare war and there would be terrain issues.

As for Nairne, well its not far from joining up with Mt Barker

[Shuz]

God help us if Nairne and Woodside sprawl and meet up though...

Nairne and Woodside will not join up, for the reasons I gave at the bottom of the previous page.

Well, years ago - everyone said that Yankalilla and Normanville would never join up... and they did.
It's eventual Nairne, Woodside will.

[rhino]

Read the reason, Shuz. Woodside is within Adelaide's water catchment. Town boundaries within the catchment are limited. Land titles are limited. One dwelling per title outside town boundaries, and the number of titles within the catchment cannot increase. Nairne is outside the catchment, and, no doubt, will grow, but only until it reaches the catchment boundary. Woodside will grow until it's town boundaries are filled, and then it will stop, failing an act of parliament to allow residential growth within the catchment (unlikely with water scarcity the way it is). I bought my land in the catchment when the moratorium was instigated, around 1992, and the situation hasn't changed while outside the catchment it certainly has. It really cannot be likened to Yankalilla and Normanville (which have not joined up, as it happens, any more than Munno Para and Gawler have joined up, (which they haven't either)).

[JamesXander]

I like to see growth and all, but I hope it doesnt affect to much on the lifestyle out here. You have to remember this literally was the COUNTRY only 20 years ago. the tunnel changed all that.

Aldinga was literally the country 20 years ago, as was Angle Vale and Virgina,

Why do you believe the hills deserve to be protected more so than these other areas?

As I said, its a bit NIMBY, but I just cant imagine the Hills losing its country feel.


It would just be sad IMO to see it become another lifeless suburb.

not that it will in the forseeable future, but yeah. Loooking forward I just think it would be a shame if it were to ever get to that point.

[ricecrackers]

it kind of already has in Blackwood, Belair, Corromandel Valley

is it so bad?

[Wayno]

it kind of already has in Blackwood, Belair, Corromandel Valley

is it so bad?

Yes it is bad. They are now suburbs, not exactly what I consider the "heart of the hills".

[ricecrackers]

it kind of already has in Blackwood, Belair, Corromandel Valley

is it so bad?

Yes it is bad. They are now suburbs, not exactly what I consider the "heart of the hills".

but they are pleasant suburbs

i agree however about curbing development + population growth near our water catchment areas.

....and the bushfire threat should be reason enough alone

[AtD]

It would just be sad IMO to see it become another lifeless suburb

Lifeless suburb, lifeless town. What's the difference. It will only become the former if it's already the latter.

[skyliner]

Yeah that was always the problem with Mt Barker, there was no decent place to go to. When I lived there I used to go straight to the city then later I would catch the delightful midnight service home at 4:45am Sunday mornings - Oh what a fun way to spend a hour drunk!


Barker was actually on 7 news tonight, apparently the State Government want to build 15,000 new homes between Mt Barker and Murray Bridge as part of their 2030 Adelaide development plan.

And so Mt Barker charges foward - here comes some of the 41 000 total pop. that the ABS was predicting for 2026 guys! Average number per house currently about 2.4 according to ABS stats.

Where would they put all these houses - in isolation from any centre at all - I think not. Mt B. will get it's share.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE

[Strangled Cat]

I know this is an old thread, I was wondering if there was any more news on this? I personally would not like to see this happen! Stirling is arguably the most beautiful town in the Adelaide Hills if not the state, it can not be ruined by commercial interest. I rarely oppose developments which better a particular area, but I would hate to see stirling changed by human input. By all means build Mount Barker into a bustling metropolis if you will, but please leave Stiling/Aldgate/Bridgewater alone!

[monotonehell]

I know this is an old thread, I was wondering if there was any more news on this? I personally would not like to see this happen! Stirling is arguably the most beautiful town in the Adelaide Hills if not the state, it can not be ruined by commercial interest. I rarely oppose developments which better a particular area, but I would hate to see stirling changed by human input. By all means build Mount Barker into a bustling metropolis if you will, but please leave Stiling/Aldgate/Bridgewater alone!

Ooo ooo oooh! May I? ....

N.I.M.B.Y!

[Strangled Cat]

I know this is an old thread, I was wondering if there was any more news on this? I personally would not like to see this happen! Stirling is arguably the most beautiful town in the Adelaide Hills if not the state, it can not be ruined by commercial interest. I rarely oppose developments which better a particular area, but I would hate to see stirling changed by human input. By all means build Mount Barker into a bustling metropolis if you will, but please leave Stiling/Aldgate/Bridgewater alone!

Ooo ooo oooh! May I? ....

N.I.M.B.Y!

LOL. Certainly not a NIMBY, I don't even live in the Adelaide Hills LGA let alone Stirling! But to tell you the truth, I would love to buy a house there one day, after the mortgage is paid off and the kids are out of school. I guess I just don't see the point in potentially ruining beautiful townships with out of place concrete jungles, when you've got Blackwood only 12km down upper sturt road, and Mount barker a 10 minute lesuirely drive down the South Eastern Freeway. But hey, what do I know? I'm just a.....













...N.I.M.B.Y!!!!!

[Aidan]

Read the reason, Shuz. Woodside is within Adelaide's water catchment. Town boundaries within the catchment are limited. Land titles are limited. One dwelling per title outside town boundaries, and the number of titles within the catchment cannot increase. Nairne is outside the catchment, and, no doubt, will grow, but only until it reaches the catchment boundary. Woodside will grow until it's town boundaries are filled, and then it will stop, failing an act of parliament to allow residential growth within the catchment (unlikely with water scarcity the way it is).

Would development within the catchment really make water any scarcer? The wastewater treatment plants are upstream of the reservoirs, so I'd expect it to have the opposite effect. It could be argued that it would adversely affect the water quality, but that's really a different issue.

However, I expect Mount Barker to retain a strong local identity for decades to come because of its relative isolation - despite having a freeway to within 5km of the City. Apart from a few rather twisty local roads, that's the only connection from there and the Stirling area to the rest of suburbia. Because it takes so long to get to the northern and southern suburbs, people are more likely to work locally. This effect will become less important as it links up with towns further E - but having retained its character during the suburban development process, it is likely to continue to retain it afterwards.

[rhino]

Would development within the catchment really make water any scarcer? The wastewater treatment plants are upstream of the reservoirs, so I'd expect it to have the opposite effect. It could be argued that it would adversely affect the water quality, but that's really a different issue.

Of course water quality is the issue, but with water being scarcer, maintaining good quality of that water becomes even more of an issue.

[skyliner]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is'nt MB on the rainshadow side of the hills and thus with very low rainfall. And does'nt the flow go to the murray R. My point is that how will development there have much effect on water availability/flow there? Mt Barker would also have access to water outside the area.Comments allowing more development there (and the growth that has taken place in the last 10 years) seem to support my point.

SA - STATE ON THE MOVE