News & Discussion: Other Metropolitan Developments

[Prince George]

How big are you thinking, Will? How much space do you have now (and, if I may ask, between how many people) and how much would you give up in the interest of amenity?

Speaking for the Queen and I, we're currently in a 1950s house, about 100 sqm, between us and the two kids. It's a bit small for us now, but I dare say that 150 sqm of well designed space would be plenty. The location is not everything that we'd like, I dare say that if we could find a 3-bed apartment of around 100-120 sqm in a good location within our budget, we'd jump on it. The "well designed" part is a much bigger issue to my mind than the actual area - I see so many lousy designs where the area that they've got is effectively smaller because the layout is so poor. I suspect that's part of the reason for the steady growth of house sizes, because poor designs simply need more space.

That aside, I am very cheered by this talk, I really want to see this happen. A round of applause for the Prospect, West Torrens, Charles Sturt and Unley councils for getting on board; jeers to Walkerville, Burnside, and NPSP.

[Will]

How big are you thinking, Will? How much space do you have now (and, if I may ask, between how many people) and how much would you give up in the interest of amenity?

Speaking for the Queen and I, we're currently in a 1950s house, about 100 sqm, between us and the two kids. It's a bit small for us now, but I dare say that 150 sqm of well designed space would be plenty. The location is not everything that we'd like, I dare say that if we could find a 3-bed apartment of around 100-120 sqm in a good location within our budget, we'd jump on it. The "well designed" part is a much bigger issue to my mind than the actual area - I see so many lousy designs where the area that they've got is effectively smaller because the layout is so poor. I suspect that's part of the reason for the steady growth of house sizes, because poor designs simply need more space.

That aside, I am very cheered by this talk, I really want to see this happen. A round of applause for the Prospect, West Torrens, Charles Sturt and Unley councils for getting on board; jeers to Walkerville, Burnside, and NPSP.

The problem with apartments currently on the market is that even the 3 bedroom ones rarely have individual laundries, home theatres and studies. I would be willing to give up the garden and 1 parking space, but regarding the interior, I am not too keen on having to squash our (4 people) possesions into a 80sqm2 space.

[Waewick]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 5943923024

"So close to the city and the parklands, this long-derelict studio site has the potential to become a showcase for the aspirations of the 30-Year Plan for Greater Adelaide," he said. Mr Holloway said the move would "unlock the site's economic potential".

"Allowing for a more appropriate housing density of up to 10 storeys overlooking the parklands will unlock the site's economic potential and provide a scale of development that is attractive to residents wishing to live near the city and along a major transport corridor."

A spokesman for the site owners, Watersun Asset Pty Ltd, said the decision would allow the company to maximise the community and economic benefits arising from the development of the site where there was an opportunity to create a "first-class" residential community.

He said Watersun had explored a range of options for the site's development and would release a proposed plan in due course.

I am hoping some of you guys can correct me here. But does this sound like another car focused development?

My pipe dream is a city loop light rail around the city going past here, but realistically that isn't going to happen

so basically my question being, what is the bus service like along that road and would the service be able to us the extended o-bahn bus only lanes?

[Waewick]

How big are you thinking, Will? How much space do you have now (and, if I may ask, between how many people) and how much would you give up in the interest of amenity?

Speaking for the Queen and I, we're currently in a 1950s house, about 100 sqm, between us and the two kids. It's a bit small for us now, but I dare say that 150 sqm of well designed space would be plenty. The location is not everything that we'd like, I dare say that if we could find a 3-bed apartment of around 100-120 sqm in a good location within our budget, we'd jump on it. The "well designed" part is a much bigger issue to my mind than the actual area - I see so many lousy designs where the area that they've got is effectively smaller because the layout is so poor. I suspect that's part of the reason for the steady growth of house sizes, because poor designs simply need more space.

That aside, I am very cheered by this talk, I really want to see this happen. A round of applause for the Prospect, West Torrens, Charles Sturt and Unley councils for getting on board; jeers to Walkerville, Burnside, and NPSP.

The problem with apartments currently on the market is that even the 3 bedroom ones rarely have individual laundries, home theatres and studies. I would be willing to give up the garden and 1 parking space, but regarding the interior, I am not too keen on having to squash our (4 people) possesions into a 80sqm2 space.

Your right in relation to size, It seems that the worst the design the cheaper the building must have been to build.

There are a few builders out there in the “well designed” category the biggest problem being that you need to re-design each house for the allotment that you have not just put the cookie cutter house down like most builders do.

I only live in 100m2…I’m hoping the design we have in place will make it a bit less pokie that what it was, but I couldn’t imagine more than 3 people living in it still, especially without a backyard.

[SRW]

How big are you thinking, Will? How much space do you have now (and, if I may ask, between how many people) and how much would you give up in the interest of amenity?

Speaking for the Queen and I, we're currently in a 1950s house, about 100 sqm, between us and the two kids. It's a bit small for us now, but I dare say that 150 sqm of well designed space would be plenty. The location is not everything that we'd like, I dare say that if we could find a 3-bed apartment of around 100-120 sqm in a good location within our budget, we'd jump on it. The "well designed" part is a much bigger issue to my mind than the actual area - I see so many lousy designs where the area that they've got is effectively smaller because the layout is so poor. I suspect that's part of the reason for the steady growth of house sizes, because poor designs simply need more space.

That aside, I am very cheered by this talk, I really want to see this happen. A round of applause for the Prospect, West Torrens, Charles Sturt and Unley councils for getting on board; jeers to Walkerville, Burnside, and NPSP.

You're right that poor design is part of the reason, but the trend to increasingly larger homes is probably more to do with unsustainable lifestyles.

[Wayno]

APARTMENTS will be built over shopfronts along major inner city transport corridors in an overhaul of suburban planning.

Urban Development and Planning Minister Paul Holloway today said four councils had committed to increasing housing density in areas close to transport routes.

He said Port Rd, Unley Rd and roads surrounding the parklands would be prime targets for development.

The govt needs to *sell* the idea of high density living. I'd hazard a guess that many people equate apartments with slums, rather than a high quality/low maintenance lifestyle choice. Bbut then as stated in a few previous posts it depends heavily upon the type of apartments that get built.

[AtD]

The govt needs to *sell* the idea of high density living. I'd hazard a guess that many people equate apartments with slums, rather than a high quality/low maintenance lifestyle choice. Bbut then as stated in a few previous posts it depends heavily upon the type of apartments that get built.

It's strange that view exists since the majority of Adelaide's apartments are high-end luxury and all of Adelaide's slums are single story detached or semi-detached.

[rhino]

I'd hazard a guess that many people equate apartments with slums, rather than a high quality/low maintenance lifestyle choice.

I don't think so. I think Adelaide people might equate Flats with slums, but Apartments are percieved a little differently.

[Nathan]

I'd hazard a guess that many people equate apartments with slums, rather than a high quality/low maintenance lifestyle choice.

I don't think so. I think Adelaide people might equate Flats with slums, but Apartments are percieved a little differently.

But a lot of people seem to think flats and apartments are the same thing. I think that's feeding the negative attitude towards them.

[Wayno]

But a lot of people seem to think flats and apartments are the same thing. I think that's feeding the negative attitude towards them.

Agree.

[Isiskii]

The way I percieve flats/units/apartments is;

Flats - a collection of dwellings which share a single or two storey common roof, with independent access points and a small yard, with little living space.

Units - a collection of dwellings which share a multi-storey common building, with a common room access point (foyer, walkway, etc) and no yard, also with little living space.

Apartments - a collection of dwellings which share a purpose-built tower block, with a common room access point, no yard, but has large living space and accessibility to in-building amenities - ie; sauna, pool, gym, etc.

[monotonehell]

The way I percieve flats/units/apartments is;

Flats - a collection of dwellings which share a single or two storey common roof, with independent access points and a small yard, with little living space.

Units - a collection of dwellings which share a multi-storey common building, with a common room access point (foyer, walkway, etc) and no yard, also with little living space.

Apartments - a collection of dwellings which share a purpose-built tower block, with a common room access point, no yard, but has large living space and accessibility to in-building amenities - ie; sauna, pool, gym, etc.

Interesting how perception is different to actual definition. They all mean the same thing.

"Flat" being an English word, "Apartment" a USAian word (or condo in other parts of that country), while "Unit" is a more generic term that could apply equally to flat, apartment or any other kind of real estate space (even those intended for business use).

In Australia I think it's more what people are used to, combined with people's experience of slum style '60/'70's era blocks of units, adding up to what they think they desire.

I've lived in a 3 bedroom flat flat(1960s built), a 3 bedroom two storey flat (1970s built) and (what amounted to) a one room flat, as well as a traditional suburban detached house. Of all of those I'd move back into the 1960's slum flat in an eyeblick, because of its layout. I look at the layouts in recent buildings and see that they really make people live in an awkward fashion. Things like combining the toilet, bathroom and laundry facilities. Which makes sense from a low cost design sense. But any more than one person living there and conflict will occur. If you must combine uses kitchen and laundry facilities go together better.

The living spaces are my biggest peeve, they have no sense of furniture. Put any furniture into the spaces provided and they make no sense. Architects and developers need to think more on how people live in space. Not simply try to fit all they are told they need by marketing into a building's volume divided my the number of units they need to sell as provided by finance.

[Omicron]

Separate bathrooms and toilets are a must. I always find it quite odd, er, performing ablutions whilst exposed in the middle of a vast tiled room.

[Will]

Separate bathrooms and toilets are a must. I always find it quite odd, er, performing ablutions whilst exposed in the middle of a vast tiled room.

Really? I quite like it, it makes me feel regal.

[Nathan]

Every place I've lived in has had bathroom and toilets combined - houses and apartments. I find the requirement that they be separate fairly minor...