Page 2 of 2
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:10 pm
by AtD
http://www.propertyoz.com.au/library/OM ... n_2011.pdf
^ This is a broadly accepted industry standard of the boundaries of Australia's CBDs and other office markets. However it's not gospel and has some flaws.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 10:24 am
by rhino
Splashmo wrote:dsriggs wrote:I don't have any exact info, but I decided to use nearmap to draw a comparison between the respective CBDs. Because I haven't been to Perth or Brisbane, and some CBD's are difficult to map, I chose to use well defined road/river boundaries & chose not to include parks, university campuses, railyards or government buildings.
...
Hope I've been helpful.
You're not exactly being accurate or fair here. Large swathes of Adelaide's square mile is residential. Most of what's south of Gouger and Angas Streets is low-rise housing. And then a lot of what you've cut out of your borders of Perth and Brisbane's CBDs is actually what we have in the east and west of our "CBD" - that is, showrooms and other businesses. The actual area you might consider the CBD in comparison to the other cities, with taller buildings, is much smaller - maybe roughly the area within North Tce, Morphett, Pulteney and Wakefield Streets.
That's what I was thinking too.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 9:57 pm
by Ho Really
Trying to compare the boundaries of the various city CBDs is like trying to compare apples with oranges. I would rather compare them by the number of buildings (density) and the office space (volume). Is that fair?
Cheers
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 10:14 pm
by Nathan
Ho Really wrote:Trying to compare the boundaries of the various city CBDs is like trying to compare apples with oranges. I would rather compare them by the number of buildings (density) and the office space (volume). Is that fair?
Cheers
I think the discussion of boundaries is about the effect it has on the density, and that the large size of the Adelaide "CBD" is one contributing factor to our lack of density.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Apr 08, 2011 11:51 pm
by Ho Really
The square mile bound by the Terraces is not the CBD. The actual CBD is not much bigger than the core.
Cheers
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Sat Apr 09, 2011 9:36 am
by Aidan
Ho Really wrote:The square mile bound by the Terraces is not the CBD. The actual CBD is not much bigger than the core.
Well if you want to be pedantic, the area bound by the Terraces is bigger than a square mile. It's a mile N to S (including the terraces themselves) but much wider E to W.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 1:52 pm
by skyliner
It has always been my opinion that the high rise section is the actual CBD. (bound by Morphett and Pulteney, Gouger/Angas and Nth Tce). The rest is just extensions. When comparing this to Bris CBD a much more accurate idea is obtained. The section outlined by dsriggs for Bris is the comparable actual CBD area. Both would appear similar in area but Bris much higher bldgs (so far).
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:24 am
by Waewick
ADELAIDE has lost the rights to host a leg of the World Series Rugby Sevens to the Gold Coast.
The Australian Rugby Union will today announce the Gold Coast has beat Adelaide and Perth as the venue for the tournament and it will be held in Queensland for the next four years.
Adelaide has hosted the event for the past five years and its contract expired last week when New Zealand won the sixth leg of the series at Adelaide Oval.
The decision is another blow for sport in South Australia and follows the loss of the Grand Prix and Jacob's Creek Golf Open to Victoria.
That is from the news today
seriosuly wtf - a blow in addition to two events we lost 10years ago?
bizzare.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:30 am
by Will
This article is probably the worst example of journalism I have ever read. It is ridiculous, sensationalist and negative for no point.
To try and blame Rundle Mall for the demise of Colorado, Angus and Robertson and Borders is absurd, and then to use the example of the Sussan, Sanity and Dusk stores being empty to criticise the mall, even though they are under demolition is beyond me. Does the Advertiser expect those stores to remain trading as they are being demolished?
A monkey on a type-writer could have written something more intelligent.
Another one bites the Rundle Mall dust
Local Government Reporter Katrina Stokes From: The Advertiser June 17, 2011 12:00AM
RUNDLE Mall needs to attract high-end retailers and offer a better customer experience. Or it risks having shoppers turn elsewhere, industry experts warn.
Two major retailers have left the shopping strip this year and the latest casualty is clothing brand Colorado Group, which has gone into administration and is due to shut in Rundle Mall and across the state.
The store's imminent closure follows the collapse of US giant Borders and Angus & Robertson.
A further three shops - Sussan, Sanity and Dusk - are also empty.
But Rundle Mall Management Authority general manager Martin Haese said the three shops were forced to close because the building was being bulldozed as part of the Harris Scarfe redevelopment.
Mid-last year, South Australian menswear retailer Ed Harry also closed its Rundle Mall store.
.
Independent retail analyst Stirling Griff said while retail was down everywhere, Rundle Mall must offer something different to keep customers happy.
"Rundle Mall is not in a different position to any other shopping mall around Adelaide," he said.
"It comes down to offering ... if you're refreshing your stock and offering high levels of customer service, it is the total retail experience that is important."
Prescott Securities chief economist Darryl Gobbett identified interest rate rises and utility rate rises as the reasons people were shopping more conservatively.
"We've got record levels of full-time and part-time employment in South Australia - it's not a lack of income from employment or wages," he said.
"It seems to be much more about people wanting to reduce their spending for a while."
Mr Gobbett said Rundle Mall was struggling because people were spending their money on staple items like groceries and keeping their savings intact.
"Rundle Mall is where you go when you're feeling good and want to buy clothes, electronics and books ... that is why the mall is feeling it a lot harder - it's what they sell," he said.
On the issue of purchasing items like books, make-up and clothing cheaper online, Mr Gobbett said South Australian consumers should consider the long-term consequences.
"Yes, you can get those books cheaper overseas; but have a think about putting some of that money toward supporting your local bookshop," he said.
"Once it's gone, it's gone forever."
Rundle Mall Management Authority chairman Theo Maras continues to fiercely back the mall.
He said the recent collapse of multi-national companies did not reflect the retail situation in Australia, South Australia or the mall.
"This collapse happened in America and some parts of Europe; it doesn't reflect the reality of what's happening here," he said.
Mr Maras told The Advertiser he was currently in talks with a number of major national and international retailers.
"There's huge interest," he said.
"It's because Adelaide and South Australia is seen as the boom city of the future, with our education, mining and defence industries."
But Adelaide City Councillor Anne Moran was still concerned about the mall's future.
"To lose terrific businesses like Borders is a big deal," she said.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:57 am
by AtD
Three shops empty to make way for a multimillion dollar project is a sign that the mall can't compete with Westfield, because their expansion plans have not been stalled for years...
The obvious solution is a million free car parks.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:45 am
by AG
AtD wrote:
The obvious solution is a million free car parks.
Which is also the most poorly thought out solution since it conflicts with the ACC's own works to narrow and widen the footpaths on existing streets and the State Government's objective to get more butts on public transport. A proper solution needs to part of a longer-term framework to encourage more people to live, work and play in the city, rather than some quick afterthought.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:47 pm
by arki
AG wrote:AtD wrote:
The obvious solution is a million free car parks.
Which is also the most poorly thought out solution since it conflicts with the ACC's own works to narrow and widen the footpaths on existing streets and the State Government's objective to get more butts on public transport. A proper solution needs to part of a longer-term framework to encourage more people to live, work and play in the city, rather than some quick afterthought.
You do realise he was being sarcastic
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 11:04 pm
by crawf
That article =
. I feel like writing in the comment section, but meh cbf
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Fri Jun 17, 2011 11:25 pm
by Will
crawf wrote:That article =
. I feel like writing in the comment section, but meh cbf
Don't bother, I wrote something intelligent, but it wasn't published.
Re: AdelaideNow Adelaide bashing.
Posted: Sat Jun 18, 2011 4:20 am
by dsriggs
Will wrote:crawf wrote:That article =
. I feel like writing in the comment section, but meh cbf
Don't bother, I wrote something intelligent, but it wasn't published.
Blame the article on Kevin Foley