Sensational-Adelaide.com

omada wrote:The Adelaide Now comments do not surprise me. I read in the recent 5000+ report that Adelaide has the highest number of carparks of any capital city (that is actual not per capita basis). I think the figure was something like 41,000 carpark spaces, the next largest was 29,000ish. Anyway, poor planning has led to Adelaidian's having a small town, drive everywhere mentality, but in a large city. This is clearly not sustainable.

I look at it a different way. I see relatively easy(ish) parking as one of the good things about Adelaide. I don't think it's something that should be swept aside in the name of progress. I believe Adelaide can have that, and still become a bigger and better city. What it takes for that to happen is good urban planning, and that is again something Adelaide is much better at than most cities in the world!

So let's be proud of what's good about Adelaide already, and make it even better!

pushbutton wrote: So let's be proud of what's good about Adelaide already, and make it even better!

Has someone hacked your account?

crawf wrote:

pushbutton wrote: So let's be proud of what's good about Adelaide already, and make it even better!

Has someone hacked your account?

Out of order Crawf, Pushy has said this many times before.

I think one or two people here seem to misunderstand the motive behind the comments I make.

I basically call a spade a spade. There are things about Adelaide which are good, and there are things about Adelaide that are not. All of that is of course just my opinion, but my opinion is based on having travelled to and researched many different cities around the world. I think it's therefore of as much value as the opinion of anyone else who has done likewise.

I believe Adelaide is best summed up, again IN MY OPINION as:
- A smallish city, which gives it both advantages and disadvantages
- Well planned city and suburban layout, if somewhat elongated North to South
- Quite good climate overall
- Stunningly beautiful beaches
- A severe lack of fun, family-oriented things to do
- Excellent architectural design of many homes
- Relatively easy to navigate by car, although public transport could be better
- Easy access to most amenities, shopping, and services
- Historically somewhat lacking in the confidence to be awesome, rather than just nice! However there are clear signs that is changing for the better.

So as you can see, it's mostly GOOD! The reason most of my comments focus on the not so good bits, is that those are the areas where I believe Adelaide can improve and become better than it already is.

The other point I try to keep making on here is that I'm not satisfied with anything mediocre. Any idiot can design something that's "ok". I actually think Adelaide deserves the BEST, not just ok!

I believe it has MASSIVE potential to become one of the great cities of the world. I want it to become one of the great cities of the world simply because it's where I've lived most of my life, and it's where my family lives. Also because as I said it does have the potential.

However this potential can only become reality if both government and private investors believe it can and want it to.

So no crawf. Thanks for your concern but my account is ok!

Actually in your defence pushbutton (and coming from somebody who has criticised you in the past) sometimes I find that when you make really valid points in posts in various threads on this site, they are often dismissed just because it is you who has posted them. Everybody isn't always going to agree, but I would rather see somebody give constructive criticism regarding our city than somebody being overly sensationalist, or at the opposite end of the spectrum, somebody who is negative in an unproductive way.

Mants wrote:Actually in your defence pushbutton (and coming from somebody who has criticised you in the past) sometimes I find that when you make really valid points in posts in various threads on this site, they are often dismissed just because it is you who has posted them. Everybody isn't always going to agree, but I would rather see somebody give constructive criticism regarding our city than somebody being overly sensationalist, or at the opposite end of the spectrum, somebody who is negative in an unproductive way.

Thanks, and so would I! Basically to me that's the whole point of any forum, whether it's about Adelaide development or anything else. It's just a way to have an intelligent discussion, and of course different people will have different opinions on things.

Everything I say on this, or any other forum, is my opinion unless I state that it is fact.

pushbutton wrote:I think one or two people here seem to misunderstand the motive behind the comments I make.

So no crawf. Thanks for your concern but my account is ok!

Oh! Don't take my comment as an insult or anything, I think it's great some of the things you have been posting lately. Hence my comment, which I'll admit was blunt.

It's good to have a balanced point of view on things.

crawf wrote:

pushbutton wrote:I think one or two people here seem to misunderstand the motive behind the comments I make.

So no crawf. Thanks for your concern but my account is ok!

Oh! Don't take my comment as an insult or anything, I think it's great some of the things you have been posting lately. Hence my comment, which I'll admit was blunt.

It's good to have a balanced point of view on things.

It is indeed. In fact, there'd be no point in any forums if everyone agreed 100% on everything. Imagine this one if every discussion was:
"How amazing is that new building"
"Oh yes, it's unbelievably brilliant"
"I know, just like everything else in Adelaide"
well, you get the point!

So long as people show each other due respect, then it's fine to disagree.

What I would hope everyone in this forum does agree on, is that Adelaide has AT LEAST some good things about it, and a lot of potential to get better! I think we do.

ABC 891 reports on Frome St getting a facelift and providing bike lanes for cyclists. The report outlines the opposing views of Theo Maras vs Stephen Yarwood.

I am in favour of new bike lanes and cyclist safety/share the road. Good on Stephen Yarwood for recognizing and acting upon the problem of ever increasing traffic congestion, including promoting safer cycling in the city and standing up to the 'ooh the traffic congestion' car lobby, including the RAA motoring organization with its periodic rants against bus lanes and bike lanes.

As more residential development (including large capacity for bike storage) occurs in the city (and inner/established suburbs), improved bike lanes will encourage and cater for cyclists. Better, more frequent and integrated public transport options and safer bike lanes and improved facilities should assist in ultimately reducing traffic congestion in the city.

Frome Street in Adelaide's CBD is undergoing an extensive facelift to provide bike lanes parallel to the footpath, a single island of parallel parking bays and one lane of central traffic each way.

The works will transform the dual-lane carriage way with angle parking to the new layout.

Chair of the Rundle Mall Authority, Theo Maras, told 891 Breakfast he was 'dead against' the changes.
He has accused the Adelaide City Council of adopting an anti-vehicle policy.
"This is congestion by design."

...

Adelaide City Council Lord Mayor Stephen Yarwood said the moves were being made to avoid future congestion.
"If all we do is induce cars as the only way to drive into the city [congestion] will continue to get worse."
He said if the council continued to cater only for vehicular traffic, a generation of lower income workers would be priced out of living in the city.

Full report on ABC:
http://www.abc.net.au/local/photos/2014 ... 989489.htm

pushbutton wrote:It is indeed. In fact, there'd be no point in any forums if everyone agreed 100% on everything. Imagine this one if every discussion was:
"How amazing is that new building"
"Oh yes, it's unbelievably brilliant"
"I know, just like everything else in Adelaide"
well, you get the point!

Sounds like we should create our own forum called "Sensational Moscow" for this one and speak about the lovely iron man of everyone's favourite global hyperpower Russia!

Vee, did you read Rex Jory's rant on AdelaideNoWay about the Frome St "Copenhagen-style" bike lanes? What do you guys reckon? Whinger or valid thoughts?

Phantom wrote:...Vee, did you read Rex Jory's rant on AdelaideNoWay about the Frome St "Copenhagen-style" bike lanes? What do you guys reckon? Whinger or valid thoughts?

Cheap shot, rabble raiser article designed to sell newspapers.

monotonehell wrote:

Phantom wrote:...Vee, did you read Rex Jory's rant on AdelaideNoWay about the Frome St "Copenhagen-style" bike lanes? What do you guys reckon? Whinger or valid thoughts?

Cheap shot, rabble raiser article designed to sell newspapers.

Rather selfish, narrow thinking comments by Rex Jory.
Can't see past his and other motorists' needs (busy people having to do this and that). Cities are changing and there is an impetus for mass-transit, safe cycling and more pedestrian-friendly cities.

Many of the younger generation ... 'don’t want, or just can’t afford, a life tethered to an automobile' - recent quote from Ben Adler. Car dependency is declining in the Gen Y group and cycling rates have increased in a range of age groups.

The ACC has now responded to the Rex Jory article.
Read:
http://www.adelaidecitycouncil.com/medi ... et-bikeway

come on, lets not beat around the bush, with wishy washy responses ACC, just tell it like it is. Virtually every urban planner, and every city throughout the world that is improving its livability is implementing segregated bike lanes. We are not talking about restricting cars, we are talking about reducing the over the top car dependence. Call it like it is and leave planning to the experts, not right wing retards working for sensationalist media outlets who are completely clueless

I have just finished reading the book by urbanist Jeff Speck - "Walkable City" great book and very easy to read, maybe even for dipshits like Rex Jory. It even talks about exactly what is happening in Frome Street, that reducing roads from 2 lanes to 1 lane (with a dedicated bike lane) actually improved the flow of car traffic, not the reverse

I know the following opinion is blasphemy on this forum, but sometimes I feel we forget that Adelaide is not in Europe, and forget that our suburban footprint is almost 100km long. Cycling is not a viable alternative for a significant proportion of people working in the CBD. We shouldn't demonise people that drive, as for a lot of people, that is their only viable alternative, not to mention that unlike cyclists motorists pay registration fees.....

Will wrote:I know the following opinion is blasphemy on this forum, but sometimes I feel we forget that Adelaide is not in Europe, and forget that our suburban footprint is almost 100km long. Cycling is not a viable alternative for a significant proportion of people working in the CBD. We shouldn't demonise people that drive, as for a lot of people, that is their only viable alternative, not to mention that unlike cyclists motorists pay registration fees.....

No one is demonising driving. Removing 2 lanes on the least used N/S road is not pushing cars aside - it's just providing safe infrastructure for a range of different transport methods. You're right, cycling isn't an option for many people. But for those who live in the city or in neighbouring suburbs - it is. By encouraging those people who can ride on to their bikes by giving them a good and safe route, then that frees up the rest of the streets and parking for those who do need to drive. Ultimately, drivers will benefit as well.

Registration fees have nothing to do with it. They don't pay for roads, and they don't give anyone exclusive use of them. Spending on highways, parking, and other car focussed infrastructure is orders of magnitude greater than what is spent on cycling infrastructure and in no way reflects the actual usage split.