Sensational-Adelaide.com

abc wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 9:07 pm

A-Town wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 6:54 pm

baytram366 wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 4:09 pm

I can't remember where I read it but I am fairly sure I read an article recently that said in just SA alone, there are around 1 million homes just sitting vacant for various reasons. What is Champion talking about? Of course empty houses are important to the current issues.

There's no way there would be 1 million homes sitting vacant in SA alone. Nationwide probably, but not just in SA.

There are so many vacant blocks in the CBD that are waiting to be developed. Balfours way on Franklin St and that block on the western section of Gouger St are a couple that spring to mind. Why are we just allowing prime real estate spots like these to sit idle in the middle of a housing crisis?

private property

• Gouger St west vacant block

• Former New Mayfield site on Sturt St

• Angas/Pultney St open air car park

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 31, 2024 10:13 am

abc wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 9:07 pm

A-Town wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 6:54 pm

There's no way there would be 1 million homes sitting vacant in SA alone. Nationwide probably, but not just in SA.

There are so many vacant blocks in the CBD that are waiting to be developed. Balfours way on Franklin St and that block on the western section of Gouger St are a couple that spring to mind. Why are we just allowing prime real estate spots like these to sit idle in the middle of a housing crisis?

private property

The government can compulsorily acquire land, so long as they provide just compensation - just like they do for major infrastructure projects like South Road.

I would say that at this point, there is a good argument for wiping the slate clean on some of these blocks which have sat around vacant (or as open air carparks) for decades. The current owners clearly don't want to do anything with them, and in such prime locations, that is absolutely not in the best interests of the city and the state as a whole. Large vacant blocks like the one on Gouger St are a drag on the precinct as a whole, and thereby on the vibrancy of the whole city.

The owners have had their chance and they have squandered it. The government should step in and acquire them and then either develop them directly through RenewalSA, or on-sell them (with conditions requiring prompt development) to other private developers.

The government doesn't have to have reasons. But it might help to develop a policy to guide how decisions about which properties are to be acquired should be made. I think anything over about 2000m2 within the square mile which has been vacant land or open air carpark for a decade or more should be a prime target. That would include:

• Gouger St west vacant block

• Former New Mayfield site on Sturt St

• Angas/Pultney St open air car park

I previously would have added to the list the open air carpark next to the Franklin St bus terminal and the Australia Post site in Grote St, but it looks like something might finally be being done with these sites. There should be close supervision to make sure action is taken promptly to achieve a good outcome here. I find it particularly objectionable, especially given the immediate housing crisis, that the government has struck a deal with the Council for no development to commence next to the bus terminal until the Market Plaza redevelopment is finished. We need more housing now, not in a decade's time. That is a much more important goal than saving a handful of carparks.

dbl96 wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 31, 2024 10:13 am

abc wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 9:07 pm

A-Town wrote: ↑

Thu Jul 25, 2024 6:54 pm

There's no way there would be 1 million homes sitting vacant in SA alone. Nationwide probably, but not just in SA.

There are so many vacant blocks in the CBD that are waiting to be developed. Balfours way on Franklin St and that block on the western section of Gouger St are a couple that spring to mind. Why are we just allowing prime real estate spots like these to sit idle in the middle of a housing crisis?

private property

The government can compulsorily acquire land, so long as they provide just compensation - just like they do for major infrastructure projects like South Road.

I would say that at this point, there is a good argument for wiping the slate clean on some of these blocks which have sat around vacant (or as open air carparks) for decades. The current owners clearly don't want to do anything with them, and in such prime locations, that is absolutely not in the best interests of the city and the state as a whole. Large vacant blocks like the one on Gouger St are a drag on the precinct as a whole, and thereby on the vibrancy of the whole city.

The owners have had their chance and they have squandered it. The government should step in and acquire them and then either develop them directly through RenewalSA, or on-sell them (with conditions requiring prompt development) to other private developers.

The government doesn't have to have reasons. But it might help to develop a policy to guide how decisions about which properties are to be acquired should be made. I think anything over about 2000m2 within the square mile which has been vacant land or open air carpark for a decade or more should be a prime target. That would include:

• Gouger St west vacant block

• Former New Mayfield site on Sturt St

• Angas/Pultney St open air car park

I previously would have added to the list the open air carpark next to the Franklin St bus terminal and the Australia Post site in Grote St, but it looks like something might finally be being done with these sites. There should be close supervision to make sure action is taken promptly to achieve a good outcome here. I find it particularly objectionable, especially given the immediate housing crisis, that the government has struck a deal with the Council for no development to commence next to the bus terminal until the Market Plaza redevelopment is finished. We need more housing now, not in a decade's time. That is a much more important goal than saving a handful of carparks.

Norman wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 31, 2024 4:53 pm

I have to agree with Rev here, compulsory acquisition for no reason is borderline authoritarian, even if we don't like the outcome. This isn't SimCity. In a market economy, sticks and carrots are the answer, so maybe vacant blocks need to be taxed differently.

Norman wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 31, 2024 4:53 pm

I have to agree with Rev here, compulsory acquisition for no reason is borderline authoritarian, even if we don't like the outcome. This isn't SimCity. In a market economy, sticks and carrots are the answer, so maybe vacant blocks need to be taxed differently.

rev wrote: ↑

Wed Jul 31, 2024 1:42 pm

This should not be applied though to mum and dad property owners who can least afford to. There's nothing wrong with someone holding on to an old house or block of residential land in suburbia to leave to their kids or grand kids as an inheritance.

SouthAussie94 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 01, 2024 12:21 pm

In a suburban context, what constitutes an empty block?

A small house on a large block?

A backyard tennis court could fit a house. Is this land empty? Or is its use as a tennis court enough to not be taxed?

Or is it 1 house per certificate of title? There's plenty of houses that sit across 2 or more titles. Are subsequent titles deemed to be vacant because they technically don't have houses on them?

Any legislation would need to account for these and more. Add too many exceptions however and the law could be toothless and not achieve the desired aim.

Saltwater wrote: ↑

Fri Aug 02, 2024 8:58 am

SouthAussie94 wrote: ↑

Thu Aug 01, 2024 12:21 pm

In a suburban context, what constitutes an empty block?

A small house on a large block?

A backyard tennis court could fit a house. Is this land empty? Or is its use as a tennis court enough to not be taxed?

Or is it 1 house per certificate of title? There's plenty of houses that sit across 2 or more titles. Are subsequent titles deemed to be vacant because they technically don't have houses on them?

Any legislation would need to account for these and more. Add too many exceptions however and the law could be toothless and not achieve the desired aim.

An empty block with nothing on it. There are plenty of examples all around Adelaide. I don't mean short term - there are properties that haven't had any housing on them for many years, and in some cases decades.

The Advertiser wrote:Hilton Adelaide hits market as global chain considers future at Victoria Square

Adelaide’s largest hotel, the Hilton Adelaide, has hit the market for the first time in 30 years as the global hotel chain weighs up its future at the landmark tower on Victoria Square.

The sale campaign comes ahead of the looming expiry of a management agreement between the building’s owners, 233 Victoria Square Hotel Pty Ltd, and Hilton Hotels.

The tower is being offered with vacant possession from July 2026, meaning an incoming purchaser would have the option to renegotiate an extension with Hilton or bring in another operator at that time.

Alyx wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 04, 2024 7:51 pm

The Advertiser wrote:Hilton Adelaide hits market as global chain considers future at Victoria Square

Adelaide’s largest hotel, the Hilton Adelaide, has hit the market for the first time in 30 years as the global hotel chain weighs up its future at the landmark tower on Victoria Square.

The sale campaign comes ahead of the looming expiry of a management agreement between the building’s owners, 233 Victoria Square Hotel Pty Ltd, and Hilton Hotels.

The tower is being offered with vacant possession from July 2026, meaning an incoming purchaser would have the option to renegotiate an extension with Hilton or bring in another operator at that time.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/business ... 1bf747f903