Sensational-Adelaide.com

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:29 am

The Afghani restaurant was the first of its kind in Adelaide and was about to undergo a new refurbishment. But uncertainty about where the roadworks would go has made him question the future.

Everyone's known for years that this has been slowly coming, and this owner plans a renovation then complains?

It's a shame that businesses and properties might be lost if the tunnel solution is not chosen, but this restaurant sounds like another Peter Van case.

The trouble is, there has been no certainty about when this has been coming. How long is a business supposed to put off needed upgrades just in case the property will be compulsorily acquired? Should it be expected to pay top-dollar to move to a less-visible location, then only receive a pittance because the compulsorily-acquired property was only an abandoned shopfront that was under-utilised in a prime location?

Perhaps the proposed tweaks to compulsory acquisition will be to allow for a business to have more long-term certainty about either investing where it is with confidence of a reasonable time there, or early assistance to move out.

at the end of the day you can't hold back a city of 1.4m because of houses and some business that would need to be acquired. we progress and move forward, that's life. yes I understand that it would be tough for those involved but no individual is bigger than the team so to speak.

SBD wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 29, 2019 7:53 pm

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:29 am

The Afghani restaurant was the first of its kind in Adelaide and was about to undergo a new refurbishment. But uncertainty about where the roadworks would go has made him question the future.

Everyone's known for years that this has been slowly coming, and this owner plans a renovation then complains?

It's a shame that businesses and properties might be lost if the tunnel solution is not chosen, but this restaurant sounds like another Peter Van case.

The trouble is, there has been no certainty about when this has been coming. How long is a business supposed to put off needed upgrades just in case the property will be compulsorily acquired? Should it be expected to pay top-dollar to move to a less-visible location, then only receive a pittance because the compulsorily-acquired property was only an abandoned shopfront that was under-utilised in a prime location?

Perhaps the proposed tweaks to compulsory acquisition will be to allow for a business to have more long-term certainty about either investing where it is with confidence of a reasonable time there, or early assistance to move out.

The Superway was finished in 2014 and the T2T was announced in 2014 with construction starting 2015 (next step after the Superway). The plan for the Corridor was announced in the early 2010s and was reconfirmed in Labor's he 30-year plan in 2015. It's easy to say now, but all the indicators were there that some form of the motorway would be coming, it's one of the main things both parties have been banging on about.

The media will always find someone to have a cry, and hold out for more money. Fact is, this is not China, and people are well compensated for their loss, including businesses that need to relocate. If they are smart, they will accept the windfall and set up in a location not plagued by traffic jams, large semis rolling past and lack of parking.

SBD wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 29, 2019 7:53 pm

Spotto wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 29, 2019 9:29 am

The Afghani restaurant was the first of its kind in Adelaide and was about to undergo a new refurbishment. But uncertainty about where the roadworks would go has made him question the future.

Everyone's known for years that this has been slowly coming, and this owner plans a renovation then complains?

It's a shame that businesses and properties might be lost if the tunnel solution is not chosen, but this restaurant sounds like another Peter Van case.

The trouble is, there has been no certainty about when this has been coming. How long is a business supposed to put off needed upgrades just in case the property will be compulsorily acquired? Should it be expected to pay top-dollar to move to a less-visible location, then only receive a pittance because the compulsorily-acquired property was only an abandoned shopfront that was under-utilised in a prime location?

Perhaps the proposed tweaks to compulsory acquisition will be to allow for a business to have more long-term certainty about either investing where it is with confidence of a reasonable time there, or early assistance to move out.

Hes not a very good business person if knowing theres a major road upgrade going to happen at some stage, and seeing other sections widened, plans renovations anyway.

Then again the West Torrens council built a new community center on the edge of the road and approved new townhouses nearby on the corner with south road.

To be fair to this chap, he's still gotta make a living while the government gets it stuff together and stumps up some acquisition dollars. He has no way of knowing when that'll be, and in the hospitality space, if you're not making improvements you're not making business. We can't expect him to sit on his hands while his business decays or is out-competed, while we soothsay about when roadworks 40 years in the making will finally start.

Lawash Bakery underwent a major refurb / extension approx 6 years ago already. As a business it’s an institution, so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say they couldn’t keep their clientele by moving to somewhere on HBR for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I suspect his business isn't under physical threat, as in being flattened.

Wouldn't they have the exit/entry for the Hindmarsh/ANZAC tunnel(s) around Hindmarsh Avenue, Hindmarsh, thus avoiding all existing properties in Thebarton?

croweater888 wrote:I suspect his business isn't under threat anyway.

Wouldn't they have the exit/entry for the Hindmarsh/ANZAC tunnel(s) around Hindmarsh Avenue, Hindmarsh, thus avoiding all existing properties in Thebarton?

It depends - going by the Scoping Report, there would be a new elevated structure over the Torrens, followed by a trench all the way to ANZAC Highway. The only variation with this trench would be the two short tunnels under Henley Beach Road and Sir Donald Bradman Drive.

Vasco wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:37 pm

Lawash Bakery underwent a major refurb / extension approx 6 years ago already. As a business it’s an institution, so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say they couldn’t keep their clientele by moving to somewhere on HBR for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody's saying that, only that he'd presumably need to be acquired first to make such a move. Those dollars are yet to be offered, so he continues to operate. Fair enough.

SRW wrote:

Vasco wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:37 pm

Lawash Bakery underwent a major refurb / extension approx 6 years ago already. As a business it’s an institution, so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say they couldn’t keep their clientele by moving to somewhere on HBR for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody's saying that, only that he'd presumably need to be acquired first to make such a move. Those dollars are yet to be offered, so he continues to operate. Fair enough.

My point was (with limited knowledge as a consumer), he has already recently undergone a major refurb and extension. The place is hardly falling apart, and is always busy.

Yes ok he may way to make further improvements, but at the end of the day, you choose to operate on South Road, you should be well aware that you are at the mercy of future plans for the good of the state. Continue to operate as is until the government announces its plans at end of year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Vasco wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:56 am

SRW wrote:

Vasco wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:37 pm

Lawash Bakery underwent a major refurb / extension approx 6 years ago already. As a business it’s an institution, so I think it’s a bit of a stretch to say they couldn’t keep their clientele by moving to somewhere on HBR for example.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody's saying that, only that he'd presumably need to be acquired first to make such a move. Those dollars are yet to be offered, so he continues to operate. Fair enough.

My point was (with limited knowledge as a consumer), he has already recently undergone a major refurb and extension. The place is hardly falling apart, and is always busy.

Yes ok he may way to make further improvements, but at the end of the day, you choose to operate on South Road, you should be well aware that you are at the mercy of future plans for the good of the state. Continue to operate as is until the government announces its plans at end of year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a totally privileged point of view. We have no idea of his means, and yet you want to limit his options. If it was assured that DPTI need a property, there could be caveats placed on its resale or compensatory arrangements made regarding its ongoing use. Even Haussmann's renovation of Paris prefaced works with lines of control. People have a right to enjoy and improve their property as they wish (and within the law). That's an entirely separate issue from being dispossessed of it for the good of the state. I don't disagree and doubt even the owner ultimately would. But the obligation is on the state to make good of the situation, and 40 years of uncertainty hasn't done that. People can't be expected to idle while the state diddles. Even now, there's no assurance which (if any) properties will be affected.

Screenshot from a friend's short video.

SRW wrote:

Vasco wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:56 am

SRW wrote: Nobody's saying that, only that he'd presumably need to be acquired first to make such a move. Those dollars are yet to be offered, so he continues to operate. Fair enough.

My point was (with limited knowledge as a consumer), he has already recently undergone a major refurb and extension. The place is hardly falling apart, and is always busy.

Yes ok he may way to make further improvements, but at the end of the day, you choose to operate on South Road, you should be well aware that you are at the mercy of future plans for the good of the state. Continue to operate as is until the government announces its plans at end of year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is a totally privileged point of view. We have no idea of his means, and yet you want to limit his options. If it was assured that DPTI need a property, there could be caveats placed on its resale or compensatory arrangements made regarding its ongoing use. Even Haussmann's renovation of Paris prefaced works with lines of control. People have a right to enjoy and improve their property as they wish (and within the law). That's an entirely separate issue from being dispossessed of it for the good of the state. I don't disagree and doubt even the owner ultimately would. But the obligation is on the state to make good of the situation, and 40 years of uncertainty hasn't done that. People can't be expected to idle while the state diddles. Even now, there's no assurance which (if any) properties will be affected.

He’s hardly idled, he did a major extension and refurb around 6 years ago, as mentioned twice now. I can think of dozens of other examples of South Road tenancies who have been idling over the past few decades and this certainly isn’t one of them.

It wouldn’t be an easy situation, but anyone who owns/operates a building or business on South Road should be well aware that they at the mercy of the Highways Act. (Note he’s not the only one!!!!) In a perfect world he would know, but again in 6 months time he should have a clearer picture of where things will be heading.

End ‘privileged’ rant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

ChillyPhilly wrote: ↑

Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:33 pm

Screenshot from a friend's short video.

Looks like they are only a few weeks away from the next traffic switch, which my guess is going to start the expressway, southbound, from just after ailyffes road. It initially travels on the the left side of the trench before shifting to the right (wrong) side of the trench before the section of collapsed wall.

It may even have the exit onto south road, so that southbound traffic to flagstaff hill etc hops on the expressway before hopping off again. This would free up some lanes above the collapsed wall so they could conceivably reduce that section to two lanes.

Another completely different guess is that the next traffic switch is extending the expressway northbound so that it ends on ailyffes road?