Sensational-Adelaide.com

I am shocked with what has happened in the last few days!

Its great to finally see some decent vision for Adelaide and South Australia.

Norman wrote:

AG wrote:There are a couple of locations near the Gawler Line that I would've thought could potentially be great sites for TODs. They include the area near Islington Station by Regency and Churchill Roads and also around Salisbury Station. I'd like to know why they weren't identified as potential sites for TODs.

This area is alredy under development: http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... ?f=8&t=580

That's true, but couldn't the same be said about Mawson Lakes and Newport Quays? There's a fair bit of empty land that could be cleaned up around Islington. Not to say that the current planned locations for TODs aren't good, they are great locations, but there should be a little more thought.

i'm a Mitcham resident, live near Mitcham Square and would support a TOD around the train station. Something like this would be fantastic! The two areas marked in blue are Mitcham Square shopping centre and the Council Chambers. The areas marked in red would be ideal for a TOD. In total only ~14 private residences would be affected with the majority of the space being open land and small businesses (dry cleaner, cafe, chicken shop, hair dresser, doctor, gym, etc) who would probably love the prospect of extra customers at their doorstep.

Maybe a small heritage concern with the old mitcham school, but i'm sure that could be retained. The major trouble being the prospective of living right next to freight trains that come through at ungodly hours each day

fishinajar wrote:I live in Modbury, and I can't think of any large areas empty or otherwise easily obtainable for large scale redevelopment (other than compulsory acquisition). Does anyone have any idea of what exactly they have in mind for this area?

I grew up in that area. Having a look on Google Maps, you can see that most of Modbury is ground level car parks! There are two a big empty block east of the Interchange on Smart Road (altho if memory serves, one has some sort of aviation transmitter in it). Also, there's a lot of empty land around the Tafe and the Modbury Hospital as well as dozens of smaller emtpy spots scattered amongst the suburbia.

AtD wrote:

fishinajar wrote:I live in Modbury, and I can't think of any large areas empty or otherwise easily obtainable for large scale redevelopment (other than compulsory acquisition). Does anyone have any idea of what exactly they have in mind for this area?

I grew up in that area. Having a look on Google Maps, you can see that most of Modbury is ground level car parks! There are two a big empty block east of the Interchange on Smart Road (altho if memory serves, one has some sort of aviation transmitter in it). Also, there's a lot of empty land around the Tafe and the Modbury Hospital as well as dozens of smaller emtpy spots scattered amongst the suburbia.

Most of those empty spots you remember or see on Google Maps are aviation reserves (no buildy!) The TAFE, or rooftop car parks for TTP. The two car parks south of Smart road are Park and ride for the OBahn (highly used) and a paid parking lot for the same. They could build a multi story park and ride and develop there.

BUT

What I think they have in mind is the old buildings that used to be nurses' quarters, that are currently student (spit!) accommodation, and knocking down low rise in the general area and building up.


OH! Wait a minute - how about the old Tea Tree Gully dump? Is that been left fallow long enough for reclamation?

I have the full map from the Planning Review Report which includes the locations of the Transit Oriented Developments proposed for Adelaide.

monotonehell wrote:

AtD wrote:

fishinajar wrote:I live in Modbury, and I can't think of any large areas empty or otherwise easily obtainable for large scale redevelopment (other than compulsory acquisition). Does anyone have any idea of what exactly they have in mind for this area?

I grew up in that area. Having a look on Google Maps, you can see that most of Modbury is ground level car parks! There are two a big empty block east of the Interchange on Smart Road (altho if memory serves, one has some sort of aviation transmitter in it). Also, there's a lot of empty land around the Tafe and the Modbury Hospital as well as dozens of smaller emtpy spots scattered amongst the suburbia.

Most of those empty spots you remember or see on Google Maps are aviation reserves (no buildy!) The TAFE, or rooftop car parks for TTP. The two car parks south of Smart road are Park and ride for the OBahn (highly used) and a paid parking lot for the same. They could build a multi story park and ride and develop there.

BUT

What I think they have in mind is the old buildings that used to be nurses' quarters, that are currently student (spit!) accommodation, and knocking down low rise in the general area and building up.

OH! Wait a minute - how about the old Tea Tree Gully dump? Is that been left fallow long enough for reclamation?

True AtD about the "smaller" empty land here and there, most of them big enough to put up an apartment building or few.

I don't think the dump site would be suitable for a long time for any higher density development due to compaction/ decomposition etc. Also it's to far from the obahn terminus to be an effective TOD.

After a few says away from the Forum it is great to come across good news such as this.

The TOD idea is a great vision, a vision which i hope will guide development in Adelaide for the next couple of decades.

However, there are a few concerns that I have after reading what has been posted here. It appears that the private sector will build these TODs. With the way the private sector operates I fear that the TODs may not live up to their full potential. For example although slowly changing, I do not think the paradigm shift towards high-density, apartment living has occured yet in Adelaide. As such with the market the way it is, could a private developer decide that there is no demand for high-density apartments living at a designated TOD site and instead propose town-houses? Will the government impose minimum density requirements on the TODs? I think that for these TODs to work an actually contribute something to sustainability they should have a minimum of 6-7 levels.

And this leads me to another issue. The private sector operates to generate profits. As such I fear that apartments at the TODs will cost in the range of $300 000-$500 000. I fear that if sold for these prices, the kind of people that will live in these TODs will be baby-boomers and single young professionals. Not exactly the kind of people that would use public transport. The people that should be encouraged to live in these TODs should be essential workers that our community requires to function, but because of their low wages (nurses, teachers...) they probabaly will not be able to afford to live here. What is the government doing to ensure that working families will be able to live in these TODs?

Another issue that I have is will the governemnt impose a maximum number of carparks available per dwelling in these TODs? At maximum a dwelling at a TOD should only have one carpark, otherwise it defeats the purpose of living at a TOD.

So whilst I welcome the announcement of these TODs, I think there are some further issues that need to be resolved to make them reach their full potential.

they are akin to Opportunity Areas in London, although not to the same scale
i thinkfor effective planning they would need to incorporate some controls into the TOD assessment process-
ie minimum density
minimum unit numbers
prefered housing mix
reduced parking standards
affordable housing requirement (including what uk calls intermediate housing)
children's play space standards
energy and sustainability criteria
encouragement of active frontages at key locations
height guidelines etc
presumption of high quality and visually interesting architecture

fishinajar wrote:I don't think the dump site would be suitable for a long time for any higher density development due to compaction/ decomposition etc. Also it's to far from the obahn terminus to be an effective TOD.

I had no idea how long the dump's been 'fallow', just a question. Thanks for clearing that up. BUT the OBahn is not a train, the buses can leave the track and go on the road...

monotonehell wrote:

fishinajar wrote:I don't think the dump site would be suitable for a long time for any higher density development due to compaction/ decomposition etc. Also it's to far from the obahn terminus to be an effective TOD.

I had no idea how long the dump's been 'fallow', just a question. Thanks for clearing that up. BUT the OBahn is not a train, the buses can leave the track and go on the road...

And their vibrating floors make them shit

bva wrote:they are akin to Opportunity Areas in London, although not to the same scale
i thinkfor effective planning they would need to incorporate some controls into the TOD assessment process-
ie minimum density
minimum unit numbers
prefered housing mix
reduced parking standards
affordable housing requirement (including what uk calls intermediate housing)
children's play space standards
energy and sustainability criteria
encouragement of active frontages at key locations
height guidelines etc
presumption of high quality and visually interesting architecture

I would also add to that provision for commercial activity. Each TOD should be of sufficient size to support an IGA style supermarket plus some specialty shops and perhaps offices.

Not sure i like this, does this mean more people would stay around their "hubs" rather than go into the city?

It sound like some Canberra-style planning, though it will be more enviromently friendly i'm sure it will see the cbd deviod of people.

Cruise wrote:Not sure i like this, does this mean more people would stay around their "hubs" rather than go into the city?

It sound like some Canberra-style planning, though it will be more enviromently friendly i'm sure it will see the cbd deviod of people.

She'll be right Cruise. The main idea of TOD's is to put med-high density housing around suburban train stations, to encourage more people to take the train into the city, so the CBD will have the same amount of people coming in, however more people will be travelling in by train rather than cars from the quarter acre block syndrome

Wayno wrote:The major trouble being the prospective of living right next to freight trains that come through at ungodly hours each day

Let me do the sales of the units and I am sure there will be no problems with getting them filled Gunzel sale of the century.