Sensational-Adelaide.com

Reading the comments on the 51 Pirie Street thread it struck me there were three kinds of people here: those who want to see as much development as possible (and regard the new 51 Pirie Street plan as good), those who only support good architecture (so regard it as bad), and those like me who are more concerned about the location (I regard it as catastrophic, as it would obstruct our best possible route for a subway).

I can think of a few other things that people here seem to value highly, but now I'm wondering how many people regard each option as the priority, and is there anything I've missed?

A bit of a mix of all of the above, really... except 5 and 7.

delete

for me there are 3 types of people on this forum
Those who love density
Those who love height
Those who love infrstructure

iTouch(myself) wrote:for me there are 3 types of people on this forum
Those who love density
Those who love height
Those who love infrstructure

And those that want a subway

To me it's primarily about architecture & active street frontages.

What a stupid poll.

Nathan wrote:

iTouch(myself) wrote:for me there are 3 types of people on this forum
Those who love density
Those who love height
Those who love infrstructure

And those that want a subway

Yep good point. Come to think of it, the other day I saw Aidan campaigning for a subway:

If only the answer were so easy...

I'm going to set off the buzzword alarm and say it's all to do with the social fabric and adding vibrancy to the surrounding streetscape. So for me, the important pieces for a good development are, in order:
- Open and inviting, an interactive presence at street level. A development that shuns the streets also shuns the community. A development that at least has a scattering of shopfronts on the street, for example, helps break this barrier. If this is not viable at the time, there should at least be the potential for the street front to be converted in the future. The boundary to the street is the single most important part of a good development. Sins include: blank walls, loading docks, service doors, roller doors, ground level not level with street, empty space and featureless stairways.
- Low dependence on cars. Traffic robs the city of space, car parks take up prime near-ground floor space and ramps crossing the footpath interrupt the streetscape.
- High density. Tall is good only in its ability to deliver high density. High density adds to the visible activity and population. It also allows for a greater variety of spaces in the immediate area
- Strong architecturally, not entirely fading in the background and not entirely screaming for attention. Variety is the spice of life.

I'm probably not shaking any cages in this forum with these ideals.

iTouch(myself) wrote:

Nathan wrote:

iTouch(myself) wrote:for me there are 3 types of people on this forum
Those who love density
Those who love height
Those who love infrstructure

And those that want a subway

Yep good point. Come to think of it, the other day I saw Aidan campaigning for a subway:

Isn't there a subway on the corner of Curry and West Tce? Much better location. There's also one at City Cross.

There's actually a Subway on Pirie St, just metres up from the Gawler Pl intersection. Aidan may have been right about it being an ideal location for a subway...