Commenting on the story: Labor’s car parking policy would drive up housing costs: industry
I’m perplexed at what the Opposition is trying to achieve in relation to car parking policies for higher-density housing development.
The generation of car parking demand and impacts of under or over-catering for it can’t be managed effectively by one-size-fits-all prescriptive policy.
It calls for context-sensitive solutions that take into account factors like the likely occupants of housing, their level of car ownership, proximity to good public transport services etc.
For every development there will be a ‘sweet-spot’ where the needs of occupiers, neighbours and wider public are being most effectively addressed.
That won’t be achieved by applying a simple rigid formula, no matter where the development occurs.
There are apartment buildings in the CBD that cater for people who use bikes and scooters, and as a result, fit into their neighbourhood a whole lot better than a tower with the first four floors all used for car parking. The latter also occur in the CBD, adding to levels of traffic in an unsustainable way.
Simplistic ideas may strive to solve a problem, but are certainly capable of creating others. – Jim Allen
Commenting on the story: Adelaide Metro office closing to make way for high-rise hotel
Closing is one thing, but establishing an alternative option at the railway station is ludicrous – not at all central for the majority of commuters.
This decision is as dumb as moving the SA Information Centre from a prime and prominent location on King William Street to a small, well-hidden almost hole-in-the-wall location in James Place.
Are the people that make these decisions ever a tourist? Clearly not in their own town. – Jenni Jeremy
I note that the State Government has decided to close the Adelaide Metro Office at King William and Currie Streets from Friday 13 September.
The reason given is that a new multi-storey building is to be erected on site and that it wasn’t worthwhile keeping the office open.
This is just another slap in the face for public transport users. The office has for many years been at the very centre of public transport in Adelaide.
Most city-based bus and tram routes pass through this intersection, and 80% of Adelaide’s public transport passengers use buses and trams.
The Government has said that an alternative is available at Adelaide railway station, yet that alternative is very much out of the way for most public transport users.
The Government considers that its internet information for users is satisfactory, yet forgets that the significant proportion of the population do not or cannot use the internet.
It also has no regard for tourists and new public transport users who need face-to-face information.
The office also provide paper timetables for passengers; many of these visit the office without having to see a customer officer, and the paper timetables are much easier to read and understand than the digital information.
I suppose the next thing will be discontinuing the supply of these public timetables.
Years ago the State Government produced a comprehensive public transport map, one that users including tourists could carry around with them.
Such maps are available in many other cities. Even those maps have disappeared.
It is as if the Government was trying to sell us a car without an instruction booklet.
The Government has known about the proposed demolition of the existing building at Currie and King William Streets for some time, so one would think that an alternative – either as part of the new building or in an alternative location close by – could have been arranged by now.
This just show a real lack of interest in public transport.
Driverless buses carrying a very small number of people are of much greater interest to this Government. – Tom Wilson
Commenting on the story: Airport flights, passengers and road traffic set to take off
When the new airport terminal was opened, I queried why the ramp drop off was not being used.
The explanation I received was that due to “terrorist threats ” the ramp would no longer be used.
The chaos that is now the norm, having drop-offs and pick-ups in the same space, is so stupid as to be a laughing stock for Adelaide.
What is wrong with erecting bollards (or similar) in front of the doors off the ramp? That way no “terrorist” could drive a vehicle through these doors.
Or am I totally wrong about all this? – Bronte Allan
Commenting on the opinion piece: “Job snob” claims a lazy excuse for inflexible welfare system
So what Bronwyn Bishop is saying in that video is that insulting the poor is fine and defaming them is fine, so long as we’re not killing them?
Was it Gandhi who said a nation’s greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest members?
Maybe Bronwyn just can’t hear the weakest members over the sound of the helicopter blades. – Karin von Behrens
Want to comment?
Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.
We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.
InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.
We value local independent journalism. We hope you do too.
InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to become an InDaily supporter.