Commenting on the story: Unley Road bike lanes face dead end under new plan

Unfortunately, Unley Road is a major arterial road connecting the CBD, northern and eastern suburbs with the south.

Bikes and cars do not mix and educated cyclists should be using the Rugby – Porter and Wood Street bikeways. The proposed Target redevelopment, Dan Murphy’s liquor store (Malvern) and another high-rise apartment block at 106 – 108 Unley Road will only add to the traffic volumes on Unley Road.

The 50km/h speed limit from Wattle Street to Greenhill Road should be extended to Cross Road. Common sense says Unley Road should be a 12-hour clearway from Greenhill Road to Northgate Street. In the day, no thought was given to the volumes of traffic roads such as Unley, Goodwood, Glen Osmond, Fullarton etc would be carrying many years hence and compromises now need to be made.

Poor intersection designs also impact now on traffic flows: Arthur Street/Unley Road/Oxford Terrace (Unley), Fisher Street/Unley Road (Malvern/Hyde Park); Grange Road, Belair Road, Newark Road (Mitcham).

In 1919, when cars were few, our first city planner, Charles Reade, warned the parliament that the Princes Road – Belair Road intersection would be a problem in the future. – Geoff Sauer

An utter embarrassment again. Bike lanes aren’t to support peoples’ hobbies as the council seems to think, but an alternative mode of transport.

Less cyclists will just mean worse traffic. – Micheal Fotheringham

Sadly, Unley Road is just no longer fit for purpose. I always use other routes accessing Mitcham from the city.

No parking at all, and fenced off with designated light controlled pedestrian crossings would kill businesses, unless Council acquired land behind all shops for parking.

And cycle lanes, even without roadside parking would probably still not work. Legalising cycles on footpaths also not feasible on this busy stretch.

Short of demolishing buildings for a wider road, not feasible or acceptable – or doing a ‘South Road’ (tunnel …. not feasible), Adelaide is stuck with it. – Robert Warn

Commenting on the story: Minister slams door on office block housing fix

Adaptive reuse of existing buildings absolutely needs to be recognised as one part of the solution to addressing housing supply in Adelaide.

It is not the only solution, but it should also not be written off. The challenges listed by Minister Champion at the CEDA conference are real, but they are not universally applicable to all existing office buildings. Some are much better suited to adaptation to housing than others, and under-utilised buildings need to be considered on a case by case basis.

A significant obstacle to adaptive reuse of office buildings that was not raised is getting builder owners to see this as a legitimate pathway for consideration.

Where office buildings are suitable, adaptation to housing provide many benefits; proximity to social infrastructure and employment, conservation of existing building fabric which is vital in limiting carbon emissions in the face of climate change, utilisation of existing services infrastructure and delivery of housing within a shorter time frame than required for greenfield housing, which faces multiple challenges of its own.

Successful adaptations include the Highways Department Building in Walkerville, the ETSA Building in Eastwood and the Queen Victoria Hospital Building in Rose Park. City examples include the Princes Apartments on Grenfell Street, the former T&G Building, 65 King William Street.

Others have been converted to student housing, which eliminates the need for carparking which is another barrier to conversion from offices to housing.  They might not all be best practice, but these examples are proof that adaptive reuse is a genuine opportunity.

The next step is making these conversions more attractive by giving building owners the right incentives – whether this be carparking exemptions, favourable consideration for new balconies or tax breaks – to consider this a viable option. – Nicolette Di Lernia

Commenting on the story: Council reveals costs on North Adelaide apartments

It’s just extraordinary that through this land deal the Adelaide City Council, or its ratepayers, is to barely break even, and only gain the rates revenue which they would have got with the development site had the council not ever bought the land.

It is extraordinary because having set the guiding principles, which I was instrumental in setting, comprising a 12mm tower setback and 8 storey height limit in this 6 storey zone, the last council allowed the developer to build to more than twice that height for no more consideration for the land.

Hence with such negotiations by council, it is no wonder that the council ratepayers gained nothing financially, whilst the developer makes all the profits. -Alexander Wilkinson

Commenting on the story: Lengthy Glenelg tramline closure for $200 million overpass

This project will inflict six months of pain on public transport users to largely improve only motorists’ commutes once finished.

In the absence of tangible improvements for rail passengers, reliable substitute services running at the same frequencies as existing tram services will be essential to avoid pushing passengers into cars.

Those less able to drive risk being disadvantaged further, especially in the absence of a long-term plan to improve passenger rail in South Australia. – Rhys Archer