[COM] 122 Grenfell Street | 59m | 17lvls | Ibis Hotel

[Goya's Line]

Music fans say farewell to Jade Monkey
by:
Alice Higgins
From:
City Messenger

September 26, 2012

"It's more about the tragedy of losing that building," he says.

"Something with that much history and that old, I'm really surprised it's that easy to get rid of it."

Exactly! Remove the paint and that cute building is still there, perfect in it's location.

[touring]

Some more news on the Jade Monkey front
A lot more detail about the building at 29 Twin St and a heritage listing application: http://www.weekendnotes.com/jade-monkey ... -be-saved/

Adelaide Now story presumably in Advertiser tomorrow: http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6482821750

[Mants]

Live music venue The Jade Monkey saved - for now

LIVE music venue The Jade Monkey has received a last minute reprieve from the bulldozer.

The 151-year-old Twin St building has been provisionally entered onto the State Heritage register while a consultant spends the next two weeks undertaking further investigations.

Adelaidenow.com.au reported last week Dave Walsh, a semi-retired IT manager, had lodged an application to have the building included on the State Heritage list.

It was due to be bulldozed to become a carpark for a $65 million, 17-storey hotel.

Mr Walsh said he was delighted the building had been granted provisional protection.

"The department is showing it is taking the nomination seriously," Mr Walsh said.

"I urge people not to relax because, at this stage, it is only a temporary nomination.

"I am confident that despite the fact The Jade is closed, there is still a very strong interest in preserving the building."

The Jade Monkey owner Zac Coligan, who closed the doors to his live music venue on Sunday, was pleased the building would be temporarily protected.

"We've always said the tragedy of the situation was losing the old building," Mr Coligan said.

"Something this old, with this amount of history, should not be wiped off the planet, it should be preserved."

More than 700 have signed an online petition to retain the building.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/sout ... 6487324095

fingers crossed that as this all pans out, the jade monkey is saved. i've said it before and i'll say it again...we are continuously talking about how much we want to activate our laneways, set up "hole in the wall" styled venues and have an element of surprise when tourists or whoever wander off the main rundle/hindley artery. the jade monkey epitomises these concepts.

[dsriggs]

I see legal action on the way...

[build 'em smarter]

No wonder people demolish things in the middle of the night without approval. Its rubbish listings etc like this that encourages it. As far as im aware (correct me if im wrong) this has been approved for demolition and the hotel approved for construction (I am aware that this is the adjoining site). If I were the developer and this was happening I would be bringing in the midnight demolition. No wonder it is so hard to get projects up and running here, once you get through all the political red tape (which is getting reduced thankfully) you still have to deal with this. This same logic would allow the blocking of demolition of a mcdonalds if enough people whinge, if there is no heritage significance, (would already be listed if there was) then knock it down. I have nothing against the business itself, and i wish it all the best, but surely the business can move to a new venue (yes it will be inconvient, but thats what can happen when you lease.)

[[Shuz]]

No wonder people demolish things in the middle of the night without approval. Its rubbish listings etc like this that encourages it. As far as im aware (correct me if im wrong) this has been approved for demolition and the hotel approved for construction (I am aware that this is the adjoining site). If I were the developer and this was happening I would be bringing in the midnight demolition. No wonder it is so hard to get projects up and running here, once you get through all the political red tape (which is getting reduced thankfully) you still have to deal with this. This same logic would allow the blocking of demolition of a mcdonalds if enough people whinge, if there is no heritage significance, (would already be listed if there was) then knock it down. I have nothing against the business itself, and i wish it all the best, but surely the business can move to a new venue (yes it will be inconvient, but thats what can happen when you lease.)

-1

[build 'em smarter]

-1

Good argument

[crawf]

All I care about is seeing that hideous mess on Grenfell Street demolished. It's an eyesore.

[Waewick]

this whole saga is starting to bring memories of "good old adelaide"

quick, stop that development! we need a reeeasssssoooooonnnnnn!

I'm surprised they haven't convinced the Parkland preservation society that a tall building might shade out the sun and the effect of more people looking at the grass and trees from a hieght might cause a disruption to the atmospheric conditions in the park, this hurting the grass.

[Nort]

I suspect you would find more people in favor of the demolition if it was actually intended to improve the laneway in any way, and not simply to give them an empty lot next door and reduce risk of noise from music on their doorstep.

[peas_and_corn]

No wonder people demolish things in the middle of the night without approval. Its rubbish listings etc like this that encourages it. As far as im aware (correct me if im wrong) this has been approved for demolition and the hotel approved for construction (I am aware that this is the adjoining site). If I were the developer and this was happening I would be bringing in the midnight demolition. No wonder it is so hard to get projects up and running here, once you get through all the political red tape (which is getting reduced thankfully) you still have to deal with this. This same logic would allow the blocking of demolition of a mcdonalds if enough people whinge, if there is no heritage significance, (would already be listed if there was) then knock it down. I have nothing against the business itself, and i wish it all the best, but surely the business can move to a new venue (yes it will be inconvient, but thats what can happen when you lease.)

Indeed. This sort of thing should have happened before the approval process, not after.

[degruch]

I suspect you would find more people in favor of the demolition if it was actually intended to improve the laneway in any way.

Absolutely Nort. Hopefully this will all pan out to be a positive move, we need thoughtful development in this part of our CBD as much of the four blocks involved is already heritage listed...29 Twin Street is a glaring omission at the moment.

[degruch]

As far as im aware (correct me if im wrong) this has been approved for demolition and the hotel approved for construction (I am aware that this is the adjoining site).

Approval for demolition of the building has not been granted as yet. Just note, the 29 Twin Street does not need to be demolished for the hotel development to go ahead, hence the carry on...it would make life easier for the developers (otherwise Twin and Grenfell Street traffic issues), but they just might have to build smarter.

I'm sure the hotel will commence in time, the Jade Monkey will pop up somewhere else, and hopefully 29 Twin Street will live to tell another 150 years worth of stories.

[build 'em smarter]

Approval for demolition of the building has not been granted as yet.

Thanks for clarification, if thats the case, then this should be part of the approval process, however if it had been approved for demo, then let it be demo'd.

Im aware that it doesnt need to be demo'd for the hotel, but that is the right of the land owner.

[SRW]

i've said it before and i'll say it again...we are continuously talking about how much we want to activate our laneways, set up "hole in the wall" styled venues and have an element of surprise when tourists or whoever wander off the main rundle/hindley artery. the jade monkey epitomises these concepts.

Too right.

And enough of painting opponents of this demolition as NIMBY anti-development types. We clearly aren't. But we don't support development at all costs. Losing this building would be at a cost to interesting streetscapes in Adelaide, and what's worse, a completely avoidable one.