Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
-
Phantom
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:49 pm
- Location: Northern suburbs
#736
Post
by Phantom » Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:33 pm
Waewick wrote:wrong thread for it, but the ACC should be providing some sort of incentive for architecturally interesting buildings.
Wholly agree with you, Waewick. You'd think the almost unanimous love for the SAHMRI building would surely have already shown them this! Also, I'm sure the footbridge has also recieved FAR more praise than it gets complaints (except from that liberal naysayer chick whose name eludes me at the current time)
To be honest, I can't imagine the ACC thinking there even is a problem looking at the Great Wall of Sandstone.
"Mono, you're a knob. <3"
-
Jamminmelo15
- Sen-Rookie-Sational
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 2:51 pm
#737
Post
by Jamminmelo15 » Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:38 pm
Went for a trek across the bridge last night for the first time - while I really enjoyed the view and design aspects, kind of wish they had a dimmer switch for the lights along the bridge. So bright it almost took away from the skyline city view
-
slenderman
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 8:44 am
#738
Post
by slenderman » Thu Mar 27, 2014 6:47 pm
Phantom wrote:Waewick wrote:wrong thread for it, but the ACC should be providing some sort of incentive for architecturally interesting buildings.
Wholly agree with you, Waewick. You'd think the almost unanimous love for the SAHMRI building would surely have already shown them this! Also, I'm sure the footbridge has also recieved FAR more praise than it gets complaints (
except from that liberal naysayer chick whose name eludes me at the current time)
To be honest, I can't imagine the ACC thinking there even is a problem looking at the Great Wall of Sandstone.
Rachel Sanderson.
I'll throw my support in to Waewick's idea as well. When we see aerial views of the oval taken from planes or in the news with the skyline in the background, but buildings like Westpac House are now looking quite drab. I realise that it's never been a particularly flattering building and perhaps it's just the fact that Adelaide Oval juxtaposes the skyline, but I think Westpac House could really use usurping soon, or at least building more interesting ~70m buildings visible from the north to draw attention away from it (ie not 70 Franklin/Rundle Place boxes). Developments like Currie/Rosina can't come fast enough (assuming it happens).
-
Waewick
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 3774
- Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
#739
Post
by Waewick » Thu Mar 27, 2014 10:50 pm
Time to call Yarwood.
-
Phantom
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:49 pm
- Location: Northern suburbs
#740
Post
by Phantom » Fri Apr 04, 2014 1:58 am
So, I walked across the bridge last night for the first time and noticed something. There is a very noticable dip/dent in it, right above the southeastern bank, near the Oval. When you're at the midway point of the bridge and you're looking at the Oval, this comes out as clear as crystal with the large lights clearly bending with the kink in the bridge. I do hope this has already been noticed and is going to be recitfied, because it currently looks so noticable, you can't help but look at it and criticise what looks like shonky work.
Has anyone else noticed this? Because it's really hard to miss (at night especially) and looks shocking!
"Mono, you're a knob. <3"
-
AdelaideAlive
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:03 pm
#741
Post
by AdelaideAlive » Fri Apr 04, 2014 7:49 am
Phantom wrote:So, I walked across the bridge last night for the first time and noticed something. There is a very noticable dip/dent in it, right above the southeastern bank, near the Oval. When you're at the midway point of the bridge and you're looking at the Oval, this comes out as clear as crystal with the large lights clearly bending with the kink in the bridge. I do hope this has already been noticed and is going to be recitfied, because it currently looks so noticable, you can't help but look at it and criticise what looks like shonky work.
Has anyone else noticed this? Because it's really hard to miss (at night especially) and looks shocking!
yes I too had noticed that, im hoping its part of the bridge levelling out to the flat run towards the oval side, but it does stand out pretty bad, surely with all the money spent and all the designers would of noticed it, or fixed it if possible, but im no engineer.
-
vozdra
- Sen-Rookie-Sational
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 5:01 pm
#742
Post
by vozdra » Fri Apr 04, 2014 10:46 pm
\
is this what you are referring to?
-
AdelaideAlive
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:03 pm
#743
Post
by AdelaideAlive » Fri Apr 04, 2014 11:29 pm
vozdra wrote:\
is this what you are referring to?
yep that's it ,spot on.
-
Kasey771
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:56 am
#744
Post
by Kasey771 » Sat Apr 05, 2014 10:47 am
First off. I love the bridge.
Second am I the only one who thinks it is a bit narrow?
After the Test match it was a crush hazard I can only imagine how it was after the Showdown.
Big infrastructure investments are usually under-valued and & over-criticized while in the planning stage. It's much easier to envision the here and now costs and inconveniences, and far more difficult to imagine fully the eventual benefits.
-
pushbutton
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1451
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 8:01 pm
- Location: Adelaide
#745
Post
by pushbutton » Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:20 pm
Kasey771 wrote:First off. I love the bridge.
Second am I the only one who thinks it is a bit narrow?
After the Test match it was a crush hazard I can only imagine how it was after the Showdown.
It's certainly too narrow if everyone's going to zig-zag about all the time (which they will be if they follow those horrible pavers)!
-
Jud1981
- Sen-Rookie-Sational
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:17 pm
#746
Post
by Jud1981 » Sat Apr 05, 2014 2:20 pm
Kasey771 wrote:First off. I love the bridge.
Second am I the only one who thinks it is a bit narrow?
After the Test match it was a crush hazard I can only imagine how it was after the Showdown.
Whilst I like the look of the bridge, it is too narrow. I experienced this first hand after the Showdown last week.
-
Matt
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
- Location: London
#747
Post
by Matt » Sat Apr 05, 2014 8:58 pm
pushbutton wrote:Kasey771 wrote:First off. I love the bridge.
Second am I the only one who thinks it is a bit narrow?
After the Test match it was a crush hazard I can only imagine how it was after the Showdown.
It's certainly too narrow if everyone's going to zig-zag about all the time (which they will be if they follow those horrible pavers)!
Yawn. Change the record.
-
AdelaideAlive
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 4:03 pm
#748
Post
by AdelaideAlive » Sat Apr 05, 2014 9:17 pm
you could have it another 5 metres wider on each side and it still wouldn't fix the problem of 20,000 converging on the bridge at the conclusion at one time.
-
Phantom
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 4:49 pm
- Location: Northern suburbs
#749
Post
by Phantom » Sat Apr 05, 2014 11:36 pm
vozdra wrote:is this what you are referring to?
Yeah mate, sure is.
Sticks out like dogs balls, if you ask me.
"Mono, you're a knob. <3"
-
Matt
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1125
- Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 12:36 pm
- Location: London
#750
Post
by Matt » Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:06 am
So, envisaging this will hit The Tiser in five... four... three.......
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Prodical and 5 guests