[COM] GPO Exchange | 85m | 22 Levels | Office

[Will]

Reminds me of AMP Square in Melbourne

[rev]

I don't know which is more revolting.

This is a prime spot for a landmark tower with a unique design.
People actually go to university to learn to design such crap?

[Jaymz]

A so-called $235 million development hey. Sounds about $135 million too much from the pics we've seen........ surely that can't be all of it?

[Matt]

This is beyond awful.

[thecityguy]

Yes, uninspiring for sure. But not awful


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[slenderman]

Yes, uninspiring for sure. But not awful


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's awful. Perhaps it would be tolerable as an anonymous density filler somewhere on Flinders/Pirie Streets but absolutely not here.

It's as boxy as a box can get (seriously, is there a single non 90-degree angle anywhere in that design?), with dozens of ugly rectangular windows copied and pasted across that wall and the eastern one. There is no interesting pattern with the windows or anything like that, any or other architectural features. The building materials don't look to be anything special either, so it won't create an interesting new contrast with the old of the GPO.

It looks to be about as long as it is tall, so will create an oppressive walled effect when viewed from the east, and it looks like the western wall will be blank.

The better-looking (but still not great) second stage doesn't have a timeline, so that big wall may be visible for years to come, and the second stage features the only good part of this development, the food/retail hub (excluding refurbishing the GPO buildings).

It just seems like a huge step backwards when you see how much the standard of design proposed for Adelaide is improving, especially considering this really is one of the most prominent sites in the city as it will help fill in Victoria Square.

[Patrick_27]

It just seems like a huge step backwards when you see how much the standard of design proposed for Adelaide is improving, especially considering this really is one of the most prominent sites in the city as it will help fill in Victoria Square.

...Where exactly has the standard of design improved in Adelaide? Almost every proposal that is either under construction or approved for construction doesn't go that far beyond what our skyline currently has... And most of those buildings that have recently been completed have failed to meet the expectations that the renders have imposed on the public. This building is underwhelming, sure, but it hardly warrants the excessive use of terms such as 'awful'.

[[Shuz]]

SAHMRI, Convention Centre, SA Water, Vue - great desigbs.

[slenderman]

It just seems like a huge step backwards when you see how much the standard of design proposed for Adelaide is improving, especially considering this really is one of the most prominent sites in the city as it will help fill in Victoria Square.

...Where exactly has the standard of design improved in Adelaide? Almost every proposal that is either under construction or approved for construction doesn't go that far beyond what our skyline currently has... And most of those buildings that have recently been completed have failed to meet the expectations that the renders have imposed on the public. This building is underwhelming, sure, but it hardly warrants the excessive use of terms such as 'awful'.

Are you a contrarian Patrick, or are you the only one who's entitled to an opinion on the architectural merit of proposals?

Let's not forget that you've used even more excessive terms to describe buildings you don't like. That proposal on Hutt Street is a "pile of shit", and so are Vision on Morphett and the Frome Street proposal (although that's probably motivated more by the loss of Rhino Room rather than the architectural merit of the building).

There's plenty of examples of designs that have been constructed/proposed this decade that have improved over what we've got in previous decades.

Built/under construction:
CC8, Ibis Hotel, Vue, SAHMRI, UniSA, Calvary Hospital (yes, even a hospital), Central Adelaide, Adelaide Uni Med School and Bohem are all vastly superior designs to this. 115 KWS also has two very attractive walls going for it at least.

Proposed:
Sofitel, Echelon, Realm Adelaide, 211-215 South Terrace, West Franklin, Flinders East, The University of Adelaide gateway building/towers, Adelaide Casino and Park Hotel are all either well-designed buildings or game changers for Adelaide if they go ahead.

Even more "meh" developments like August Towers, Maughan Church, Vision on Morphett, 70 Franklin, 50 Flinders, Holiday Inn Express, Quest KWS South and 261 South Terrace are inoffensive at worst.

Sure, there's always going to be a bit of crap that slips through, like 228 North Terrace, Alto Apartments and probably that Waymouth Street student accommodation, but at least they aren't taking up some of the CBD's most prominent sites.

And besides, even if our architecture was all even as close to as bad as this proposal, wouldn't it be high time to stop building crap and demand higher standards from architects who are paid money and go to university to come up with innovative designs?

[Patrick_27]

It just seems like a huge step backwards when you see how much the standard of design proposed for Adelaide is improving, especially considering this really is one of the most prominent sites in the city as it will help fill in Victoria Square.

...Where exactly has the standard of design improved in Adelaide? Almost every proposal that is either under construction or approved for construction doesn't go that far beyond what our skyline currently has... And most of those buildings that have recently been completed have failed to meet the expectations that the renders have imposed on the public. This building is underwhelming, sure, but it hardly warrants the excessive use of terms such as 'awful'.

Are you a contrarian Patrick, or are you the only one who's entitled to an opinion on the architectural merit of proposals?

Let's not forget that you've used even more excessive terms to describe buildings you don't like. That proposal on Hutt Street is a "pile of shit", and so are Vision on Morphett and the Frome Street proposal (although that's probably motivated more by the loss of Rhino Room rather than the architectural merit of the building).

There's plenty of examples of designs that have been constructed/proposed this decade that have improved over what we've got in previous decades.

Built/under construction:
CC8, Ibis Hotel, Vue, SAHMRI, UniSA, Calvary Hospital (yes, even a hospital), Central Adelaide, Adelaide Uni Med School and Bohem are all vastly superior designs to this. 115 KWS also has two very attractive walls going for it at least.

Proposed:
Sofitel, Echelon, Realm Adelaide, 211-215 South Terrace, West Franklin, Flinders East, The University of Adelaide gateway building/towers, Adelaide Casino and Park Hotel are all either well-designed buildings or game changers for Adelaide if they go ahead.

Even more "meh" developments like August Towers, Maughan Church, Vision on Morphett, 70 Franklin, 50 Flinders, Holiday Inn Express, Quest KWS South and 261 South Terrace are inoffensive at worst.

Sure, there's always going to be a bit of crap that slips through, like 228 North Terrace, Alto Apartments and probably that Waymouth Street student accommodation, but at least they aren't taking up some of the CBD's most prominent sites.

And besides, even if our architecture was all even as close to as bad as this proposal, wouldn't it be high time to stop building crap and demand higher standards from architects who are paid money and go to university to come up with innovative designs?

Hang on, where in my posting did I even suggest to being the only one who can pass an opinion? Seems a bit unfair for you to say that when thecityguy expressed his opinion and you responded with 'it's awful' and went on to completely disregard most of the very little that he said. And just because my perspective differs from yours (and others) doesn't make me a contrarian either, architecture is a form of art and therefore subjective.

I said most, not all; of-course there are a few good ones which has slipped through the cracks, but there are still a lot of buildings have failed to live up to their own design. VUE and the Adelaide Uni's building immediately come to mind (115 KWS turned out better than I had thought but as you've said, has two blank walls), hell, I'm even starting to get the feeling that Bohem will also fall into that basket.

What would you like to see on this site? I can probably guess (because it's the same tag-line I read from most people on here)... 'tall, sleek and curvy'. It seems that anything that doesn't fall into at-least one of those categories these days will get knocked by the majority on here.

[slenderman]

Hang on, where in my posting did I even suggest to being the only one who can pass an opinion? Seems a bit unfair for you to say that when thecityguy expressed his opinion and you responded with 'it's awful' and went on to completely disregard most of the very little that he said. And just because my perspective differs from yours (and others) doesn't make me a contrarian either, architecture is a form of art and therefore subjective.

I said most, not all; of-course there are a few good ones which has slipped through the cracks, but there are still a lot of buildings have failed to live up to their own design. VUE and the Adelaide Uni's building immediately come to mind (115 KWS turned out better than I had thought but as you've said, has two blank walls), hell, I'm even starting to get the feeling that Bohem will also fall into that basket.

What would you like to see on this site? I can probably guess (because it's the same tag-line I read from most people on here)... 'tall, sleek and curvy'. It seems that anything that doesn't fall into at-least one of those categories these days will get knocked by the majority on here.

As you've said, all thecityguy has said is that it's underwhelming but he approves of it because, to him at least, it's decent and predominately glass.

I disagreed, perhaps a bit overbearingly/authoritatively, and I apologise to thecityguy if that came across as rude, and I invite him to elaborate a bit on his opinion, as I'm happy to debate it respectfully.

But I've listed several things about this building that in my view make this one awful and disappointing, namely its proportions, the associated overly repetitive design that is devoid of variety/interest and the (seeming) lack of interesting materials used, so it's not like I just said "Nope, It's awful, you're wrong, none of your points are valid" without offering my own argument as to its merits.

But moving on, without stating that "I want something tall, sleek and curvy", given the reasons I outlined in my post, I don't think that this is even close to the best use of this site, and I'm pretty sure you don't think so either. Does it honestly look to you like the best outcome someone who has spent years studying architecture and is paid good money can design? Or does it look like an expense-minimising design that any schmuck like you or me could come up with without much effort?

I associate development with improvement, and to me, this part of the development does not offer enough improvement to support it. As I've mentioned, all things considered, I think it's a pretty awful piece of architecture, and the main benefit of this development is the redevelopment of the GPO buildings and the ground level activation (which I think looks fantastic), but that takes place in the second stage which doesn't have a time frame yet.

As I'm not an architect, I'm not certain how to design a masterpiece, but most people know a good building when they see one, unless they're vehemently opposed to high rise development like the Adelaidenow comments section.

But without making it "sleek and curvy", which I admit is a bit of a vague request thrown around here, without vastly changing the shape of the building, how about breaking up the height of the building so that the wall effect isn't so pronounced? Perhaps set parts of the eastern wall back so it isn't one continuous, oppressive wall?

Or how about creating some sort of glass pattern using different colours, like the SA Water/Commonwealth Law Courts do to break up the monotony of the eastern wall? Maybe make an interesting pattern on some of the walls with protruding elements, as has been done in the City Central towers (glass pods) and 50 Flinders (those orange blades), or perhaps make a striped pattern that alternates between steel/aluminium cladding and glass, as has been done in CC8, 50 Flinders , Ibis and the Sofitel proposal?

But as it stands, like rev, I would legitimately rather not see this stage go ahead and wait until someone can come up with something better, because I think this site is too good to waste on something as average architecturally as this.

[Ben]

GPO precinct development to refocus the business heart of Adelaide’s city centre

Richard Evans, The Advertiser
November 1, 2016 9:15am



THE $235 million development of the General Post Office precinct is set to realign the heart of the Adelaide CBD, says the agent responsible for bringing in a major state government department as the anchor tenant.

The Attorney-General’s Department will occupy the top half of the new 20-storey building on Franklin St (overlooking Victoria Square), said CBRE director Andrew Bahr, and will help foster the laneway culture favoured by the State Government and Adelaide City Council.

“This isn’t just another glass building, it’s all about the precinct,” Mr Bahr said. “There will be retail and food and beverage built into the design via the Telephone Exchange building next door. It will refocus the CBD, dragging people back to the GPO, to the true and literal centre of Adelaide. The GPO precinct will be the final piece in the puzzle.”

Mr Bahr, who began a soft search for new tenants around 18 months ago, said interest in occupying the remaining 12,000sqm of the new 24,500sqm tower had intensified since last Friday’s announcement.

“There’s been much interest, this is now a project that is going to happen. This is the biggest pre commitment deal in Adelaide since the ATO moved to Tower 8 (adjacent the GPO precinct on Franklin St) four years ago. Prior to precommitment, it’s very difficult to sell a plan to tenants on paper.”

A dearth of major transactions in Adelaide this year has been in part due to a shortage of large leases approaching their end date, he said, but will not impact upon the Precinct GPO.

“A lot of major leases are expiring in the city in 2019,” Mr Bahr said. “I have had a half a dozen calls and messages this morning already because of what is now happening.”

The new tower — a second and smaller tower of 15 storeys with a King William St address is also being planned — will have a floor plate of 1460sqm, Mr Bahr said, and will boast a unique podium design.

“There will be podium level car parking above the ground floor, the actual office space will start on Level 3,” he said. “From the low levels up, the tenants will all have the same experience throughout the building, sitting above the heritage GPO. This will not be just another office tower, but something that will redefine the modern workplace.”

The landmark GPO opened in 1872 and was the tallest building in Adelaide at the start of last century. A refurbishment (including the Telephone Exchange building) by national property conglomerate Charter Hall which owns the site, is part of the overall place making exercise, Mr Bahr said.

The Charter Hall plan can be best compared to Brookfield Place in Perth, which provides a heritage retail area for the city plus food and fashion options in some of the that city’s sympathetically restored historical buildings, Mr Bahr said.

Architects Hassell and Fitzpatrick and Partners have been charged with the building design and construction is expected to begin in the second quarter of next year with completion expected by July, 2019.

[crawf]

Again wishful thinking, but that only looks like a concept or artist impression. Not a true render.

[Ben]

I think it is a concept as it says architects are working on final plans now.

[monotonehell]

The picture Ben posted with that 1st November article is the same as the original concept picture from last year.

Seems like an artist's concept, not a design proposal... maybe?