[CAN] 20-22 Currie St | 123m | 31lvls | Office

[keepadelaidealive]

Do you reckon it will get approved? I really hope it does, but there would be a lot of fuddy duddy's not happy with such a new development along the Adelaide skyline!
http://www.keepadelaidealive.com

[Ho Really]

This will be great for the industry, hopefully a local firm gets the contract. All these projects must be putting a squeeze on the supply of both materials and labour.

That was my first thought. I hope we get the bulk of the contracts on this particular building.

Hopefully the approval and building of this iconic tower will spur others to come up with exceptional designs. I also hope it will be the first of many the ACC will approve.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

If built, I think the only major complaints will come from the tennants in the Westpac building. They'll lose most of their northern views including those of the Adelaide Oval (at cricket time)!

Cheers

[stelaras]

I hope this one gets the big tick of approval, it will look beautiful in our ever increasing skyline

[urban]

This building will add so much to the city's skyline. No longer will the inelegant Westpac(State Bank) building loom large over our city. This building is symbolic of our city's fortunes. Just as the new building will reduce the visual dominance of the State Bank building in our skyline (and even hide it from some angles), it's construction will be a symbol that the city is no longer defined and dominated by the State Bank collapse.

As with all skyscraper projects the buildings addition to the skyline is far greater than it's contribution at street level. The issues of overlooking etc, Will raised earlier are typical of the difficulties associated with the mixture of large and small buildings. It is a shame that the glass enclosure for the elevators will be lost for the first few levels. Did they consider obscure glass instead of concrete?

The skyline renders look great. Has anyone seen renders at ground level of how the building will relate to the neighbouring buildings and laneways. This will be of equal importance for the city and I'm sure for the neighbours it is of greater significance.

Let's hope this project proceeds.

[Ho Really]

...It is a shame that the glass enclosure for the elevators will be lost for the first few levels. Did they consider obscure glass instead of concrete?...

They probably thought about this. Since there are a lot of nice glass products out there for this purpose. I can only put it down to a psychological reason. Maybe those on the ground could see up as well...

Cheers

[talrok]

I personally hope it could be a tall mother f.. of a building, say 150m and slender .. with a good mix of glass and concrete .. sick of those CC1 and CC2 glassy things ... AND, I know this will shock many, but they ditch the stoopid bendy arch looking (canterlever?) front on Currie St .. how ridiculous .. my four year old cousin could have designed that. Its unimpressive, unnecessary and unimaginative.

But lets build something higher than 90 metres please!!!!

[Howie]

The cantilever is my favourite part of the building, and a radical departure from the architecture we've seen before in Adelaide. But i guess that's what good architecture does to people, it polarises them.

What i'd like to see with this building is an extra four meters of height.

[UrbanSG]

Thanks for the updated info Will and beamer. I was waiting for these skyline shots but damn, they are very average. It just looks like a big white blob. They could have made the building look ten times better than that. Just by saving and editing the pictures to darken them I can actually see some detail now.

Who knows what the ACC will do. There is never any certainty with the inconsistency in approvals and refusals. A planner recommending approval and stating how good the building is doesn't mean the DAP will approve it. We have seen that happen and then the development gets refused. Hopefully it is the full DAP sitting so we don't get a repeat of Aurora. When all members sit they seem rather pro office developments, unlike the few that sat during the initial Auroro decision.

Would like to see this building go ahead but tenant commitment will be the next interesting phase if it does get approved.

Also something really has to be done about the Stamford Hotel. This proposal highlights how dated and ugly that building is. Considering its position on the skyline it really needs and upgrade.

[talrok]

If there is one building in this city that needs to be jazzed up is the 'GHD' building on Grenfell St. Cnr Grenfell and Gawler on NE side .. man is that a most disgusting building. I think Stamford is ok .. gives good contrast to the skyline from Nth Adelaide. There is old, but then there is old and ugly .. and the 'green coloured with red brick' building on Grenfell is revolting!

[Will]

Connor Holmes analyzed the plans and this is their recommendation:

"The proposed easily meets the vast majority of relevant Development Plan policies. Those it does not quite meet in full are considered to be of lesser importance in the wider analysis of the Development Plan policies"

"The two key elements where the proposal is seemingly at odds with the numerical standard is building height and sunlight to the southern side of Currie Street, however in regard to the sunlight situation, a building of substantially lesser height than even 103m will also shade the footpath and thus not fully meet Zone Principle 9"

"As such the building is suitable for the site and should be granted consent by the city of Adelaide DAP"


In addition the council is also impressed by the quality of materials that will be used for the building, in particular the white granite.

[Will]

However is must also be acknoledged that the proposal has received various negative representations, in particular from the inhabitants of the apartment building at 31 Gilbert Place and from the former taxation office building. Many of these people will be attending the council meeting to make their displeasure known.

However it is heartening to read that one of the people against the development in their representation stated " at the same meeting, we were also informed that the council wanted this project to go through and would do everything possible to make it happen".

[Howie]

There were also some complaints that resident's views were being lost, and this would lead to significant depreciation of their property value.

Personally I don't think this argument will fly. There's no way you can preserve views unless you do what Donald Trump does and buys out the airspace above neighbouring properties to ensure this towers will always have views of New York.

[Pikey]

AND, AAL and the CASA have approved the development, so it's up to the ACC now!

[Shuz]

I knew all along that CASA and AAL are fine with it. As stated many times before, planes do not fly OVER the cbd (much to the ACC's thinking that they do) anyways, given the thumbs up from these two authorities and recommendations of approval should only deliver a positive response. But hey, we all know what the ACC is like when it comes to 'skyscrapers' (shock horror!)

I'll believe it when I hear it.