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

[Ben]

They obviously have no idea as the section that protrudes is on the south side of the building not the (north side) as stated. I want to write in.

[crawf]

the things nimbys come up with, "majestic Adelaide skyline"

what a total fool

[urban]

Why does the messenger print letters which are incapable of making a coherent logical argument?

What is Currie St's contemporary style architecture? How does this building conflict with that 'style'

Is Westpac Tower more attractive than this proposal? I for one am glad that this bland stump will no longer dominate our city.

What exactly about the building won't be easy on the eye?

Is he talking about the curved north facade or the curved cantilever? The curved north facade will not reflect any more than any other glass building. Is he concerned about glass buildings per se or just this one?

5 green stars is not actually all that difficult to achieve. It is just a dramatic improvement from the previous low levels. The 5 stars takes into account the fact that the building is made of glass. The main problem with glass buildings is keeping them cool in summer not warm in winter.

Majestic is not a term I would use to describe our current skyline. We have majestic streetscapes, Adelaide oval is majestic, the River Torrens if photographed well is majestic, the hills backdrop to our city is majestic but our current skyline is more lumpy or stumpy.
The nature of city skylines is that they change. This proposal along with spire, city central and the precinct will dramatically improve our skyline.

D Wilden stay home in case any other changes frighten you.

[stelaras]

well said urban!

Just remember it is the messenger than published this...The reporters/editors are not the sharpest tools in the shed!

[Ho Really]

Ho Really, what then is causing such rigid and prolonged flight path options. Is there no other way to approach Adelaide airport? Is it the prevailing wind direction, landing strip orientation, visuals etc etc??? I'd really like to understand this as it is causing Adelaide many developmental issues, such as with the project under discussion.

The approach (landing) is not the problem from either direction, it's when planes take off heading northeasterly and turn right for Melbourne, Hobart and Auckland that it becomes an issue. As we all know these planes have no need to fly over the CBD. They could just as easily continue for an extra few nautical miles and then turn. Most of the planes I’ve seen over the CBD are on domestic flights. I can’t recall seeing any B-747s, B-777s, A320s or A330s on international flights fly over Currie-Grenfell Streets (maybe Air New Zealand’s A320?). The runway, winds or visuals are not an issue. I can only put it down to pilots trying to save a few seconds (probably a minute) of fuel.

I heard that Santos' height was allowed in the face of the stringent airport requirements. Surely this can be done again - and if so, what of landing/takeoff trajectories then? If a precedent is laid down with the Curri St bldg,(as already with Santos) what then? The whole thing seems full of anomelies and contradictions - a morass of mines.

I still think the issue with the Westpac Tower (then State Bank) was to do with the airport radar not CBD building heights per se. A quick call or e-mail to AAL should give you the right answer.

Cheers

[Ho Really]

Glass buildings are not a problem. Look at all the 5-star rated buildings going up. They are all glass. This fellow D Wilden has no idea. He needs to get informed.

Cheers

[rogue]

Why does the messenger print letters which are incapable of making a coherent logical argument?

What is Currie St's contemporary style architecture? How does this building conflict with that 'style'

Is Westpac Tower more attractive than this proposal? I for one am glad that this bland stump will no longer dominate our city.

What exactly about the building won't be easy on the eye?

Is he talking about the curved north facade or the curved cantilever? The curved north facade will not reflect any more than any other glass building. Is he concerned about glass buildings per se or just this one?

5 green stars is not actually all that difficult to achieve. It is just a dramatic improvement from the previous low levels. The 5 stars takes into account the fact that the building is made of glass. The main problem with glass buildings is keeping them cool in summer not warm in winter.

Majestic is not a term I would use to describe our current skyline. We have majestic streetscapes, Adelaide oval is majestic, the River Torrens if photographed well is majestic, the hills backdrop to our city is majestic but our current skyline is more lumpy or stumpy.
The nature of city skylines is that they change. This proposal along with spire, city central and the precinct will dramatically improve our skyline.

D Wilden stay home in case any other changes frighten you.

Hear, hear. Good work Urban. Well said!

[jimmy_2486]

This person is obviously an old person!

I think we should make that person happy and just knock all our buildings down and have paddocks in the cbd like in the 1800's... is that the "Majestic Adelaide Skyline" that this person is talking about???

I don't understand the issues with light and that....I mean how many people in the city stare up at the sun while they are walking?? That is the only way you will do damage to yourself??? what a dumbass.

Some people are so dumb, they criticize development with the weirdest arguments like....."it will hurt my eyes"...and "it will look different and will change our majestic skyline"?? I mean, did they say our skyline was majestic when all our other buildings were built?

[Cruise]

This person is obviously an old person!

That's an unfair generalisation

[jimmy_2486]

My bad....im just used to elderly people saying stuff like that.

[skyliner]

This person is obviously an old person!

That's an unfair generalisation

I agree - it's an unfair discriminatory generalisation and it is fallacial reasoning - I'm 56 and proud of it - and Adelaide. To me, Currie St. is a fantastic design and the sooner we get it the better.

Everyone has some valid thoughts - coloured by their backgound etc etc - read behind the lines and judge these things instead.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

[Shuz]

I just want to point at him and chant 'NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY' all day long just so I can piss him off. What an idiot.

[Bulldozer]

D Wilden fails at physics

[Ho Really]

I don't understand the issues with light and that....I mean how many people in the city stare up at the sun while they are walking?? That is the only way you will do damage to yourself??? what a dumbass.

You don't need to look up to get reflections and glare. Light comes from many angles. It can be a real issue for traffic, however I doubt the people who are designing this tower haven't thought of it and compensated (if there is any need in the first place). The fellow who wrote the letter should've informed him/herself better.

Cheers

[Rob5089]

All I can say is that it looks like a magnificent piece of kit. Build it! I'm a guy very reluctant to say no to many Adelaide developments, just for the sake of getting the word out that this city is willing to accept progress.