News & Discussion: Low/Mid-Rise CBD Development

[Algernon]

Seems odd that you should need construction approval to build lego brick buildings

[Ben]

I personally hate what they’ve done to that square. One developer should not be allowed to develop so much land in the one space individually without having a cohesive precinct plan approved. They offer poor architectural form, poor amenity (go to an open and see if you could fit a mattress in the bedrooms) and poor community connectivity (no active street frontages are all). They have increased the population by hundreds but offered nothing in the way of retail or services to the people that live there or nearby.

[[Shuz]]

You would think that there would have been a planning precinct masterplan developed for the area, if one developer had so much interest in this area.

[Waewick]

I personally hate what they’ve done to that square. One developer should not be allowed to develop so much land in the one space individually without having a cohesive precinct plan approved. They offer poor architectural form, poor amenity (go to an open and see if you could fit a mattress in the bedrooms) and poor community connectivity (no active street frontages are all). They have increased the population by hundreds but offered nothing in the way of retail or services to the people that live there or nearby.

Do they need to? The square is close to existing retail outlets in every direction.

Do all tallish buildings need a retail component to compete with what's there?

[SRW]

Hurtle and Whitmore (and indeed Wellington) squares are not like Victoria/Hindmarsh/Light. I think it's reasonable to exclude ground floor retail from multi-storey living complexes in predominately residential areas, particularly when primary retail strips exist nearby (in this case, Pultney Street and to a lesser degree Sturt/Halifax). By way of comparison, there's a number of similar constructions along Anzac Highway and Churchill Roads, and it would be folly to expect all to contain retail. Especially so given physical retail's decline.

[Patrick_27]

Hurtle and Whitmore (and indeed Wellington) squares are not like Victoria/Hindmarsh/Light. I think it's reasonable to exclude ground floor retail from multi-storey living complexes in predominately residential areas, particularly when primary retail strips exist nearby (in this case, Pultney Street and to a lesser degree Sturt/Halifax). By way of comparison, there's a number of similar constructions along Anzac Highway and Churchill Roads, and it would be folly to expect all to contain retail. Especially so given physical retail's decline.

Precisely. I live behind the Ale House and for me the Markets is only a ten minute walk, Rundle Mall twelve minutes, Hutt Street IGA ten minutes. There is an abundance of retail for what I need, and in terms of cafes and restaurants there are so many tucked away in places or otherwise on Pulteney Street.

[SBD]

These are not tall buildings or they would not be in this low/mid-rise forum. What is the typical suburban population required to support a local coffee shop, convenience store, pub, Chinese restaurant, pizza shop etc? If the entire square developments will be sufficient for these they need to be provided somewhere in or nearby the development. The reason these higher density living are in the city is because many of these things already exist nearby.

In suburban developments, land can be left to add these things later when the population supports it. In the city centre, leaving space for future development isn't such a great idea. It will either be vacant shopfronts or immediately filled. The earlier 1- and 2-storey buildings facing the square were mostly residential without retail at ground level, so stacking them six-high leaving balconies for street interaction but no ground level retail isn't that unreasonable.

[dbl96]

These are not tall buildings or they would not be in this low/mid-rise forum. What is the typical suburban population required to support a local coffee shop, convenience store, pub, Chinese restaurant, pizza shop etc? If the entire square developments will be sufficient for these they need to be provided somewhere in or nearby the development. The reason these higher density living are in the city is because many of these things already exist nearby.

In suburban developments, land can be left to add these things later when the population supports it. In the city centre, leaving space for future development isn't such a great idea. It will either be vacant shopfronts or immediately filled. The earlier 1- and 2-storey buildings facing the square were mostly residential without retail at ground level, so stacking them six-high leaving balconies for street interaction but no ground level retail isn't that unreasonable.

I suppose a solution could be flexible design of ground floor apartments so that they can easily be converted into shopfronts if the demand arises. That and flexible zoning to allow the conversion to take place.

[EBG]

Update for 62 South Tce, . Picture 14/9/2020. Now working on level 7- roof top level . I thought this was to be 8 stories ? Does anyone know for sure how many stories this project is to be? Please click on picture for bigger.

[wilkiebarkid]

Update for 62 South Tce, . Picture 14/9/2020. Now working on level 7- roof top level . I thought this was to be 8 stories ? Does anyone know for sure how many stories this project is to be? Please click on picture for bigger.

8 levels including ground according to render on page 111

[Ben]

this is just off Whitmore square next to the Salvos site I believe.

Application Number: DA/506/2020
Type: Application Assessed on Merit
Lodged: 15/09/2020
Location: 2-8 Hocking Place, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: Construct 8 level building containing retail and parking at ground level and apartments above

Name
ENZO CAROSCIO ARCHITECTURE

[Patrick_27]

this is just off Whitmore square next to the Salvos site I believe.

Application Number: DA/506/2020
Type: Application Assessed on Merit
Lodged: 15/09/2020
Location: 2-8 Hocking Place, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: Construct 8 level building containing retail and parking at ground level and apartments above

Name
ENZO CAROSCIO ARCHITECTURE

More bloody retail, really? Seriously, I know that buildings without ground level retail have been criticised on these forums but where do those developers including retail expect to find long-term/sustainable tenants? How long do most cafes last at the bottom of these buildings? How often do we see tacky retail businesses that don't last more than six-months or that these retail spaces that sit empty for upwards of a year before they end up being fitted out for clerical offices? It's very one-dimensional of developers to think that Adelaide needs a retail component to every low/mid/high-rise building that goes up in the CBD and beyond, also very one-dimensional to presume that people wouldn't want to live on the ground level of an apartment building provided they were met with adequate security for their premises.

[rev]

More bloody retail, really? Seriously, I know that buildings without ground level retail have been criticised on these forums but where do those developers including retail expect to find long-term/sustainable tenants? How long do most cafes last at the bottom of these buildings? How often do we see tacky retail businesses that don't last more than six-months or that these retail spaces that sit empty for upwards of a year before they end up being fitted out for clerical offices? It's very one-dimensional of developers to think that Adelaide needs a retail component to every low/mid/high-rise building that goes up in the CBD and beyond, also very one-dimensional to presume that people wouldn't want to live on the ground level of an apartment building provided they were met with adequate security for their premises.

Yeh the thought of random drunks urinating on your front window or door in the early hours of the morning on weekends sounds appealing to many I guess.

But I agree on the retail bit. It'll end up being some shitty coffee joint of which you can find way more then necessary in every corner already. How many more do we need? That's the least of the problems though, most developments are boring and uninspired garbage anyway.

[how good is he]

I think the planners/those approving the developments want the the ground floor “activated” with businesses/retail. I guess what’s the alternative? Just a foyer or a ground floor apartment?

[SRW]

I think the planners/those approving the developments want the the ground floor “activated” with businesses/retail. I guess what’s the alternative? Just a foyer or a ground floor apartment?

I think more of the building's common amenities -- gyms, theatres, kitchens etc -- could be located at ground, especially in buildings where there's no special outlook to warrant them being at a higher level. That way you're getting activity and passive surveillance at street level (instead of vacant shopfronts) and extra apartments in the freed space above.

In saying that, I don't have a problem with commercial or retail in this location. The concern should be about its proposed ground level parking.