[COM] 52-66 King William Street | 65m | 15 Levels | Southern Cross Arcade

[Ben]

This doesn’t sound like good news.

Description
Variation to DA 020/A143/20 (and 22000044) for the demolition of all buildings on site with the exception of the State Heritage Place (Sand's and McDougall building), and the construction of a 15-storey mixed-use office and retail building with ancillary parking and end of trip facilities. Variation to change basement floor area from retail to carpark.

[cmet]

Is this the space where it was rumoured luxury retail would occupy?

[Ben]

No the basement is meant to be a supermarket.

[HiTouch]

The city is in desperate need for another carpark.


(said no one ever)

[Nort]

Wonder what Supermarket they ever expected to have in there. Unless they were hoping for Woolworths to move in there don't seem to be any other suitable potential tenants.

Makes me suspect they always wanted to do this.

[Pikey]

Could have been a request from a potential office tennant too. As long as the ground floor is still retail activated as slated I think it'll be fine (aside from car park entry which I'm assuming will come from laneway access off Grenfell Street?)

[SRW]

Could have been a request from a potential office tennant too. As long as the ground floor is still retail activated as slated I think it'll be fine (aside from car park entry which I'm assuming will come from laneway access off Grenfell Street?)

Yes, vehicle entry is from Imperial Place. However, the site is within both the Capital City Zone and Core Pedestrian Area which restrict car parking. This development already increases on-site car parks by about 20 on what was there previously (to total ~40), so it'll be interesting to see what SCAP will make of this request for further increases.

In terms of the outcome, I agree it's not fatal but it is profoundly unhelpful to induce more traffic to the area (particularly Grenfell). And as a city user, I was rather looking forward to having a supermarket closer to the West End.

[Algernon]

The city is in desperate need for another carpark.


(said no one ever)

True, but having on site parking is a major draw for potential tenants and gives them a clear point of difference in the market.

[floplo]

Wonder what Supermarket they ever expected to have in there. Unless they were hoping for Woolworths to move in there don't seem to be any other suitable potential tenants.

Makes me suspect they always wanted to do this.

Aldi doesn't have a CBD location yet.

[Nort]

Could have been a request from a potential office tennant too. As long as the ground floor is still retail activated as slated I think it'll be fine (aside from car park entry which I'm assuming will come from laneway access off Grenfell Street?)

Yes, vehicle entry is from Imperial Place. However, the site is within both the Capital City Zone and Core Pedestrian Area which restrict car parking. This development already increases on-site car parks by about 20 on what was there previously (to total ~40), so it'll be interesting to see what SCAP will make of this request for further increases.

In terms of the outcome, I agree it's not fatal but it is profoundly unhelpful to induce more traffic to the area (particularly Grenfell). And as a city user, I was rather looking forward to having a supermarket closer to the West End.

There is some legacy access to car parks down Imperial Place but not many and already pretty annoying. I'd be very surprised if new developments were given approval to build carpark entrances there.

[SRW]

Could have been a request from a potential office tennant too. As long as the ground floor is still retail activated as slated I think it'll be fine (aside from car park entry which I'm assuming will come from laneway access off Grenfell Street?)

Yes, vehicle entry is from Imperial Place. However, the site is within both the Capital City Zone and Core Pedestrian Area which restrict car parking. This development already increases on-site car parks by about 20 on what was there previously (to total ~40), so it'll be interesting to see what SCAP will make of this request for further increases.

In terms of the outcome, I agree it's not fatal but it is profoundly unhelpful to induce more traffic to the area (particularly Grenfell). And as a city user, I was rather looking forward to having a supermarket closer to the West End.

There is some legacy access to car parks down Imperial Place but not many and already pretty annoying. I'd be very surprised if new developments were given approval to build carpark entrances there.

It already has approval to do so. The question is whether they'll now be allowed to increase the expected traffic, which was already considered at the borderline of manageable given the pedestrian/vehicle conflicts on Grenfell. Though I suppose they can argue that without a supermarket, goods movement will be less.

[Prodical]

From yesterday. Quite like the old Sands and McDougall entrance showing a bit of Adelaide history - could have looked a bit tokenistic but hopefully it will blend in OK

[Spotto]

Still a shame they couldn’t/wouldn’t save both the Sands McDougall facade AND the James Place Hotel.

But, it’s nice that the final design is actually tasteful and not another cube of glass.

[Nort]

Yes, vehicle entry is from Imperial Place. However, the site is within both the Capital City Zone and Core Pedestrian Area which restrict car parking. This development already increases on-site car parks by about 20 on what was there previously (to total ~40), so it'll be interesting to see what SCAP will make of this request for further increases.

In terms of the outcome, I agree it's not fatal but it is profoundly unhelpful to induce more traffic to the area (particularly Grenfell). And as a city user, I was rather looking forward to having a supermarket closer to the West End.

There is some legacy access to car parks down Imperial Place but not many and already pretty annoying. I'd be very surprised if new developments were given approval to build carpark entrances there.

It already has approval to do so. The question is whether they'll now be allowed to increase the expected traffic, which was already considered at the borderline of manageable given the pedestrian/vehicle conflicts on Grenfell. Though I suppose they can argue that without a supermarket, goods movement will be less.

Basement.pngRight of Way.png

My bad, I got James Place confused with Imperial Place!

[Prodical]

Last night