[PRO] Buckingham Arms | 10lvs | $150m

[ChillyPhilly]

This got rejected. Another win for the NIMBY morons.

SCAP slammed it: https://www.saplanningcommission.sa.gov ... eeting.pdf

[dsriggs]

Great idea, great location right near the edge of the city, nice use of the old hotel.

Watch the Walkerville Council blow this to pieces.

I knew SOMEBODY would bugger this up, at least...

[A-Town]

The SCAP have had a few shockers of late.

[SBD]

Great idea, great location right near the edge of the city, nice use of the old hotel.

Watch the Walkerville Council blow this to pieces.

I knew SOMEBODY would bugger this up, at least...

Just about the only thing they did not have an issue with was the overall height/number of levels!

It seems to me that a lot of the concerns could have been addressed by architects and designers having a coffee with the SCAP members/advisors to understand what would be accepted. Are they allowed to regard this meeting as a trial run, address the feedback and resubmit in a few months?

[ChillyPhilly]

Great idea, great location right near the edge of the city, nice use of the old hotel.

Watch the Walkerville Council blow this to pieces.

I knew SOMEBODY would bugger this up, at least...

Just about the only thing they did not have an issue with was the overall height/number of levels!

It seems to me that a lot of the concerns could have been addressed by architects and designers having a coffee with the SCAP members/advisors to understand what would be accepted. Are they allowed to regard this meeting as a trial run, address the feedback and resubmit in a few months?

They could re-apply with a revised design that satisfies what SCAP deemed to not satisfy.

[WGG]

Great idea, great location right near the edge of the city, nice use of the old hotel.

Watch the Walkerville Council blow this to pieces.

I knew SOMEBODY would bugger this up, at least...

Just about the only thing they did not have an issue with was the overall height/number of levels!

It seems to me that a lot of the concerns could have been addressed by architects and designers having a coffee with the SCAP members/advisors to understand what would be accepted. Are they allowed to regard this meeting as a trial run, address the feedback and resubmit in a few months?

That would most certainly be a conflict of interest, unethical and breach the Accredited Professional code of conduct.

The application has been refused.

There are two pathways to take:
1. Appeal the decision to the Environment, Resources and Development Court.
2. Submit a new application.

With pathway 1, it is quite often that either a 'pending track' or 'conference track' will take place, in which a 'compromise' proposal will be submitted to the SCAP.
These are confidential, and we will not know the outcome until the Court makes consent orders.
If the court sees there is no prospect of resolution, a directions hearing will take place and will follow the 'hearings track'.

[timtam20292]

nimby morons.

[Dvious]

I actually agree with the refusal. Scale, setbacks and design aesthetic are actually all quite poor. Not all development is good development. Back to the drawing board from me.

[ChillyPhilly]

I actually agree with the refusal. Scale, setbacks and design aesthetic are actually all quite poor. Not all development is good development. Back to the drawing board from me.

I am the same. I would be happy if this was 30+ storeys, but the ground level activation and scale was minimal at best.

[ChillyPhilly]

Second time lucky, maybe?

https://www.indaily.com.au/news/adelaid ... arms-hotel

[Patrick_27]

Is this meant to be an improvement? The previous submission was FAR superior...

[urban]

The images from the Indaily article are the previous submission.

The new scheme hasn't been released.

[abc]

Is this meant to be an improvement? The previous submission was FAR superior...

they're photos of the rejected submission champ

[Nort]

[Alyx]

From $150m for 180 apartments across ten levels to...

New plans for a 29-townhouse development behind the historic Buckingham Arms Hotel have been lodged in a dramatic downscaling of earlier contentious plans.

Citify has confirmed it submitted revised plans for the 29 three-storey townhouses with Walkerville council in the latest bid to develop the site.

Each would have three bedrooms and two bathrooms, with two internally accessible car parks, with the maximum building height of 10.5m.