[PRO] Festival Plaza Tower 2 | 149m | 38 Levels | Office

[Prodical]

Just build it

[Mpol02]

It’s so weird right Patrick? So weird.

And I agree, the plaza area has been so long winded. Over the years now. It lacks cohesion and has now fallen into the hands of developers. There is SO much prime land and they pick this.

[Patrick_27]

Once again, spouting out bitter remarks and talking down about people (who are far more qualified than you) that are opposed to this development; as if you genuinely believe there is no legitimate reason that one might want this proposal to be scaled back or abandoned. Grow up.

[Personal attacks removed]

[Personal attacks removed]

Government architects and ministers are agenda driven, and have time and time again shown a track record of under delivering on projects and rushing things for the sake of rushing things. It's why the whole Riverside precinct looks like a dogs breakfast, brought to you by Labor appointed Ministers and architects. The Lord Mayor has more experience on her little finger than the entire state cabinet combined.

[Patrick_27]

It’s so weird right Patrick? So weird.

And I agree, the plaza area has been so long winded. Over the years now. It lacks cohesion and has now fallen into the hands of developers. There is SO much prime land and they pick this.

It's incredibly weird. Getting so offended than someone might crush his dreams of seeing this city become a skyscraper ridden metropolis.

Precisely. Victoria Square as a civic space has been sitting dormant of its potential for years, where are the state government on that? The Convention Centre expansion (whilst it was necessary, but not specifically in that location) is case in point of poorly designed and executed state government initiative... So much so that they had to take Stage 2 back to the drawing board to get the project over the line.

On the topic of this development, though, if the state government so desperately require a new State Administration Centre, why didn't they boot SkyCity out of the Railway Station, move in there, relocate SkyCity elsewhere in the CBD where their footprint isn't bound by the parameters of the Railway Station's heritage facade. Again, rushing for an outcome because God forbid if they couldn't cash in on gambling dollars after every sporting fixture at the new Adelaide Oval.

[Mpol02]

Because Adelaide lacks forward thinkers and planners. It builds for tomorrow not the future. The state needs a people with vision. A great city isn’t about height it’s about planning it’s about people. Adelaide fails to really bring people and city together baring one month of the year. It has so much potential and time and time again it falls flat.

It had a whole lot of people making some really weird decisions. If item feels like people at the top are amateur and truly lack experience.

[timtam20292]

Even I agree with Patrick on this subject.

[dbl96]

Onwards and upwards

It’s simple, we need more A++ quality office stock.

No one is disagreeing with you on that.

The question is - is it a good outcome for that office stock to be built on this particular site?

I am of the view that the answer is no, because:

1. This development, in its planned location, overwhelms the neighboring grand public buildings of Parliament House and the Railway Station; and

2. A private office tower is inconsistent with the long standing dedication (back to Light's Vision) of this precinct as public land reserved for public cultural institutions and facilities; and

2. This development will suck up so much demand for office space that for years to come it will hinder development of the areas of the CBD which are actually intended for commercial development. Not only that, but if, as expected, the State Administration Centre and various state government departments are relocated, the lifeblood will be sucked out of Victoria Square, which was always intended to be the heart of the city.

I am all in favour of new, large-scale commercial developments. But they should be being built on private land in the CBD, preferably in the underdeveloped western and southern areas. The only reason this tower is getting built on this piece of public land is because of some highly murky dealings between the Walker Corporation and both sides of politics.

All of what I have said applies as much to the first Festival Tower as it does to the second. In an ideal world I would demolish them all - Festival Tower, the Riverbank Centre, the Hyatt, the Casino extension. They have no place being where they are built. Of course, that will never happen. But it is a real pity that poor planning and greed have allowed this public precinct to be butchered so badly. It has been a death of a thousand cuts.

[rev]

Vinnie Elon fuck boy using snowflake as an insult. The incel is incelling.

There are lots of reasons why this development is wrong. It’s corrupt it’s been discussed at great length. But calling someone a snowflake when you’re so put out about another average Adelaide building going up is all kinds of foul.

Also you’re super fucking cringe. A fan boy of skyscrapers without any understanding of their impact. He sits at home all day and jerk’s off to tall buildings all day. Touch grass

Ooh someone’s triggered

Have you had your daily estrogen top up mpol?

Lord Mayor are the types of people who hold our city back and prevent forward thinkers. This development is happening regardless of council opinion, thank god. Onwards and upwards

It’s simple, we need more A++ quality office stock. This tower will provide. Let’s just build it and get it done.

Vinny, put the troll who doesn't actually live in Adelaide/SA on ignore and forget the garbage it posts. You'll be better off for it.

Don't take what Patrick has to say personal, everyone has and is entitled to a different opinion. Some people view the plaza area as parkland, I view it as a concrete landscape. No need to tear each other apart over it though.
There's been a lot of concern by people who actually live in this state about how the plaza development has been handled. How government handles the development of public spaces is important, and the processes for those developments need to be transparent as a matter of public interest.
Lets keep in mind we all want to see a growing and prosperous Adelaide and an evolving skyline. We all have different opinions and views on what's more important or should be a priority.

[VinyTapestry849]

Low key, if we built the dome over the parliament and completed the parliament, it would make the tower overshadowing less obnoxious.

IMG_2047.jpeg (19.11 KiB) Viewed 1055 times

IMG_2046.jpeg (23.07 KiB) Viewed 1055 times

When the tower is built, thankfully heat transfer will from the glass facade won’t be an issue on the north terrace side, with the sun facing the other way.

However the plaza might get a little toasty

[HiTouch]

This time I'm providing no comment regarding the Viny drama, I will say rev is right and it seems abc's friends from interstate are a bit touchy right now. Oh well.

I agree there's been some shoddy decisions and major conflicts of interest (see Lot 14's BAE HQ and Riverlea). It's just funny that Lomax-Smith is complaining when she is literally a proponent of this culture and such questionable outcomes when it suits her (the stupid mall pigeon, the $60k temporary vic square swing, the crazy staff turnovers to gatekeep certain other decisions for recent memory). You could say the ACC is literally the epitomy of bad development and upkeep (The Rundle Lantern and its broken panels, the slippery Mall pavement, the lack of southern Vic Square activation).

Regarding the economic output of Festival Tower 2, I would love to see the government's case for how it will create $1 billion in economic activity. What does that even mean?

[rev]

I agree there's been some shoddy decisions and major conflicts of interest (see Lot 14's BAE HQ and Riverlea). It's just funny that Lomax-Smith is complaining when she is literally a proponent of this culture and such questionable outcomes when it suits her (the stupid mall pigeon, the $60k temporary vic square swing, the crazy staff turnovers to gatekeep certain other decisions for recent memory). You could say the ACC is literally the epitomy of bad development and upkeep (The Rundle Lantern and its broken panels, the slippery Mall pavement, the lack of southern Vic Square activation).

Regarding the economic output of Festival Tower 2, I would love to see the government's case for how it will create $1 billion in economic activity. What does that even mean?

I guess it depends on the scope for that supposed economic activity.
What did they include in that figure?
- The construction activity for the tower?
- The spending of the construction workers for X amount of years it will be built?
- The projected base spending of workers and what not in the tower once complete?
- The maintenance of the building?

[dbl96]

Low key, if we built the dome over the parliament and completed the parliament, it would make the tower overshadowing less obnoxious.
IMG_2047.jpegIMG_2046.jpeg

When the tower is built, thankfully heat transfer will from the glass facade won’t be an issue on the north terrace side, with the sun facing the other way.

However the plaza might get a little toasty

Thanks for digging up those pictures - very interesting. I believe the council was at one point pushing for a condition of approval on Festival Tower #2 being that Walker pay for the dome to be built. Not sure how I feel about it though. The current Parliament House is attractively understated. That dome seems a little bit over the top.

I’m not so much concerned about overshadowing, but more that the Festival Plaza development is so much bigger in scale than Parliament in a way that detracts from the impressiveness of the grand old Parliament House . This is especially the case because of how close the new building will be to Parliament. Grand old symmetrical buildings like these need a certain amount of space around them to really be seen at their best. Also in this case, parliament was supposed to be able to be seen from multiple angles, not just North Terrace but now one side will be obscured completely by the tower. It’s the same sad outcome which befell the northern facade of the railway station.

Have you tried walking through the Festival Plaza in summer? It’s already a fair bit warmer than toasty. The problem is, they can’t really fix it with more trees, because there’s no soil to plant them into, what with the plaza sitting on top of several levels of underground parking.

[abc]

Low key, if we built the dome over the parliament and completed the parliament, it would make the tower overshadowing less obnoxious.
IMG_2047.jpegIMG_2046.jpeg

When the tower is built, thankfully heat transfer will from the glass facade won’t be an issue on the north terrace side, with the sun facing the other way.

However the plaza might get a little toasty

Thanks for digging up those pictures - very interesting. I believe the council was at one point pushing for a condition of approval on Festival Tower #2 being that Walker pay for the dome to be built. Not sure how I feel about it though. The current Parliament House is attractively understated. That dome seems a little bit over the top.

it would provide no functional purpose and in this age of expediency would not be looked upon favourably by anyone

[Algernon]

This time I'm providing no comment regarding the Viny drama, I will say rev is right and it seems abc's friends from interstate are a bit touchy right now. Oh well.

I agree there's been some shoddy decisions and major conflicts of interest (see Lot 14's BAE HQ and Riverlea). It's just funny that Lomax-Smith is complaining when she is literally a proponent of this culture and such questionable outcomes when it suits her (the stupid mall pigeon, the $60k temporary vic square swing, the crazy staff turnovers to gatekeep certain other decisions for recent memory). You could say the ACC is literally the epitomy of bad development and upkeep (The Rundle Lantern and its broken panels, the slippery Mall pavement, the lack of southern Vic Square activation).

Regarding the economic output of Festival Tower 2, I would love to see the government's case for how it will create $1 billion in economic activity. What does that even mean?

Lay off the pigeon

[gnrc_louis]

This time I'm providing no comment regarding the Viny drama, I will say rev is right and it seems abc's friends from interstate are a bit touchy right now. Oh well.

I agree there's been some shoddy decisions and major conflicts of interest (see Lot 14's BAE HQ and Riverlea). It's just funny that Lomax-Smith is complaining when she is literally a proponent of this culture and such questionable outcomes when it suits her (the stupid mall pigeon, the $60k temporary vic square swing, the crazy staff turnovers to gatekeep certain other decisions for recent memory). You could say the ACC is literally the epitomy of bad development and upkeep (The Rundle Lantern and its broken panels, the slippery Mall pavement, the lack of southern Vic Square activation).

Regarding the economic output of Festival Tower 2, I would love to see the government's case for how it will create $1 billion in economic activity. What does that even mean?

The installation of the mall pigeon sculpture predates her term of mayor by two years.