[U/C] 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use

[stumpjumper]

Great new picture, crawf!

[frank1]

how on earth can we compare north adelaide to PARIS?!

One word....Adelaide.

We should also remember that any project done by the SA government in Adelaide is 'world-class' and is compared to London, Paris, Rome, New York

[urban]

I wonder what a positive city would have done with a prime piece of real-estate such as this one?

Interesting to note Adelaide is not the only city grappling with big holes in the centre of the city.

From World Architecture News:
It is a complex, unloved knot of rail and Métro interchanges, traffic feeds, heavyweight retail and resonant historical location, it teems with 800,000 users a day, and it is a long time since most Parisians had a good word to say about it.
The destiny of Les Halles, at the heart of France’s capital, is of huge symbolic importance: it was the principal wholesale food market - “the belly of Paris” - from the twelfth century until its departure to the suburbs in the 1960s. Its nineteenth century glass and iron halls, unappreciated at the time, were destroyed. For years afterwards it remained no more than an immense, dispiriting, undeveloped hole, and ever since its completion in the mid-seventies, Parisians have shown little affection for the drab cocktail of underground mall, stations, lacklustre pavilions and gardens that endures today. Intermittent problems with drugs, gangs and petty crime after dark have not helped its reputation.
Les Halles, in other words, has been going wrong since the middle of the last century, and no one involved in its next rebirth can countenance the idea of messing it up again.

To see how the Parisians are dealing with the issue visit: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/in ... ad_id=1893

I haven't listened to the podcast yet but from the images it looks they have decided to go underground.

[Edgar]

I am quite tired of arguing with stumpjumper in regards to the constant changes in the development planing between the planners and the developers. Basically, almost the entire collection of major developments that is currently taking place in South Australia, which we have been hoping and needing for, are considered a bad code of conduct between these developers and our government, well, according to stumpjumper anyway.

It is a major status construction, a major development always involved changes in the planning compared to its original planning. We are not talking a less than $1million development here, it is a big cost, and big cost should always ensure huge return in profit of course. Otherwise all these major developers would be pressured and choked to bankruptcy if they don't make enough profit out of any developments.

Then it all rolls back in an under-developed backwater city, which we all hate to agree.

I am all for this development, if it is build at 6 or 7 levels, I am happy for it. If it is being pressured down to 3 levels, I don't bloody care anymore, I just want that piece of land be developed, and O'Connell St would be completed.

[Pikey]

^^^
Most articulate post in this thread.


Will, Stumpjumper, you'll always agree to disagree, so let's leave it out of here, ok??

[Will]

^^^
Most articulate post in this thread.


Will, Stumpjumper, you'll always agree to disagree, so let's leave it out of here, ok??

I will no longer argue with Stumpjumper in regard to this development, as I felt that we were going around in circles. But in other and future threads I cannot make such a promise. I think if I or Stumpjumper writes something which the other disagrees with, we should be able to discuss our differences. After all isn't this a forum?

[Pikey]

Certainly is, on topics in regard to their titles, not getting sidetracked on technical issues, which ultimately end up dictating the thread, and making others who want to source information on the topic, difficult.

See where I'm coming from?

[Will]

Certainly is, on topics in regard to their titles, not getting sidetracked on technical issues, which ultimately end up dictating the thread, and making others who want to source information on the topic, difficult.

See where I'm coming from?

I understand where you are coming from, but I think that if what we are discussing has something to do with the development in the thread, then I really can't see anything wrong with it.

Because after all, this forum would be really boring if it was only a noticeboard for news. I would only have 1 or 2 posts from Ben per week!

[Cruise]

how on earth can we compare north adelaide to PARIS?!

Why not?

[Ben]

From The Messenger:

Cr's do-it-yourself designs for Le Cornu

Louise Russell

12Feb08


Adelaide City Cr Sandy Wilkinson's own plans for the Le Cornu site in North Adelaide.
ARCHITECT and City Cr Sandy Wilkinson has taken the unusual step of designing his own ``compromise'' concept for building on the infamous former Le Cornu site, North Adelaide.


Cr Wilkinson says his draft design retains the landmark Caffe Paesano corner building instead of seeing it demolished and keeps the the O'Connell St streetscape to a less imposing building height.

All this while maintaining a similar floor space to the plans submitted to the State Government by the owners and developers, the Makris Group.

Cr Wilkinson conceded it was highly unusual for a councillor who also sits on the city Development Assessment Panel to design an alternative to a development application. As the Makris Group has major project status, the city DAP has no planning power in this case.

``I think as soon as (the applicant) steps outside the perimeters of the development plan then all bets are off ... as a North Adelaide Ward councillor I'm quite at liberty to say `if you're going to develop over the limits, you should do it in a positive way'.

``It ought to be something that makes a positive contribution to North Adelaide, rather than being an oversized edifice ...''

The Makris Group wants to build a $150 million six-storey (20m-25m) development with apartments, shops, restaurants and 380 car parks.

Cr Wilkinson said he had suggested a two-storey (9.5m high) frontage along O'Connell St, equal to the height of the Archer Hotel, scaling up to six-storeys in the middle of the site.

He said under his design, the floor space stayed at roughly 25,000sqm, by straightening an internal, arc-shaped road wanted by the developer.

Makris Group CEO John Blunt declined to comment.

A public meeting about the former Le Cornu site is at the North Adelaide Community Centre, Tynte St, on Tuesday, February 19, at 7.30pm.

The Makris plans are available through http://www.planning.sa.gov.au; deadline for public comments is March 5.

[ozisnowman]

Yeah right you TOOL it may have the same amount of floor space...

Difference is Makris's plan looks good, your plan on the other hand
looks boring, boxy and shitty and not very pleasing on the EYE...

[rhino]

How arrogant is this guy?

"You want to build on this site, OK, build this. I don't like your ideas!" :wank: :wank:

[AG]

How uninspiring. Anybody can draw up a two storey rectangular prism.

[JAKJ]

WTF? No wonder this guy is a councilor, there is no way he could get employed as an architect!!!

[skyliner]

You can hardly even see it - no impact on the area - I thought it was the footprint at first! There's nothing to it - BORING. Even looks like a glorified woolworths outliet. Please, please,don't let THAT happen!

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE