[COM] 74-80 Light Square | 31m | 8lvls | Office

[Will]

Although I understand where the 80's comments are coming from, I do not think this building could be said to be an 80s design. To me it looks like a 00's design with 80's inspiration. I like it!

[Wayno]

looking again - i'm not sure i like this one. But i am pleased it's not another "blue/green glass box tower with balconies"...

[AtD]

I think it's a fantastic design. They've done well to turn another glass box into something interesting. I don't mind the street level yellow triangles. Hopefully there's good street interaction (but IIRC that area of Light Square is rather uninviting). Is that a car park on the first floor? I count 12 levels, btw.

[Nathan]

I'm digging this as well, and agree that it's a welcome change from the generic glass boxes. I think the quality of the finish on the yellow panels is what is going to make all the difference, so hopefully they don't cheap out on that.

[omada]

I can't see 1980's in this building, but I can see a modern European/Melbourne type style to it, I like it! All that has to be resolved is the street level activation.

More buildings like this please!

[crawf]

Love it!

We need buildings like this in Adelaide

[Mants]

looks like a cheap and nasty Docklands-esque building.
but then again, our skyline needs colour.

[Joely]

I wonder if the orangey bits are supposed to be some sort of copper material similar to the black building on KWS with the copper stripe up the side.. That would look awesome IMO.

[Will]

This proposal is a step closer as the planning staff at the ACC have recommended that this development be SUPPORTED by the ACC DAP.

This is a symbolic step nevertheless as the final decision rests with the state governemnt DAC.

[Will]

Although the recommendation is to support the proposal the council has some suggestions that it would like the developers to address.

The council suggests that the façade be altered so that it is more in keeping with the masonry and red-brick townscape of Light Square. In order to do this, the council would like the following alterations:

the colour of the orange sunshades is considered innapropriate, and they suggest a more 'masonry' colour be used instead.

the base of the building should be increased from the current 2 levels to 3 levels so that it is more in keeping with the streetscape of the square.

The finish to the sandstone cladding at the base is not considered appropriate

The council would like the proposal to remove the triangular fin elements at the base.

[AtD]

I don't agree at all. Judging from the renders we've seen in this thread, it looks very interesting indeed. The only complaint I have is a lack of shelter for the footpaths.

I can understand that the Council doesn't want to take the risk that this building will turn out to be ugly, but I don't agree that their solution is to require everything to look like "masonry and red brick" - how monotonous!

[rhino]

If they do go to red brick, I hope they will use sandstock (which seems to be able to last for over a century) and not those hard-edged gas fired more modern bricks.

A red brick base need not be boring - some of the old red brick facades are fascinating, and I am disappointed every time one of them gets pulled down. There was a lot of ornamental brickwork which does not appear on modern brick buildings. Furthermore, I really like the way modern buildings sprout from the top of these old red brick buildings - Chesser House is a good example.

Having said that, I wasn't too upset by the design put forward either which, as stated earlier, was so much better than another plain glass box.

[Queen Anne]

So the council is okay with knocking down number 76, which looks to be a lovely old building that is surely "in keeping" with the square, and then turns around and tells the developer that what they have done needs to be more like the rest of the square. Huh?!? Have I missed something?

If we are going to lose number 76 (sadly) let's at least be a bit bold with what we put there to replace it.

It sounds like we are going to end up with, both, a lost historical building and a lost opportunity to do something a bit colourful and new - in favour of putting up more bland, it seems. That's very frustrating.

[Will]

Oh dear. The council has voted against every major development presented to it since it lost its planning powers to the state government. What message is this sending out to investors? what message is this sending out to prospective migrants or to young people considering their future here in Adelaide. The message it is sending is to stay away and to get out.

The council has lost the plot.

I wonder whether our esteemed councillors, particularlry Councillor Wilkinson who appears hell-bent in sending us back to the 1800s, if they care about the great damage that such petty decisions are wrecking on our already negative image.

Light Square proposal 'too tall'Article from: Font size: Decrease Increase Email article: Email Print article: Print Submit comment: Submit comment DANIEL WILLS
June 23, 2009 12:01am
ADELAIDE City Council's development authority has refused to support plans for a 13-level office block on Light Square because it is "a few storeys too high" and would "stick out like a very tall sore thumb".

The council's Development Assessment Panel last night ignored advice from its own planners to support the proposal and voted against plans submitted by Pruszinski Architects.

Councillor Sandy Wilkinson said the building did not meet the "desired character" for Light Square and would clash with existing smaller buildings.

The final power of approval rests with the State Government's Development Assessment Commission, which is expected to examine the plans later this year.

Councillor Michael Henningsen said the "height, bulk and scale" of the building was "too much"

[how_good_is_he]

What is also insane is that this is the same people that approved absolute crap looking new developments like spark88, i-pad & palais! Like these have added anything to the desired character of there surroundings. Just give it up councillors.