[COM] 377-379 King William Street | 50m | 16lvls | Apartments

[jk1237]

agreed AtD, this is no masterpiece, but to reject a 9 level building in an area with taller buildings nearby is getting really really pathetic. Has anyone seen what this derelict building looks like atm - its pretty crap and in dire need of a development

ACC, change your development plan FFS, it is truly ridiculous, cringeworthy and embarrassing, and is making a major obstacle to development in our city

[Ben]

As expected the council rejected this development at last weeks meeting.

I fail to see how any development of a unused vacant site would not strengthen the desired character for the Policy Area

That the development, the subject of the application from Colangelo Group to retain the
facade and construct an eight (8) storey serviced apartment building at 377?379 King William
Street, Adelaide SA 5000 as shown on plans designated DA/867/2011 is not seriously at
variance with the provisions of the Development Plan but is REFUSED Development Plan
Consent for the following reasons:

? The proposal fails to meet component (a) of the Mixed Used Zone and (b) of the King
William Street South Policy Area desired character in that it does not provide a high
quality new building.

? The proposal fails to meet King William Street South Policy Area Principle 1 in that it
does not strengthen the desired character for the Policy Area.

? The proposal fails to meet King William Street South Policy Area Principle 3 in that the
design and materials do not acknowledge the importance of the location along the City’s
major north?south axis.

Discussion ensued.

The motion was then put and carried

[Will]

Although I am not too fussed regarding the ACC's reaction to this proposal, it is interesting to note that since being stripped of their planning powers in 2008, they have to the best of my knowledge rejected every multi-storey proposal.

[crawf]

Doesn't the DAC have the final say on this one?, I can't recall the cost of this development

[Ben]

Nope Crawf. That's it for this one.

[wilkiebarkid]

Nope Crawf. That's it for this one.

And so it should be. For heavens sakes, the minimum height for anything proposed for KWS south of VS should be 75-80 metres. We will regret a series of pathetic 30-50 metre developments on this our 'Grand Boulevard' in years to come. The North/South spine should be a showcase of quality buildings of impressive stature, not the kind of garbage that has recently been presented. Just because the southern end of KWS is so poorly undedeveloped now doesn't mean we should accept anything that is above 20m or so. It's obvious from recent projects at the southern end of KWS that the Council doesn't see KWS as anything special. No vision, no idea about what could be. 8, 10 ,11, 13 storey buildings, you gotta be kidding.

[AtD]

We shouldn't be rejecting proposals because they're not grand enough down this end of KWS. There is so much empty space in the city and this site specifically is quite an eyesore right now. There is still plenty of space for the spectacular developments when they come. In the mean time developments like these are at least adding to the activity of the city. It's not ugly, it's mediocre - good enough.

[wilkiebarkid]

Who accepts mediocrity when you are talking about a building that will be present for 50+ years along our main street?? More substantial and spectacular developments will become more commonplace when building height restrictions are lifted.

[Adelarch]

Surely more substantial and spectacular developments will become commonplace when there is more money floating around combined with greater vendor demand, not simply the act of lifting height restrictions. In the meantime this site may remain dormant for a very long time. I cant see what is so ‘out of character’ about this building. The term is such a capture all that it needs to be broken down to what exactly is out of character and how - colour, materials, proportions? I’d be interested what advice Council have offered in this regard - if they failed to offer any specifics it would be quite unfair to the developer.

[crawf]

This proposal looks fine for this small allotment. We need a mix of building heights along King William Street, so it doesn't look like a flat pancake.

[AtD]

The current building on site, the former Royal Caledonian Society of SA building. Thought it may be good for future historical reference.

Quote as a reminder.

[Nort]

The building was generic and nothing exciting at all, but at the same time with the current state of the site I don't see how it isn't an improvement. If we want to have more people living in the CBD projects like this will definitely help do it. If that side of town never becomes anything grand, then this development is fine, if that part of King William Street does eventually become well developed then a generic structure like this will get lost between the other buildings so it won't be an eyesore.

[wilkiebarkid]

The current building at 2 levels and of little architectural significance is nondescript in my opinion. It along with the current development plan is holding back what should be built here. With the emphasis on increasing the City population and encouraging the use of public transport (tram and bus route along KWS), we need to see 20+ storey developments. 6, 8 10, storey apartment buildings belong in the suburbs.

[Will]

The current building at 2 levels and of little architectural significance is nondescript in my opinion. It along with the current development plan is holding back what should be built here. With the emphasis on increasing the City population and encouraging the use of public transport (tram and bus route along KWS), we need to see 20+ storey developments. 6, 8 10, storey apartment buildings belong in the suburbs.

Although as most members here, I approve of taller buildings, one must be not so naive so as to think tall = beautiful.
Indeed, just look at Wave and Edge on KWS south to realise that short buildings can also be beautiful.

Furthermore, I totally reject your description of the current Caledonian Club. Adelaide is an elegant city. We are not Brisbane or Perth.

[crawf]

In Brisbane's defense, the city does have an elegant side to it...

The only slight positive about the Caledonia Club is the front exterior. Other than that it's nothing special.