[COM] 231-243 Waymouth Street | 55m | 17lvls | Student Accom

[monotonehell]

It looks like a giant sponge

I'm holding by my original impression - a menger sponge.
http://sensational-adelaide.com/forum/v ... 39#p146739

[EBG]

The western side now slopes inwards from level 12. Picture from Currie St shows northern view as at 14/6/17.

[phenom]

Taking shape from afar.

waymouth_studentblock.jpg (120.3 KiB) Viewed 3421 times

[wilkiebarkid]

The western side now slopes inwards from level 12. Picture from Currie St shows northern view as at 14/6/17.

Looks like something out of the Flintstones!

[Jaymz]

Looks equally as bad from the air landing at Adelaide airport, than it does from street level

[SRW]

I love the interest it adds to the skyline. It's a surprising sight when spotted from street level. I guess it's final colour and finishings will determine if its impact is enduringly positive (I hope it ends up being lighter).

[Brando]

I built better with plasticine in 2nd Grade...

[YellowRoad]

A new Waymouth St building is drawing attention — for all the wrong reasons
Roxanne Wilson, Lifestyle reporter, The Advertiser
June 26, 2017 8:26pm

IT looks like an architectural remnant of the Cold War era.

But this “ugly” new building is rising above Waymouth St in the Adelaide CBD and it’s drawing attention for all the wrong reasons.

Adelaide City councillor Sandy Wilkinson said the building was an eyesore and said the city was “being ruined by developments” like it.

The 16-storey student accommodation, across from the Grace Emily Hotel, is still under construction.

“I’m not surprised people are reacting to that building,” Mr Wilkinson said. “It certainly is ugly. The main problem with it, and many new developments, is that its scale is completely at odds with every(thing) around it.”

Mr Wilkinson, who has degrees in planning and architecture, said it was the latest development that “disrespected” pre-existing buildings.

“Another example is the ibis hotel on Grenfell St that ... blocks the view of the Adelaide Arcade dome from the east,” he said.

Councillor Anne Moran wouldn’t comment on the look of the building but said it was an example of “seemingly unplanned development”.

“I think this building shouldn’t be seen in isolation,” she said. “It might turn out to be fine but it does rather represent the rampant, seemingly unsympathetic development that is going into a lovely city.”

It is unclear if the building will get any colour or covering.

Planning minister John Rau said the development was approved by the independent Development Assessment Commission.

Property developer Atira Student Living declined to comment.

Its fair to say that on both this form and the Advertiser forums, opinions are divided on this building. Im holding out until completion to make a judgement but it can go either way.

Councillor Wilkinson seized the moment to have a dig at the Ibis hotel building, not happy that the the view of the Adelaide Arcade dome has been blocked out from the East. Not something I ever thought of when the Ibis building was U/C, all I can say is thank goodness the ACC have been stripped of their decision making powers..

[Algernon]

Its fair to say that on both this form and the Advertiser forums, opinions are divided on this building. Im holding out until completion to make a judgement but it can go either way.

Councillor Wilkinson seized the moment to have a dig at the Ibis hotel building, not happy that the the view of the Adelaide Arcade dome has been blocked out from the East. Not something I ever thought of when the Ibis building was U/C, all I can say is thank goodness the ACC have been stripped of their decision making powers..

The council that has no qualms approving hideous parking garages in heritage areas has no moral authority here. That comment about blocking the view from the East is just so Adelaide. I.e. no fuss blocking out the view of the same building from the west with a parking garage.

[mshagg]

A bit of controversy isn't a bad thing - it suggests it is not universally despised. I cant stand the argument that it is 'at odds' with its surrounds as a case against it. Well duh - this was a fucking patch of weeds surrounded by a 7 foot tall privacy fence.

Regardless of the specific design of the building, if you look at it in the context of the area it actually does make sense. Altitutde, Vision, Central Adelaide. West Franklin Crane is up. I actually couldn't think of a better spot in the city for it?

Perhaps Cr Wilkinson would have preferred another multi story car park with a ruddy big patch of gravel in front of it.

[Pistol]

Yet another example of the 'Tiser using this forum to create news.

The fact that we are all talking and debating about this building is testament that this is something different to all the glass boxes that are going up at the moment.
When was the last time we had such a debate on the architectural merits of a building?

My opinion, I love it! Think it is something that Adelaide needs.

[Ser Noit of Loit]

I get the council's concern about plonking buildings without care for what's around them. We don't want Adelaide to become a China that slaps down multi storey buildings that cares nothing for the history, culture and aesthetic of what's already there.

But then how can a city grow without developments? The flat western end of the city and Whitmore Square (I suspect they're referring to Bohem as one of those that "disrespects" the buildings already there) are hardly quaint European avenues.

We have areas of the city that would be ruined by the wrong sort of developments; East Terrace, South Terrace, North Terrace, the riverbank, inner city heritage streets. This, Bohem and Central Adelaide are in areas that would only be improved by their existence, they'll improve the look of tired areas and bring more people.

[slenderman]

I get the council's concern about plonking buildings without care for what's around them. We don't want Adelaide to become a China that slaps down multi storey buildings that cares nothing for the history, culture and aesthetic of what's already there.

But then how can a city grow without developments? The flat western end of the city and Whitmore Square (I suspect they're referring to Bohem as one of those that "disrespects" the buildings already there) are hardly quaint European avenues.

We have areas of the city that would be ruined by the wrong sort of developments; East Terrace, South Terrace, North Terrace, the riverbank, inner city heritage streets. This, Bohem and Central Adelaide are in areas that would only be improved by their existence, they'll improve the look of tired areas and bring more people.

Exactly. Fair enough if the actual design/aesthetics of the building is what Sandy Wilkinson doesn't like, but according to that article, his main gripe is the scale being at odds with the surroundings, rather than the design itself. This building isn't even particularly tall; by my count, it will be our equal 55-tallest building at this stage.

The CML and T&G buildings were once upon a time totally at odds and out of scale with the rest of the 2-3 storey buildings that surrounded them in those days, but nowadays, they're just density fillers as the city has grown up in the past 80 years.

This building will be the same, as the similarly scaled West Franklin goes up a block away, which is in turn adjacent to other similarly-scaled developments, which are in turn adjacent to the core of the CBD. And as you say, this is hardly a character area of the CBD. Like a lot of the CBD west of Morphett Street, it looks like a country town. That shouldn't be the case in a city of over a million people.

[Algernon]

That fenced off gravel car park previously occupying the site was much more in keeping with the character of City Collision Centre next door and the snack bar across the street. We should oppose these types of developments so we can maintain the character of the city centre. A place with a City Collision Centre, a snack bar and a fenced off gravel car park.

And people wonder why the state stagnated for 2 decades with that sort of mob regulating development in the CBD

[Patrick_27]

That fenced off gravel car park previously occupying the site was much more in keeping with the character of City Collision Centre next door and the snack bar across the street. We should oppose these types of developments so we can maintain the character of the city centre. A place with a City Collision Centre, a snack bar and a fenced off gravel car park.

And people wonder why the state stagnated for 2 decades with that sort of mob regulating development in the CBD

My problem with a lot of the statements that you make on these forums is that you're quite content with low quality shit replacing the character of this city, so long as it has some height and subsequently increases our sky-line (because they would make us more in-line with Australia's east-coast states - why anyone would like Adelaide's sky-line to be line Melbourne's is beyond me...) Now whilst this particular chunk of the city wasn't offering much in the way of character beforehand (as mentioned, a gravel carpark next to an crash repairer) the whole basic principal of building quality over 'quantity' should also apply here as well, it's consistency. If they're intend of putting forward shit proposals, they should be forced back to the drawing board, especially for student accommodation buildings that will be built in Adelaide regardless of any opposition to design. We might be experiencing a building boom right now, but how would we all feel if the building boom crashed in the next couple of years and all we had left to show for it was a bunch of apartment/student accommodation buildings that have little to no architectural merit? I know how I'd feel.