Sensational-Adelaide.com

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 12:28 pm

I for one definitely hope any type of Govt. Department doesn't take up space in the new tower, although sadly, it seems like a given in Adelaide to get a major office tower off the ground, aka City Central 2 and 3 (ATO and Attorney Generals Office).

Why? What is wrong with government tenants? Government jobs provide workers with reasonably good, stable incomes in fair working conditions. Also Covid has further reiterated the important role Government plays in the economy in general.

claybro wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 12:55 pm

citywatcher wrote: ↑

Fri May 01, 2020 10:50 pm

SRW wrote: Oh, so this is your idea of logic

X2

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk

So you would actually rather a new tower filled with public servants, costing additional millions in rent for you the taxpayer, rather than have a mining company pay to rent the office space and have its logo on top in case there is a conflict of interest.? If that kind of anti mining sentiment is the norm over there, no wonder SANTOS is packing up for Brisbane.

Maybe SRW is just sick of special interest groups having such strong lobbying power - contradicting the core intent of how a liberal democracy should function.

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 1:07 pm

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 12:28 pm

I for one definitely hope any type of Govt. Department doesn't take up space in the new tower, although sadly, it seems like a given in Adelaide to get a major office tower off the ground, aka City Central 2 and 3 (ATO and Attorney Generals Office).

Why? What is wrong with government tenants? Government jobs provide workers with reasonably good, stable incomes in fair working conditions. Also Covid has further reiterated the important role Government plays in the economy in general.

I should have been clearer with my comment, I was making it on a more broad economic view point. I think it's preferable if new office towers be filled with the private sector, but the demand needs to be there. The uptake of new office space by the private sector is a clear sign of a healthy economy. It's pretty basic.

I'm okay with the public sector, it plays it's role. But if the Govt. is always having to sweeten the deal for a new tower by locking in (often long term) leases and rent, then it's not really sustainable. I could go on more of a rant, but i'll only say it's widely known that S.A has the highest number of public employees as % of total employment of all the states. Anyways, this prolly belongs in the beer garden/SA Economy thread so i'll leave it here.

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 1:22 pm

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 1:07 pm

Jaymz wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 12:28 pm

I for one definitely hope any type of Govt. Department doesn't take up space in the new tower, although sadly, it seems like a given in Adelaide to get a major office tower off the ground, aka City Central 2 and 3 (ATO and Attorney Generals Office).

Why? What is wrong with government tenants? Government jobs provide workers with reasonably good, stable incomes in fair working conditions. Also Covid has further reiterated the important role Government plays in the economy in general.

I should have been clearer with my comment, I was making it on a more broad economic view point. I think it's preferable if new office towers be filled with the private sector, but the demand needs to be there. The uptake of new office space by the private sector is a clear sign of a healthy economy. It's pretty basic.

I'm okay with the public sector, it plays it's role. But if the Govt. is always having to sweeten the deal for a new tower by locking in (often long term) leases and rent, then it's not really sustainable. I could go on more of a rant, but i'll only say it's widely known that S.A has the highest number of public employees as % of total employment of all the states. Anyways, this prolly belongs in the beer garden/SA Economy thread so i'll leave it here.

I definitely agree that South Australia needs to attract more private sector investment and thus employment. My understanding though is in a lot of cases when Government does move into new builds this one it is to either consolidate their footprint into one building or because where they previously where was lower grade office space? Anyway, this is in a pretty prime location so you'd imagine it will attract a mix of the private and public sector like the BHP building has.

claybro wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 12:55 pm

citywatcher wrote: ↑

Fri May 01, 2020 10:50 pm

SRW wrote: Oh, so this is your idea of logic

X2

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk

So you would actually rather a new tower filled with public servants, costing additional millions in rent for you the taxpayer, rather than have a mining company pay to rent the office space and have its logo on top in case there is a conflict of interest.? If that kind of anti mining sentiment is the norm over there, no wonder SANTOS is packing up for Brisbane.

None of these things follow.

The state government already leases from the private sector, and is trying to sell off many of its remaining owned assets (like the State Admin Centre). It's pretty straightforward that it could finish up leases in lower-grade stock and consolidate here, probably saving money through relative energy efficiency and colocation benefits. That's not 'additional', as though they'd hire servants just to fill it...

Less straightforward is the wrongheaded route you've taken from what I said to this idea of anti-mining sentiment forcing SANTOS to move. I made a comment about the semiotics of parliament being overshadowed by moneyed interests (in a development that has otherwise lacked probity and sympathetic scale). Nobody's calling for pitchforks to end mining, FFS, not that it has anything to do with whatever decisions SANTOS is making regarding its workforce's location.

I would just like to point out that SANTOS is not "packing up and leaving". It is merely shifting staff around the country, and the number of people employed in the Adelaide office(s) will remain the same. They will just be different staff.

I also doubt that SANTOS will be the tenant here as they only just finished refurbishing their current office.

Norman wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 4:36 pm

I would just like to point out that SANTOS is not "packing up and leaving". It is merely shifting staff around the country, and the number of people employed in the Adelaide office(s) will remain the same. They will just be different staff.

I also doubt that SANTOS will be the tenant here as they only just finished refurbishing their current office.

Since Norman raised this lets clear this up re SANTOS. Adelaide still loses out - why? Because all Onshore operations staff are to be based in Brisbane, all Offshore staff are to be based in Perth, Adelaide remains as the corporate centre with some roles being different than previous, ie more admin less engineering. So instead of the Adelaide office growing with the growth of SANTOS with the sort of jobs the Premier keeps banging on about , it will be diluted by the increased presence in Perth & Brisbane. Not much increased economic benefit to SA is it?

So who apart from Government is going to be left to occupy the biggest stake for office space in this new tower? There are no SA companies left to find for this - no Bank HQ available, no mining giant HQ available, no retail HQ available, no large manufacturing consolidate HQ available, so who?

Bob wrote: ↑

Sun May 03, 2020 8:59 am

Norman wrote: ↑

Sat May 02, 2020 4:36 pm

I would just like to point out that SANTOS is not "packing up and leaving". It is merely shifting staff around the country, and the number of people employed in the Adelaide office(s) will remain the same. They will just be different staff.

I also doubt that SANTOS will be the tenant here as they only just finished refurbishing their current office.

Since Norman raised this lets clear this up re SANTOS. Adelaide still loses out - why? Because all Onshore operations staff are to be based in Brisbane, all Offshore staff are to be based in Perth, Adelaide remains as the corporate centre with some roles being different than previous, ie more admin less engineering. So instead of the Adelaide office growing with the growth of SANTOS with the sort of jobs the Premier keeps banging on about , it will be diluted by the increased presence in Perth & Brisbane. Not much increased economic benefit to SA is it?

So who apart from Government is going to be left to occupy the biggest stake for office space in this new tower? There are no SA companies left to find for this - no Bank HQ available, no mining giant HQ available, no retail HQ available, no large manufacturing consolidate HQ available, so who?

If the Hillside Mine gets going, then Rex minerals will need more office space.

If the huge Ceres wind farm proposed for Yorke Peninsula gets going (eg to supply the mine) including a cable across the gulf, Senvion will need office space.

Twin Creek Wind Farm is proposed by RES Australia, which does not presently have an SA presence.

There's three opportunities to attract new staff to offices in SA, that would not have large suburban or country manufacturing that would also be their logical head office location.

Two more tower cranes going up this weekend. First suspended slab pours next week (B4 level)

The second riverside car park crane is going up today and the remaining casino crane has started to come down with some tower sections being removed. no time for pictures.

The second crane is finished and the third crane is 1/2 complete as at midday Sunday.
The first crane is at the rear of parliament house, the second right in the centre of the site and the third is at the north east part of the site next to King William road. Please click on picture for Bigger. PS no work has been done to remove the last casino crane.

A variation to the development application has been lodged for Festival Plaza. It looks to contain updated renders of Station Place, the station entrance and the plaza.

https://www.saplanningcommission.sa.gov ... hments.pdf

Norman wrote: ↑

Wed May 27, 2020 11:36 am

A variation to the development application has been lodged for Festival Plaza. It looks to contain updated renders of Station Place, the station entrance and the plaza.

https://www.saplanningcommission.sa.gov ... hments.pdf

Main changes are a reduction in lawn area, increased footprint of the retail/dining structure, and a few less trees.

I generally agree with the responses in there, it would be nice to see those trees kept, but overall the development looks good.

Yeah, it'll be a satisfactory space although not one I'm in love with. It's a shame there are not enough deep soil areas to allow more trees; I worry those 'arbours' are not architectural enough and will end up looking like bad 80s mall furniture without providing adequate shade.

The part I am excited about is the vaulted concourse for the Railway Station. It looks amazing!

Advertiser has another article about this development if anyone is able to post it.