[COM] 102-120 Wakefield Street | 65m | 14lvls | Office

[Pants]

Have you seen what they've done with the heritage building fascades in Roper Street?

This?



I thought it's an old render. What've they done?

[Nort]

Remember kids, it's going to end up looking like this...



It's not the Guggenheim, but it's probably not worth wanting to kill a kitten over.

I'll believe it when I see it, can easily see this being a case of promising to build something to hide the carpark in order to get approval, but once the carpark is finished suddenly discovering that the rest of the development isn't profitable enough to continue with.

[UrbanSG]

Pants it MAY end up looking like that (previous page).

However that proposal could end up falling through. It could be years before anything is built there or it could be next year. The point is these 'staged' developments lead to poor visual amenity outcomes until further stages are constructed. Particularly with these office/car park scenarios.

When there is a potential for a car park to go up without any other component in the 1st stage and it will look like a shed from the most prominent perspective that is when Council should intervene and require some kind of temporary treatment on this facade that can be removed at a later date.

[Pants]

Good points, well made.

[rhino]

Have you seen what they've done with the heritage building fascades in Roper Street?

This?



I thought it's an old render. What've they done?

Yeah, pretty much exactly that. Big glass panels so that you can see the heritage fascades, and a bit of a historical explanation painted on to / etched into the glass. Could have been worse.

[Vee]

I'll believe it when I see it, can easily see this being a case of promising to build something to hide the carpark in order to get approval, but once the carpark is finished suddenly discovering that the rest of the development isn't profitable enough to continue with.

Sounds plausible.
Approval should be dependent on the full development happening, not just a ruse to get another ugly carpark to blot the streetscape. A timeframe and penalties should be part of the approval process in cases involving carpark construction.

What will happen to this rash of new carparks when initiatives such as (private) car-free zones, tolls/penalties etc are implemented to reduce congestion in the centre of cities? More pedestrian friendly, public transport-oriented cities are on the horizon.

[skyliner]

I'll believe it when I see it, can easily see this being a case of promising to build something to hide the carpark in order to get approval, but once the carpark is finished suddenly discovering that the rest of the development isn't profitable enough to continue with.

What will happen to this rash of new carparks when initiatives such as (private) car-free zones, tolls/penalties etc are implemented to reduce congestion in the centre of cities? More pedestrian friendly, public transport-oriented cities are on the horizon.

This has been a major question of mine over the last 6 months. Must be another secret agenda around we know nothiong of. Bitb the the one of wanting Adelaide to stop spreading out and we constantly read of huge fringe proposals anyway.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CBD SKYLINE

[Nort]

I'll believe it when I see it, can easily see this being a case of promising to build something to hide the carpark in order to get approval, but once the carpark is finished suddenly discovering that the rest of the development isn't profitable enough to continue with.

Sounds plausible.
Approval should be dependent on the full development happening, not just a ruse to get another ugly carpark to blot the streetscape. A timeframe and penalties should be part of the approval process in cases involving carpark construction.

What will happen to this rash of new carparks when initiatives such as (private) car-free zones, tolls/penalties etc are implemented to reduce congestion in the centre of cities? More pedestrian friendly, public transport-oriented cities are on the horizon.

For the amount of cars coming into the CBD to drop, one of two things (or a combination of both) would have to happen.

CBD growth stagnates. In this scenario the amount of car parking space is the least of worries.

Public Transport becomes a substantially more feasible option for travelers into the CBD. This isn't going to happen overnight, and by the time a big public transport culture has developed enough time will have passed that these carparks won't be new and no-one will see a problem with pulling some of them down to construct more interesting buildings.

[Pants]

Go here --> http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... f=7&t=3108 to vent your respective spleens about the the good and bad of cars and where to park them.

Play nice. Have fun.

[ghs]

This one must be nearly done right ?

[SRW]

Well, the carpark is done. Now we're just waiting on the friggin' office.

[Ben]

Hopefully this means a tenant has been found so construction to cover up the carpark can begin.

Type: Development Application Received
Application Number: DA/614/2007/A
Lodgement Date: 17/02/2011
Location: 102-104 Wakefield Street, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: VARIATION TO Demoish existing buildings and construction of a 10 storey building consisting of a multi level car park, offices and ground floor retail - 2 additional levels, internal floor changes, relocation of plant room to Level 6

[dsriggs]

A change of plans to include MORE floors? What is this??

[Adelarch]

There she is in all her, um, glory.
Atleast the carpark will be covered up…

[Matt]

I just actually laughed out loud.