Sensational-Adelaide.com

I would like to ask what are the alternatives to put on the site -hotel/luxury apartments/offices - which are probably all over saturated with supply exceeding demand. Further there is limited carparking on site. So considering the planning side - what would you put there?

The developers have addressed the councils concerns and the amended proposal is expected to be granted approval on Monday's meeting. They have done a great job blending this with the adjacent heritage buildings imo, if that's what we're aiming for in this city?

blends ok for the first 5 floors, but above that it's just a taller version of the "earth tone" buildings we have all over the CBD. Nothing special at all really, unless the renders are deceiving...

Thanks Ben. That is an unfortunate compromise IMO. Why is the eastern wall suddenly blank? I worry that the finishes used on the 'lower' facade will result in it looking rather tacky. I don't count 18 floors either.

Is there going to be a tenancy on the ground floor? I'd hope so.

I'd much prefer this:

AtD wrote:Thanks Ben. That is an unfortunate compromise IMO. Why is the eastern wall suddenly blank? I worry that the finishes used on the 'lower' facade will result in it looking rather tacky. I don't count 18 floors either.

Is there going to be a tenancy on the ground floor? I'd hope so.

I'd much prefer this:

I would too but unfortunatly this is how our council has earnt it's bad name. It's gets a chance to have a 21st century addition to the skyline but it is too modern and forced to blend in with late 19th century architecture. It really is quite depressing, but at the end of the day there is nothing we can do about it.

So disappointing. Thanks a lot ACC. -Gives finger-

I must admit i am not a fan of the amended design.

This building would of made a great impact if you were looking from the Torrens and possibly even would of shown its head all over the country whilst the Cricket is played @ Adelaide oval...

I really don't understand how or why the council is soooo against interesting developments in our city. Do they have a hidden agenda?

I just wish that we could get some Gen Y's into council! I'm sure that things would change dramatically in our city in terms of vibrancy and skyline... One can only dream i guess.

I was never keen on the design with the curved façade, but I'm still unhappy about the blank eastern frontage of the current proposal. It's decent overall, however, if that's what they're going for.

Appears like the bulk of the bldg has been reduced too - as well as a loss being made of the eastern windows. It certainly does merge in with the Adelaide surrounds.

Overall not as impressed as with the previous proposal. This tucking away concept (off street frontage) is IMO just bending to the desire to keep an older image of the citry. (same idea with Currie St tower and several along Grenfell St on the northern side).Not near as common in Bris.

However, very happy something is still happening on this location..

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

Call me crazy, but I actually like the new design. Not as good as the old one, but still, I like it.

Wow, what on Earth happened here? Many good things about the previous two version has been completely dissolved for the "amended" version. What happened to the more elegant continuity and refinement? Why must they keep the small building on the site if the whole development has the potential to look and/or function better without it? The little bushes and blades on top just top off the madness. I thought the council didn't have as much say in these thing anymore.

Maybe I'll like this more when more renders and details are released. Or when more floors are added. Sorry, I almost forgot that floor reductions are much more likely...

Nah, this is crap. Why do we always, always end up with the next best thing? The building to the east is heritage listed, so why the need for a fire wall?

I would love to hear from Clr Yarwood, whom still finds the time to post, unlike the mayor who jumped on here during election time only!

ACC seem to be happy with a compromise rather than push the boundries.

It is no wonder Adelaide is viewed as being 'okay'...

It's essentially a thinner version of the David Jones carpark/apartments next door, which isn't necessarily bad, but it doesn't fill me with great joy and wonder. And while I'm not against the idea of creating a heritage-influenced podium, must we be trying to recreate some kind of austere Depression-era construction?

I just hope that the architects have pressed Ctrl+S on their keyboards in regards to their original proposal, because it's such a nice curvy thing that deserves to find a home somewhere else.

I'm almost embarrassed for the City of Adelaide itself that they were forced to remove windows and add blank brown walls to gain approval. As well as a fake heritage facade, massive set back, rooftop (eco?) vegetation spilling over the top..........it's all cringeworthy. It's 53M for gods sake, not 153.

I wish we still had the ACC town planners of Adelaide 1909* instead of the timid, misguided 2009 version. A century ago they weren't scared of their own shadows. They had balls.

* - Minus the 1909 sanitation.

[/quote]
I agree that this is the design that should have been built all along!

Congratulations ACC you have F%&ked up yet another opprtunity to add a fine piece of architecture to our city.

To add insult to injury, the new render looks like a big turd with windows