[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Sat Apr 04, 2009 6:28 pm
Meh!Ben wrote:
Sensational-Adelaide.com
Adelaide's Premier Development and Construction Site
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/
199-200 North Terrace | 85m | 20lvls | Mixed Use
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1440
Page 13 of 26
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 5:29 pm
When you look at this render the bldg seems about 1.3 times the height of the 11 - 12 floor bldg further west. The older render shows the original concept as twice that height instead from almost the same vantage point, although i do realise the original was closer to the vantage point, thus distorting vertical distance. - shame we lost the 21st century look as well. Should have been a town planner and gone to Adelaide as was my original intention.Ben wrote: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?
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Sun Apr 05, 2009 9:56 pm
Sure its not to late. Ive just started my degree and Im 33. By the way its bloody interesting, opens up a whole new perspective to half of the comments that people that obviously arent planners. Cant wait for the next few years!!Should have been a town planner and gone to Adelaide as was my original intention.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 9:52 am
very disapointing the previous concept has changed so signicantly. now we miss another opportunity for a great design that would stand out on north terrace and instead accept a crap proposal with the ever common fly truss feature on the roof. two thumbs down.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Mon Apr 06, 2009 11:53 pm
Adelaide Council refuses 18-storey student tower
DANIEL WILLS, LOCAL GOVERNMENT REPORTER
April 06, 2009 10:15pm
ADELAIDE City Council has refused to approve a new 18-storey student accommodation tower on North Tce for the second time in four months.
The council's Development Assessment Panel last night voted to delay its decision on the 154-apartment block amid claims it clashed with the neighbouring State Heritage-listed Gallerie Building.
The move follows a deferral in December on similar grounds and came in spite of a recommendation from the council's own planners to grant approval.
The site is currently home to a building occupied by Club 199, which would be demolished to make way for the tower.
Councillor Sandy Wilkinson said the new plans were "a dramatic improvement" but applicant A D'Andrea and Associates had only given "token" consideration to the adjacent heritage building.
He said the number of apartments should be further reduced to prevent the tower overwhelming the streetscape.
"Given the rate that China is building universities and the likelihood student apartment buildings won't be so sought in the future as student apartment buildings, but maybe as more general apartments, I think it would help if the number of apartments was changed," he said.
Last night the panel also supported plans for an eight-storey office block on Wyatt St.
Twelve months ago, before the downturn of global credit markets, the panel approved development of a 15-storey mixed use building on the same site.
The new proposal will be sent to the State Government's Development Assessment Commission for consideration.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:24 am
Improvement?!Councillor Sandy Wilkinson said the new plans were "a dramatic improvement" but applicant A D'Andrea and Associates had only given "token" consideration to the adjacent heritage building.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 3:48 am
Before the anti-ACC vitriol starts up, can I ask, how many times and for how long can the DAP delay its decision on this proposal? What rights has the developer to force it to resolution?
I cannot imagine reason there is to oppose this type of development at the site (design notwithstanding), and the above article doesn't do much to reveal Council's true thinking on the matter -- unless Mr Wilkinson's comments are representative, and I hope dearly that they are not.
I'm sorry Mr Wilkinson, that's a nonsense. Doubtlessly, Adelaide's foreign student population won't keep increasing as rapidly as it has been, but it's unlikely to go into any great decline. Let us remember too that this building, in this location, will always be highly appropriate/desirable for student accommodation."Given the rate that China is building universities and the likelihood student apartment buildings won't be so sought in the future as student apartment buildings, but maybe as more general apartments, I think it would help if the number of apartments was changed"
I cannot imagine reason there is to oppose this type of development at the site (design notwithstanding), and the above article doesn't do much to reveal Council's true thinking on the matter -- unless Mr Wilkinson's comments are representative, and I hope dearly that they are not.
[APP] Re: #REJ: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 8:09 am
Changed thread title to rejected.
Will the developers send back the original proposal to the DAC? Here's hoping they build this instead.
Will the developers send back the original proposal to the DAC? Here's hoping they build this instead.
[APP] Re: #REJ: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:00 am
Howie, it was not rejected, it was deferred again.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 9:10 am
Rejected, deferred, who cares? This one should've got approved on first submission of the nice curved glass tower. At least the ACC got a decision right on the last proposal which was morbidly horrendous.
[APP] Re: #REJ: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 11:22 am
Opps.. my bad. i'll change it back.AtD wrote:Howie, it was not rejected, it was deferred again.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:47 pm
Utterly disappointing!Lost for words. Are they actually wanting a further dumbing down? (inferred from the 'overwhelming the streetscape').
That last render fitted in very well I thought. Really annoyed. The developers will just pull the pin with all this nonsense.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
That last render fitted in very well I thought. Really annoyed. The developers will just pull the pin with all this nonsense.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 4:49 pm
I think what they want is a 1920's cottage but then it may not fit in well with the 1910 heritage building next door so would proabably be refused.
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:34 pm
I have just spoken to the developers and they are absolutely disgusted and infuriated with the ACC.
Just to highlight, the developer spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the first two world-class designs only to be told NO. The curved glass facade was designed with an INTERNATIONAL architect consulting!
The developer was then told by the ACC that unless the heritage dept. supported the design, the ACC would not support it and effectively they were held hostage to the heritage dept.
So in effect they have been forced to design a building which they don't even want to build!
The unbelievable part is the architects worked with the heritage dept for the past SIX months to get their support [which they got] and then the councillors said no anyway!
The developer even had to engage an independent heritage consultant to give a 12 page report supporting the development.
The comments by Sandy Wilkinson highlight how ridiculous the process is. What do extra universities being built in China have with his role as a councillor in approving this development? Then to question the demand for students accomm. into the future when there is infact a mass under supply is pure idiocy. Every other development is infact over saturated - hotel, offices, normal apartments. So what is his alternative?
Then to ask for "more consideration" to the adjacent Gallerie building, what do they want - a replica built next door?
Maybe after the developer walks away and leaves the current BRIGHT RED circular building there for the next 20 YEARS will it be considered a better fit for the heritage streetscape of North Tce.
I just hope even if they get this approved they re-lodge the original curved facade application with DAC [even if they waste more money and time].
Just to highlight, the developer spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the first two world-class designs only to be told NO. The curved glass facade was designed with an INTERNATIONAL architect consulting!
The developer was then told by the ACC that unless the heritage dept. supported the design, the ACC would not support it and effectively they were held hostage to the heritage dept.
So in effect they have been forced to design a building which they don't even want to build!
The unbelievable part is the architects worked with the heritage dept for the past SIX months to get their support [which they got] and then the councillors said no anyway!
The developer even had to engage an independent heritage consultant to give a 12 page report supporting the development.
The comments by Sandy Wilkinson highlight how ridiculous the process is. What do extra universities being built in China have with his role as a councillor in approving this development? Then to question the demand for students accomm. into the future when there is infact a mass under supply is pure idiocy. Every other development is infact over saturated - hotel, offices, normal apartments. So what is his alternative?
Then to ask for "more consideration" to the adjacent Gallerie building, what do they want - a replica built next door?
Maybe after the developer walks away and leaves the current BRIGHT RED circular building there for the next 20 YEARS will it be considered a better fit for the heritage streetscape of North Tce.
I just hope even if they get this approved they re-lodge the original curved facade application with DAC [even if they waste more money and time].
[APP] Re: #DEF: 199-200 North Tce | 53m | 18lvls | Student
Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2009 6:05 pm
that is pathetic. i hope this gets some good media coverage.