Adelaide's Premier Development and Construction Site
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/
https://mail.sensational-adelaide.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=739
This is tall enough for its own thread, isn't it?wilkiebarkid wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 12:13 pmNot sure if this has been posted before. From Maras Group website. Proposed 361-367 King William Street (corner of Sturt Street). 18 floors of offices over 4 levels of carparking.
Saw this. I personally think it’s underwhelming for the cbd. I know it’s predominantly residential area but surely we can do better than townhouses in the cbd.gnrc_louis wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:26 pmReasonable sized townhouse development at 245-259 Gilbert St: https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/ ... 069-19.pdf
It’s the far SW corner of the CBD near South and West Tce. Seems fine to me.Ben wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 2:32 pmSaw this. I personally think it’s underwhelming for the cbd. I know it’s predominantly residential area but surely we can do better than townhouses in the cbd.gnrc_louis wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:26 pmReasonable sized townhouse development at 245-259 Gilbert St: https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/ ... 069-19.pdf
Agreed, the scale is fine for the area. The actual CBD is blocks away, and nearby South Terrace is zoned for greater heights. The only problem I have with this is the number of vehicle crossovers on the Vinrace St frontage -- I know they've oriented the dwellings to face north on the access lane, but it sucks for other users of the public street.ml69 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 3:11 pmIt’s the far SW corner of the CBD near South and West Tce. Seems fine to me.Ben wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 2:32 pmSaw this. I personally think it’s underwhelming for the cbd. I know it’s predominantly residential area but surely we can do better than townhouses in the cbd.gnrc_louis wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 1:26 pmReasonable sized townhouse development at 245-259 Gilbert St: https://www.saplanningportal.sa.gov.au/ ... 069-19.pdf
What a joke, surely there are planning regulations that somehow stipulate what is now deemed appropriate use for a CBD site? A lot of people harp on in Adelaide about desire for more development in this city, and by result our planning commission in conjunction with the state government will allow for heritage buildings to pay the price to progress, meanwhile this kind of shit remains standing and is repurposed... Where is the sense?
Agree. If the planning system allows for local heritage listings to be (rightly or wrongly) removed/ignored, then there should equally be mechanisms in place to discourage this sort of thing.Patrick_27 wrote: ↑Tue Mar 10, 2020 5:47 pmWhat a joke, surely there are planning regulations that somehow stipulate what is now deemed appropriate use for a CBD site? A lot of people harp on in Adelaide about desire for more development in this city, and by result our planning commission in conjunction with the state government will allow for heritage buildings to pay the price to progress, meanwhile this kind of shit remains standing and is repurposed... Where is the sense?
