[COM] Renaissance Arcade | 132m | 40 Levels | Realm Apartments

[Mants]

Look at the last car on the left, the middle section of the building, the highest unit on top, there are a bunch of perverts living there

Almost every afternoon around 4-5, they will be sitting on the balcony, spotting on the university girls that walk pass Target - Centrelink. Sometimes, they would even whistling at those girls.

Dicks Time to go

[skyliner]

On going through the thread I agree with those who say Ruthven Mansions should stay. Having lived in several big cities, I note that Adelaide has not existed long enough to get many buildings like this - hence it's relative uniqueness gives ample ground for preservation.

However, I am impressed with the proposal of high resi blocks being built in the inner city. Keeping the Ruthven facade would not be that hard. I watched in 1980 as they moved the entire facade of a building in Vic. Sq and rolled it back once the new building behind it was finished.

New resi towers will bring population, more life, more cash flow in the city, a better skylline, perhaps more from overseas. This is a repeat of similar things in the eastern cities. Adelaide will see more yet.

[Pistol]

From the City Messenger (22nd March 2007)

A Chinese business consortium will visit Adelaide next month to investigate building two of the city's tallest apartment blocks.
The consortium, known as the Tengyu Group, will re-visit its two-year-old plan for a 20-storey apartment block on top of Rundle Mall's Renaissance Arcade.
The group is also considering building a second similar sized apartment block in the city, but will not reveal its possible location at this stage.
Tengyu Group Adelaide based member Kokwah See said a development application for the Renaissance Arcade building could be lodged with the Adelaide City Council by June.
He said the delaiy in the project was because of membership changes within the consortium.
"We can see a very good growth in Adelaide and the capacity for growth in apartments," Mr See told the City Messenger last week.
"There are a lot more people coming to Adelaide and that will lead to more business growth."
Plans for the building are not finalised but its likely to include up to 230 apartments aimed at students and permanent residents.
Work on the building would start in the first half of next year, subject to approval and apartment sales.
The extra housing would be a boost for the Adelaide City Council, which latest Australian Bureau of Statistics figures list as the fastest growing council area in the state.
The council's population last year grew by more than 450 people, to 15 299, according to ABS estimates.
It was an annual growth rate of 3 per cent and nearly gour times the state's growth rate of 0.8 per cent.

Sounds quite promising. This could be up before Spire! Wonder what site they are considering for the second building?

[Howie]

Can't wait to see the plans..!! Thanks for the update.

[Cruise]

bump, anything new?

[stumpjumper]

Proposed for a 7m deep site behind the church at cnr Pulteney St and North Terrrace - a student housing tower.

Firstly, 'student housing' tends to be code for 'undersized dwellings with inadequate parking'.

Secondly, this project will involve the demolition of one of the city's little gems - 13 Austin Street. Have a look before it goes - it's a tiny Victorian Italianate building complete and original to the last detail. It adds an intersting texture to a city laneway. A clever design would retain the interesting little facade at least as part of the building entry level, but I doubt it will.

I can see the accountants and quantity surveyors now -

'Why keep this? Look what it's going to cost us to do that!! What's wrong with a panel of rendered cement block?' (Gets out a Pantone pen) 'See, we render it, what's that purple/khaki colour - 'architectural aubergine', that's it, or that other one, there it is, 'Baby Dysentery Brown'. Much better. Tell the architect to get his hand off it.'

There's no heritage protection for the building. Not many people are aware that there is no protection against demolition at all for any buildings in the city except the few on the State Heritage Register. Being on the Council heritage register means absolutely nothing - any building on that register may be removed from the list at any time at the request of the owner. Even being on the Register of the National Estate offers no protection whatsoever against demolition. A building in Bentham St on the Register of the National Estate was recently demolished to make way for the Futuris complex.

[Will]

Just because something is old does not mean it is worthy of protection. There is a reason why certain buildings are not heritage listed. And as for the national trust property that was demolished in bentahm Street, I am compeltely unnaware of such a building existing. i have a book from 1990 which lists all the heritage buildings in Adelaide, and no such building exists. Do you have a photo of it or something?


And out of curiosity what is your opinion regarding the demolition of the Arturo's Taverna building at 20-22 Currie Street?

[stumpjumper]

Delete you bastard!

[stumpjumper]

Agreed Will. There's a lot of shite of all eras which doesn't deserve a second look let alone preservation.

My point was that in the City of Adelaide, there is effectively no heritage listing other than the State list. The federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 makes the old Register of the National Estate just a list, and the City of Adelaide's local heritage list is entirely voluntary (the tradeoff is the Heritage Incentive Scheme, which doesn't work well for commercial buildings - a state of affairs the Property Council is quite happy with). That leaves the State Heritage Register, managed by the woefully under-resourced Heritage Branch (they can't even afford a full time receptionist), as the only protection for those old buildings which are important. The Property Council is quite happy with that, too. Here's an example - I know of an application for heritage listing which has been on the agenda of the state heritage authority since February 1984. In fact there have been more than 20 submissions for lsiting the property. Heritage Branch say that 'lack of staff and resources' have prevented them from processing the listing, and the 20 year old submission is still pending. There's service for you - Public Service!

The building at 13 Austin Street is unusual in that it is a complete, untouched piece of Victorian era commercial architecture on a rare small scale. It has never been renovated, just maintained. It has been proposed for local heritage listing several times, but each time the listing was declined by the owner. Anyone can see that a single storey building, no matter how interesting, in an area zoned for 20 storeys is not going to be around for long once a footprint is consolidated, as in this case. I was hoping that the facade could be retained as part of the new building. There is a knee jerk reaction against retaining facades - 'facadism' - by supposed design intellectuals. The fact is that this little building is a facade anyway. Behind the ornate stonework and timberwork is a brick box.

I have a few pics of the interior and exterior, but I can't work out how to post them here (although Howie has probably set it all out somewhere. Do you need a third party image handler?

I have news for you - your 1990 book 'Heritage of the CIty of Adelaide' doesn't list all buildings which were under any sort of heritage list at the time.

The demolished building in Bentham Street dates from 1848, and began life as a chapel one of the Radical Nonconformist movements which were prominent in the early years of Adelaide. See Douglas Pike's book 'A Paradise of Dissent' about that. It was listed on the Regsiter of the National Estate as Place ID: 16972 and Place File No: 3/03/001/0163. It was at 22-24 Bentham St and was demolished very quickly and quietly by Futuris because they could. The buildign except for the frontage to Bentham Street was pretty beaten up by the time it was knocked down. I've got a very interesting hand made brick from the old building.

[Will]

Thanks SJ for your informative reply. I am actually curious about this building that was demolished in Bentham Street. I actually thought my 'heritage of the City of Adelaide' book contained all heritage buildings in the city, obviosuly I was wrong. Is this the building?:

[stumpjumper]

That's the one.

It's not easy to understand the different levels of heritage listing in SA, especially since the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.

A lot of items were effectively de-listed. For example, everything on the 'Register of the National Estate' except Commonwealth-owned property lost protection unless State governments picked them up. In South Australia, as you might expect, the state government declined to pick up much at all.

The government here has a view that heritqage is a cost centre, not a profit one - despite heritage conservation being used to make money around the world, and having easily demonstrable social benefits. You can't balme the govt, though. They are programmed for immediate cash benefit only, ie sell the land with a clear title.

Next time you see Foley or Conlon or Rann, ask them what they think of heritage conservation. Stand well back, though.

I've got a scrap book of 'listing refused by owner' or de-listed properties in Adelaide which have been demolished.

[Will]

SJ, do you have an image of the Austin Street building?

I have found the following images, but I can't tell which one it is:

[Ben]

Plans were lodged with the ACC yesterday for a $92m Twin tower apartment complex:

Type: Development Application Received
Application Number: DA/1041/2007
Lodgement Date: 18/12/2007
Location; 12-24 Renaissance Arcade 11-17 Austin Street, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: Demolish existing buildings and construct 2 tower structures

[crawf]

Please be over 80m+, a tower over that height in that area is what we need

[Will]

Thanks Ben for the news. These are very exciting times to be in Adelaide. There is literally a new building announced every few days. If there is only one downside, this is keeping me really busy on Emporis, having to ad all these new buildings!