Sensational-Adelaide.com

Will wrote:At its upcoming meeting, the ACC DAP is expected to grant planning APPROVAL to this building.

ABC NEWS
City apartment building on hold
Posted 1 hour 39 minutes ago

Map: Adelaide 5000
Plans for an 11-storey apartment block have been deferred by the Adelaide City Council's Development Assessment Panel due to visual, construction and access issues.

The tower proposed for Andrew Street in the city would need the demolition of an existing workshop and would have four levels of underground parking.

The panel has asked the developer to provide more information about how the building will look and where cranes will be placed during construction.

It is also seeking details on access from the building to a proposed plaza that is expected to be built on council land in the future.

So much for "cutting red tape" to encourage development in tougher economical times.

Yes, it was deferred at the DAP meeting.

I believe this is one of the Council's last $10million plus developments it can actually make a decision on, thankfully.

Where will teh crane be located?
What a shambles the Council is.
In these times, when the majority of proposed projects are being cancelled through uncertainty and lack of finance, this is the level of analysis that the council stoops to?
Spare me...

UrbanSG wrote:Yes, it was deferred at the DAP meeting.

I believe this is one of the Council's last $10million plus developments it can actually make a decision on, thankfully.

Thank christ for that.

You guys seriously don't think it's important for the council to know where a tower crane will be located?

Pants wrote:You guys seriously don't think it's important for the council to know where a tower crane will be located?

Not at this stage of the application. That should be addressed when an application for construction is submitted. This is purely for planning consent. it's ridiculous the council would defer this decision based on that information.

Is it just me but has anyone else noticed that how since the council lost their planning powers for developments over $10 million they have shown their true colours?

They have REJECTED every major development presented to them. Think of 199-200 North Terrace, Freedom Space Apartments, the tramline extension and now this.

I know that members of council do not like it when people criticise the council, but seriously can you blame us?

Only when council stops acting in such a petty, village manner will the criticism stop.

You do make a good point Will.

Though I thought the ACC supported the $100m Port Road tramline extension?

crawf wrote:You do make a good point Will.

Though I thought the ACC supported the $100m Port Road tramline extension?

Nah, they rejected it because trees would be cut down.

Ben wrote:

Pants wrote:You guys seriously don't think it's important for the council to know where a tower crane will be located?

Not at this stage of the application. That should be addressed when an application for construction is submitted. This is purely for planning consent. it's ridiculous the council would defer this decision based on that information.

They've not rejected it, they've deferred the approval seeking more information. It's better that the developer get a definite yes, instead of a 'yes' now and a 'oh wait hang on' at a later point.

There's been a few decisions that I've questioned in the past, but this isn't one of them... yet. Let's not jump down their throat before they've made a decision?

I don't know how the council can enforce their height limits when they have allowed significantly higher development on the adjacant site which happens to be council owned. That is just so corrupt and disgusting IMO.

Anyway the council staff have recommended the DAP to approve the reduced development on Mondays meeting.

Ben, the first render is no longer relevant, the other two reflect the current recently amended design.

Of particular interest is Council's admission in their report that 'The Precinct' development on the old bus station site (which they are a part of) has effectively stalled and was originally due to have commenced by now. An amended timeframe is currently being discussed with Urban Construct/Multiplex and no design work has occurred beyond the concept stage for this area. They are apparently waiting for the economic recovery and market timing.

We basically knew this. However it is good to have it confirmed after so much fuss was made when this project was originally announced, it is only fair they admit what is really occurring. The bus station is great but it has shifted what is basically derelict land further west until 'The Precinct' development actually occurs. Not a great urban design outcome for the present time in that area.

Just out of curiosity, what is the other low rise proposal to the south of this building? It looks like it's been placed there for a massing reference

Ben wrote:I don't know how the council can enforce their height limits when they have allowed significantly higher development on the adjacant site which happens to be council owned. That is just so corrupt and disgusting IMO.

It's not ideal, is it? I'd love to see the arguments behind it.