[CAN] 71-83 Franklin Street | 50m | 13lvls | Office

[UrbanSG]

We are not talking about creating a fantastic design here.

It is very simple, the architect could easily incorporate some glass along the western elevation or include some varying elements to break it up. Glass could be included as the floor plans shows there is only a single wall element for a large part of this elevation apart from the lift and services portions of the building.

They have argued on this occasion that they are blocking out the harsh western sun by creating this solid wall. Just like all of the City Central proposals.

Well Woods Bagot if we follow this logic then the entire western Adelaide skyline should be concrete!!!

Anyway the Council has recommended approval as stated already but suggests this western elevation should be changed. Hopefully the DAC requires this amendment.

At least the southern elevation is glass. My worst fear was that this could be all concrete too.

[Hippodamus]

Instead of criticising this proposals architectural merit we should be focussing on ways to improve its connectivity with adjacent developments, the street and the rest of the city. This current design is malleable and can be improved by simple measures of good planning, urban design and green innovation.

It should take advantage of the fact it is located next to the bus terminal for starters, therefore land use at grade should be complementary to such a facility (i.e. tourist information sub-office, specialised shops, small gallery, cafe, mini mart, restaurant, etc). It should also orientate itself in such a way that both developements, when fully completed; will relate and speak to each other. This can be done from implementing similar parapet levels of the canopy of the bus terminal and translating it into a continuous and complementary form for the new building. This doesn't neccessarily need to be done in exactly the same way with identical materials, but respecting current form and enhancing it. In addition, the interface between both buildings is also important, as the space (if any) between both structures could be improvised into something more useable for the persons using these facilities at grade, rather than forcing this area to be an uncomfortable and desolate wind tunnel.

Secondly, its relation to the street is of aesthetic and micro-climatical importance, as the building could be stepped back from the street at the upper levels for urban design purposes to take advantage of the northern sun for larger balconies featuring 'green roofs' for plants and water saving designs. These simple examples are measures of improving the buildings overall relation to the city, which is more important than fussing about its current design which can easily be modified to a more useable solution.

[Mants]

admittedly, when i saw this on the first page, i thought it was a new render of CC8.
at least it isnt green. i wish the architect would look to buildings such as VS1, ConH for inspiration. this is just dismal.

[AtD]

It looks like this building provides no weather protection along Franklin Street. I hope the developer has realised the potential for retail tenancies along the ground floor street frontage and will make it more pedestrian friendly.

[Just build it]

Wow, how attractive and original.

I can't believe there's a team of architects at that place that can sit down and agree that these featureless Lego monstrosities are the best they can come up with, regardless of the budget.

In a typical office building like this one, creating a building of architectural wonder doesn't often rate very high on the agenda. In fact, in many cases the design is hardly determined by the architects at all. It isn't fair to be criticising architects about the design when they are one of the many parties who have a say in the design and function of the building. It's not as simple as the developer or client simply going up to an architect and asking to them to come up with a design, then the architect doodles a design and that's the final design.

Breaking News!

I never expected an architectural marvel nor do I believe that basic creativity is dependant on budget because it isn't. If you're happy with a dull clone of another dull clone just 300m down the road and think it's unfair to criticise the architect because he has budget constraints then that's fine. I think it stinks. There seems to be no thought put into making these buildings people or street scape friendly or visually interesting. Box on box, a few pods, ten pot plants to portray 'green credentials', huge blank wall in grey and white pre-fab panel.......done. Mundane production-line design.

Of course, in the end it means nothing. The developer and architect couldn't care less about what we think of it anyway.

[Omicron]

This is a glass box:



This is a glass box:



This is a glass box:



This is a glass box:



This is a glass box:



This is a windowless box:



With these in mind, must we have the same box repeated over and over again?

[Will Derwent]

Bloody hell people, some of you really know how to sink the boot into something that really doesn't deserve it.

We've got a financial crisis working its way through the economy, a 20,000 sqm office space building proposal with what looks like a reasonable design and all you lot can do is gripe that you haven't been given the Chrysler building.

As for repitition - its not such a bad thing. Plenty of previous architectural periods were dominated by repetitive designs, I mean there are entire neighbourhoods in London that are built in the same architectural style and they're unique in their own way.

Frankly I'm surprised that anybody wants to build in this economic climate, and I'd expect some level of simplification in the designs to cut costs while still getting a building off the ground (so to speak).

[mattblack]

Right on !! Be thankfull that its a modern glass design not another brown lump that Adelaide has plenty of.

[UrbanSG]

The glass box part of this design doesn't worry me and I am definately not expecting a 'Chrysler building' design, we should be so lucky.

What worries me is the blank western wall. This will be extremely prominent from the west. Blank walls have become a real feature of this recent boom as developers maxmise the use of the entire allotment unlike the 80's and attempt to create large office floor plates. The excuse for these blank walls is reducing heat load and maximising the energy star ratings of these buildings. Well VS1 has shot that idea right down. It is possible to have an energy efficient building with west facing glass.

Even if they don't want to incorporate glass along the western elevation they should articulate this feature in some way. Hell even Ipad has been able to do that with different concrete elements and paint shades on its northern elevation to break up an otherwise blank wall. An economic crisis doesn't mean we should just accept any design and we are not asking the world here. The western wall can be improved with some basic design principles which Woods Bagot refuse to employ as shown throughout their recent designs. This minor improvement can be done without increasing costs significantly and can create a much better design outcome.

[bm7500]

Omni, just as an aside. Is that first 'Glass Box' just off Chapel Street in Melbourne?

[crawf]

Regardless of the current credit crunch, Adelaide does not deserve 'second best'.

[Shuz]

Crawf, you must be really naive to live in hope that Adelaide will just suddenly stop settling for second best and lift its game.

[Prince George]

Omni, just as an aside. Is that first 'Glass Box' just off Chapel Street in Melbourne?

Ooh, ooh, pick me sir! It's the School of Architecture at the Illinois Institute of Technology. Mies van der Rohe, back in the '60s.

[Matt]

Oh for the love of God.
NOT AGAIN.

How many more of these bland, ugly, podded, cheap, nasty looking atrocities can we squeeze into one city?

ENOUGH!
If I was the DAC, I'd stamp this application with a big red "WE'RE BORED." and send it on a one-way trip back to the drawing board.

[Benski81]

Look I have to agree that this design doesn't exactly make me wet my pants with excitement and anticipation but at the same time I think we should be glad that atleast there is a half decent modern building replacing the piece of satanic shite that is there now.

What would we prefer, nothing or another brown slap of turd-like concrete? With a contracting economy like we have I was surprised to even see this development proposed. Adelaide is going through its industrial revolution, if you like, and we need this middle step of a few low - midrise developments so we can then move onto bigger, more exciting and more glamorous designs. Finance 101 the NPV has to be there for the developer otherwise they wouldn't bother in the first place and we don't have the population or the corporate presence here for higher cost projects atm.