Sensational-Adelaide.com

Our city's best and biggest office locations are slowly getting filled up with medium rise average buildings like this proposal. Soon there won't be any suitable spots for some real iconic buildings.

Hey, maybe that's the ACC's plan to fill these prime spots with junk, so there will be no more room for decent sized iconic buildings in the city, and the skyline will remain boring and flat. That's their future vision for Adelaide (sorry a bit harsh, but i'm pissed).

I don't mind this, but that blank wall has to go. Thankgod there is still room for a landmark tower.

And I really don't think is such a great location, its right on one of the worst streets in the city - Franklin St. Such a disaster IMO

"I am speechless with rage" :wank:

My god some of you are quick to jump off the deep end. How many fucking times does it have to be mentioned to look at this development wholistically?? This is not a badly designed tower, with maximum bang for your buck in terms of lettible space. So, there's a clad blank wall, whoopy do, so the next tower with a complying fire resistant wall is designed, you're all going to take to your wrists with a razor blade? Just remember, it's down the road, not accross the street.

Yeap I am looking at this development wholistically Pikey and all as I am seeing is blank walls, green glass, boxy buildings and pods that all look the same. I mean come on!

The ACC is planning to make Bentham Street a major north/south pedestrian link. A large blank wall (adjacent a street frontage) but with no active street frontage and instead another loading bay/car park area at ground level is going to do wonders for this street, NOT!!! I understand the need for blank featureless walls on abutting property boundaries but not a street frontage. There is no excuse. This needs to be glass to ensure more passive surveillance of the street can occur. I get sick of seeing CC1's ugly western wall each day. It wrecks the building. How do we even know that this wall on CC8 will even be 'clad' after the terrible outcome with the exposed concrete of CC2?

I am all for development but we shouldn't just accept crap. The ACC had better try to negotiate some imporvements on this building. Get rid of the ugly pods and improve the western elevation!

Pikey wrote:"I am speechless with rage" :wank:

My god some of you are quick to jump off the deep end. How many fucking times does it have to be mentioned to look at this development wholistically?? This is not a badly designed tower, with maximum bang for your buck in terms of lettible space. So, there's a clad blank wall, whoopy do, so the next tower with a complying fire resistant wall is designed, you're all going to take to your wrists with a razor blade? Just remember, it's down the road, not accross the street.

Your kidding me Pikey, the whole block is going to look the same. Surely you honestly don't think this is the best design they could come up with?
Sorry mate, but i'm suprised that your ok with it.

UrbanSG wrote:
The ACC is planning to make Bentham Street a major north/south pedestrian link. A large blank wall (adjacent a street frontage) but with no active street frontage and instead another loading bay/car park area at ground level is going to do wonders for this street, NOT!!! I understand the need for blank featureless walls on abutting property boundaries but not a street frontage. There is no excuse. This needs to be glass to ensure more passive surveillance of the street can occur. I get sick of seeing CC1's ugly western wall each day. It wrecks the building. How do we even know that this wall on CC8 will even be 'clad' after the terrible outcome with the exposed concrete of CC2?

I agree. Some serious contradictions here in the development aspect. Your point about Bentham St is highly pertinent - unless there is something none of us know about in the $45b pipeline of future developoments in SA. and Adelaide! Waiting for another iconic bldg to set off CC.

BTW - can someone outline what exactly the Bentham St plan involves.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

Sorry Pikes, I'm with Urban SG.

On the basis of the 3 buildings they've given us so far, the whole development is going to be a cluster of mid-rise, slightly above average buildings that all look the same. I've heard of not making your Architects do much work and getting some discount for buying in bulk, but enough of the f**king green glass boxes with semi-interesting pods already.

Not all buildings have to be Frank Gehry masterpieces, but this site has so much promise, and in that context they've pretty much dished up crap.

Aside from the western wall, which must be capable of being broken up and engaging the street level somehow, this is a pretty good building - even the pods are better than CC2's because they're more integrated with the building's facade and don't come out of nowhere through f**king exposed concrete... but, it's just more of the same and the prospect of 3 or 4 more buildings just like it, on that primo block, isn't all that appealing.

I'll happily be proven wrong if they break the mould with whatever else is in the pipeline, but I'm not too confident given their current form.

I'm not quite speechless with rage though Will.

Pikey wrote:"I am speechless with rage" :wank:

So I am not allowed to express my rage at the laziness of the architect/ developer in giving us a huge blank wall to front a street? Thinking in a holistic manner, I can foresee how ugly the western skyline will look with the blank wall of CCT1, CCT8 and the Woods Bagot building at 105 Waymouth Street. Other projects have demonstrated that it is possible to achieve a 5 star rating without blank western façades. I'm sorry, but I think our city deserves better than this.

I actually prefer the last proposal than this new one.

Pikey wrote:"I am speechless with rage" :wank:

My god some of you are quick to jump off the deep end. How many fucking times does it have to be mentioned to look at this development wholistically?? This is not a badly designed tower, with maximum bang for your buck in terms of lettible space. So, there's a clad blank wall, whoopy do, so the next tower with a complying fire resistant wall is designed, you're all going to take to your wrists with a razor blade? Just remember, it's down the road, not accross the street.

I'm with Pikey, i think we're not looking at the big picture there's more to this than just a few buildings that may seem a bit odd or ordinary to some.
The entire completed project will speak for it'self.
No doubt that area will be totaly transformed in a few years time.
Let it evolve.

Skyliner said:

BTW - can someone outline what exactly the Bentham St plan involves.

I think they are implementing another recommendation from the venerable Jan Gehl report "Public Spaces, Public Life".

Quoting from pg.73:

Improve the north-south connections
-identify key north-south streets and create primary pedestrian links through some of these e.g. the link between the
Market and the Station (Pitt St, Bentham St, Leigh St and Bank St) which get special treatment.
-ensure interesting ground floor facades.
-provide minimum waiting times at pedestrian crossings.

I've no idea the extent to which they are following the recommendations..

frank1 wrote:Our city's best and biggest office locations are slowly getting filled up with medium rise average buildings like this proposal. Soon there won't be any suitable spots for some real iconic buildings.

Hey, maybe that's the ACC's plan to fill these prime spots with junk, so there will be no more room for decent sized iconic buildings in the city, and the skyline will remain boring and flat. That's their future vision for Adelaide (sorry a bit harsh, but i'm pissed).

The council don't build buildings like these, the private sector does. And if the council don't approve something you have a whinge. They approve it and you have a whinge anyway. Please put some thought into your posts.

omada wrote:

Skyliner said:

BTW - can someone outline what exactly the Bentham St plan involves.

I think they are implementing another recommendation from the venerable Jan Gehl report "Public Spaces, Public Life".

Quoting from pg.73:

Improve the north-south connections
-identify key north-south streets and create primary pedestrian links through some of these e.g. the link between the
Market and the Station (Pitt St, Bentham St, Leigh St and Bank St) which get special treatment.
-ensure interesting ground floor facades.
-provide minimum waiting times at pedestrian crossings.

I've no idea the extent to which they are following the recommendations..

Thanks mate.I have something to work with now.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

Tyler_Durden wrote:

frank1 wrote:Our city's best and biggest office locations are slowly getting filled up with medium rise average buildings like this proposal. Soon there won't be any suitable spots for some real iconic buildings.

Hey, maybe that's the ACC's plan to fill these prime spots with junk, so there will be no more room for decent sized iconic buildings in the city, and the skyline will remain boring and flat. That's their future vision for Adelaide (sorry a bit harsh, but i'm pissed).

The council don't build buildings like these, the private sector does. And if the council don't approve something you have a whinge. They approve it and you have a whinge anyway. Please put some thought into your posts.

Yeah, no shit. I never said the ACC builds buildings, but they approve them. What's your point about whining, half the people on this site whine about projects all the time. You just seem to pick on my posts all the time (this aint your first criticism of my posts)

Anyway, moving on......

This whole project is just so average it's boring. I accept that it's appropriate for the buildings share a similar aesthetic to create a coherent whole, but what we're getting is underwhelming, assembly-line architecture. And that western wall is inexcusable.