Sensational-Adelaide.com

Düsseldorfer wrote:holy fk, i'm hoping that design 2 with the awesome curved front gets approved!!!!

wouldn't be surprised if the council only approved the first design tho, and say that the second 'curved' design (like with 20-22 currie st) would cause the sun to reflect onto the footpath and blind people

Sadly, I agree. I'm really scared of being tremendously disappointed with the outcome of this. I'm not usually a pessimist but the ACC are just so backwards and ridiculous in their thinking that something like this is unlikely to stand a chance against them. I'm really excited about this project yet I don't want to get myself too excited because I know I'd get the urge to actually inflict harm on one of the councillors if it was rejected! I really think the better option would be to lodge this with the DAC instead.

Just the thought of the ACC refusing either of these designs makes my blood boil.

If design No.1 used a brass/gold coloured material I'd really love it but it looks like a yellow/mustard coloured material so in that case I'd rather design No.2 with the cool curve. This is exactly the 'bold and innovative design' asked for in the CBD Development Plan. The northern side of North Terrace, yeah fair enough, it's historically significant and beautiful but the southern side is littered with cheap bland crap from the '50s-'80s and should be open to modern looking developments.

Just build it wrote:Just the thought of the ACC refusing either of these designs makes my blood boil.

If design No.1 used a brass/gold coloured material I'd really love it but it looks like a yellow/mustard coloured material so in that case I'd rather design No.2 with the cool curve. This is exactly the 'bold and innovative design' asked for in the CBD Development Plan. The northern side of North Terrace, yeah fair enough, it's historically significant and beautiful but the southern side is littered with cheap bland crap from the '50s-'80s and should be open to modern looking developments.

I wouldn't have thought there were other people still up! I 100% agree with you RE the southern side of the terrace, though the 1 thing that scares me most about those renders is the little 2 storey stone building to the left of it. Council is known for rejecting proposals outright due to not 'blending with' and not 'having a relationship to' adjacent heritage buildings. Fun times ahead!

WHY ARE THE COUNCIL DECIDING THIS ONE? IT SHOULD GO TO THE NEW APPROVALS MECHANISM.

THE COUNCIL ARE HOPELESS!

Design #2 please...

Both designs seem to extend onto the Nth Terrace footpath. Was the old building like that? and does this mean all adjacent buildings (if demolished & rebuilt) could push further out over the footpath?

how_good_is_he wrote:Problem with apartments here is lack of avail. carparking as site is quite tight.

Walking, Buses, Trains and Trams...

Wayno, good in principle, but buyers who spend say $1m+ usually have cars and expect carparking.

Only reason that its with the ACC is the proposal was lodged some 9 months ago with them and they have to deal with it.

The boundary of the site lies some 3m in front of the heritage listed Gallerie building, but runs parallel with the adj. buildings like OPSM on North Tce, with the balconies overhanging the boundary by some 2m [which they can].

I fail to see how either of the two new designs doesn't fit into the southern side of North Terrace given that there are already two apartment buildings with some similar architectural elements that already exist there in the area, of similar or larger size.

The width of the North Terrace footpath is exaggerated in the renders. However, the existing building (the nightclub) does extend further out onto the footpath than it's neighbour to the east.

Both designs are good. Design 2 is awesome. I am guessing the Council is mainly against the balcony overhang because they are obsessed with the idea of North Terrace as Adelaide's great wall :wank: Even though the hospital, unis, Hyatt etc all extend infront of this wall! They also hate building overhang over footpaths even though it has been allowed on occasions. Anyway I hope somehow one of these designs (preferably 2) can get approved.

Absolutely loving the idea of a curved facade. Not only would it be of visual interest in itself, but the contrast would emphasise both the rectilinear new buildings on that strip of North Terrace and the neo-classical old buildings adjacent to it.

Design number 2 gets my vote! It looks supurb.... simple, yet elegent!

ACC, reject or ask for a dumbing down of this proposal at your peril

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOVE Number 2...

Finally something that actually looks good... I hope this one goes ahead..

how_good_is_he wrote:Comments from council planners is they are against the wall of glass on North Tce facade in option 1 and the curved element in option 2. Reason given, they want to minimise bulk/density/impact on North Tce facade.

This is exactly the type of building we need. Our CBD is pretty drab looking with many ugly, ageing, sandstone coloured buildings as is evident from the render pictures. North Tce needs sprucing up with fresh architecture such as these proposals. Alas, it's the council assessing it at the moment.

I can see the councils point here. They both don't relly fit into the north terrace theme (the heritage buildings to the right and left), especially the curved one. If i had to choose i actually prefer the first render over the curved one.

What North Tce theme? The building to the west is pretty drab and they built the David Jones place directly to the east of the nice edwardian place.

The theme along Nth Tce should be the vibrant high-rise and quality buildings along the south of North Tce, directly opposite (and balancing) the historic library, museum, Elder Hall and art gallery etc on the northern side.

The best improvement to the "theme of north tce" would be to rip down the horrible 60s law building in Adelaide uni, which wrecks the historical link that flows along the whole length from Parliament to the RAH.

Why do the council still persist in their outdated vision for the city? I camnnot fathom their perspective on any of this. They regularly approve drab, mediocre 12 level buildings all over the city that add nothing to our present or future. When a "statement" building like this one comes along, one that announces that Adelaide is not a retirement home after all, they refuse it.