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

[Omicron]

Indeed. Good design doesn't have to be expensive - clean lines, strong proportions, definitive stance, sharp edges, flush walls, contrasting/complementary colours and the like are all cost-effective ways of achieving an aesthetically-pleasing, effective and efficient outcome.

I just don't see a consistent theme on this building. The simple elements of this design, like the basic rectangular shape, flat glass, lack of ornamentation and the like, and the more complex elements like the glass protrusions, contrasting glass colours, setbacks and such, are just not strong enough in isolation to give this building any sort of character. It's neither pleasingly minimalistic nor intriguingly complex - just half-hearted attempts at both. And why on earth is the pod-like checkerboard stuck halfway up the building? It adds weight to the midsection and does absolutely nothing for the proportions, especially when combined with the sneaky setback halfway up that pokes back out to the footpath again like a fat stomach heaving over a too-tight belt.

A similar identity crisis befalls CC2 - the King William St. facade hints at the old Advertiser building with its grid-like window shades, the northern facade replicates CC1 next door, and the southern facade introduces exposed concrete out of nowhere (why not the silvery cladding of CC1's core?) and tacks on reflective glass pods with little geometric relevance to the rest of the design.

Will rightly points out 151 Pirie (on HIndmarsh Square) as a good example of a conservatively pleasing design, which is appealing for its simplicity and consistency. There isn't a sudden slash of concrete that isnt found anywhere else in the design, nor is there a funny protrusion poking out that doesn't seem to quite line up with any other window or floor on the building. This isn't to say that unique, confronting design is a bad thing, of course - take UniSA's Hawke Building, Federation Square or Bilbao's Guggenheim as more extreme examples of buildings with lines every which way that still manage to be visually appealing, because these buildings commit to their chosen theme and stick to it like hell, without timidly attempting four different ones.

Put a proper veranda over the footpath for goodness sake; bring Level 5's balcony setback down to level 2 (and make it a proper setback, not this sneaky one); apply that checkerboard effect upwards from Level 3/4 almost to the top floor, alternating between CC2's reflective silver and Conservatory's rich deep blue but removing the tiny eaves on the inner sections; and keep the rooftop setback as a subtle homage to the penthouse level of '60s high-rises (think RBA on Victoria Square or the AMP Building in Sydney), but add small overhanging roof just like the aforementioned '60s examples. Then you have a building that isn't standing right on top of the footpath as this one appears to be, using setbacks that subtly reduce the visual weight of the building as it rises upwards, and yet remains proud of being the box that it is.

Even more simply, swap the midsection with the podium by placing the darker checkerboard down the bottom and the cleaner, lighter glass up top, ensuring that the setback does in fact set the upper floors back a bit. That way, the higher levels of the building are less dominating and again, the visual weight of the building is reduced. I'm sure there would be far fewer comparisons with City Central with the flatter pods much closer to ground level, too.

[rhino]

Put a proper veranda over the footpath for goodness sake; bring Level 5's balcony setback down to level 2 (and make it a proper setback, not this sneaky one); apply that checkerboard effect upwards from Level 3/4 almost to the top floor, alternating between CC2's reflective silver and Conservatory's rich deep blue but removing the tiny eaves on the inner sections; and keep the rooftop setback as a subtle homage to the penthouse level of '60s high-rises (think RBA on Victoria Square or the AMP Building in Sydney), but add small overhanging roof just like the aforementioned '60s examples. Then you have a building that isn't standing right on top of the footpath as this one appears to be, using setbacks that subtly reduce the visual weight of the building as it rises upwards, and yet remains proud of being the box that it is.

Wow Omi, is that the same building? I do like your ideas, nevertheless!

[Will Derwent]

Can someone please explain to me what the rationale is for setbacks in the first place? And I don't see what is so bad about a building with big 'visual weight' or a flat front to its full height.

Am I missing something?

[AtD]

Off the top of my head, setbacks reduce shadows and wind-tunnel effects.

[skyliner]

This building looks as though itis deliberately designed to look low and unimpressive - no cantilever awnings - again! (Need these for Adelaide's unpredictable climate and to be more user friendly). Better than what was there and will help bulk up the western CBD.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

[Will]

I have edited the title of the thread so as to reflect the building's true height of 50m. The previously listed height of 47m corresponded to the ceiling of the uppermost floor. This did not include the lift core and plant room, which add an extra 3m to the height of the structure and thus lifts its height to 50m.

[UrbanSG]

This was approved at Thursday's DAC meeting.

[Shuz]

That was quick... I guess I'm sort of happy about it. Not the best design to be approved, but at least its better than whats there now.

[Paulns]

I agree with the above...

[Ben]

From The Advertiser:

Urban Construct gets approval for 13-level office tower

RUSSELL EMMERSON

December 17, 2008
ADELAIDE developer Urban Construct has received development approval for a 13-level office tower next to the Central Bus Station.

Chief executive Todd Brown said future demand for office space and a shortage of alternatives would underpin demand for the $130 million project.

"Vacancy rates in the Adelaide CBD have continued to plummet as corporates search for high quality office space in preparation for the next wave of investment,'' he said in a statement.

"The next decade will see significant mining, defence and technology opportunities in the state and large, medium and small companies all know they need a prominent presence in Adelaide.''

Urban Construct will target an ``as built'' five-star green-star rating, allowing it to seek premium rental rates in excess of $500/sqm. In the past, these rates have been underpinned by large-scale State Government tenancies.

But new commercial projects face a more cautious financing and property market than existed 12 months ago.

While Adelaide's property market remains one of the country's better-performers, a slowing of credit has resulted in a trend toward higher loan-to-value ratios effectively requiring developers to contribute more to a development and achieving higher levels of precommitment.

This has slowed the move toward speculative development.

Urban Construct, which is part of the $2 billion Newport Quays joint venture, has confirmed it will seek anchor tenants before construction commences.

[Brando]

U/C are already in discussions with a number of tenants and are expected to gain the neccessary pre commitment to start construction in 2009.

[bike19]

any news on this project? i keep riding past this eyesore hoping to see some demolition work soon, lol.

[Waewick]

if it doesn't happen in time for 2013/2014 I can't see it happening for a few years!

[crawf]

It's a cheap carbon copy of City Central anyway, so it's no loss.

[Will]

It appears that the building has beed re-designed. It looks less ugly now: