[U/C] 399 King William Street | ~52m | 16 Lvls | Mixed

[Ben]

Council are expected to reject the amended proposal at tonights meeting. Basically the conditions of the "rooms" are unliveable (bedroom and bathroom in same room and many with no natural light)...

[UrbanSG]

Refuse away and hopefully the DAC agrees and refuses the application as well. I'm amazed at the lack of windows on this and the Pulteney Street proposal and I'm surprised Hames Sharley is even associated with these applications.

In a reponse to the DAC planners a set of plans is marked up in pen and the lines aren't even straight! Talk about saving time and costs.

[iTouch]

I agree with UrbanSG, be gone with this abomination

[Will]

For those who can't be bothered reading the entire report, here are the reasons for its refusal:

The internal amenity of the apartments is considered to be of a low standard by not
providing any outlook from living areas as desired in CW PDC71.

The living areas rely on borrowed light through the doorway of bedrooms and ensuite
bathrooms and are not provided with adequate levels of sunlight in accordance with
CW PDC53.

Living areas within apartment are not of a size to enable the reasonable enjoyment of
use by occupants including the non?provision of dedicated dining areas separate from
food preparation areas.

Bedrooms incorporate bathroom facilities, compromising the amenity of the
bedrooms.

It has not been demonstrated that storage areas for apartments have been provided in
accordance with CW PDC79.

The building does not adequately transition in height down to 17 metres in the west
half of the King William Street South Policy Area PA28 as desired in Principle 6.

Overall the design quality cannot not be
considered to be of sufficiently high quality given its prominent location on King William
Street.

This and its sister development at 260 Pulteney Street are easily the worst proposals I have ever seen. They represent third world living standards which are completely unacceptable. Not to mention both buildings look like cardboard boxes placed out on the kerb for recycling.

[Vee]

Thanks, Will for the summary.

This is shocking! How could anyone have the temerity to even propose such a building in Adelaide?

[Ben]

Not sure how you would get a view of the torrens...

Apartments are about the size of a Yatala jail cell
Alice Monfries From: Sunday Mail (SA) July 30, 2011 10:00PM


Inside one of the student apartments proposed to be built on King William St. Picture: David Cronin Source: Sunday Mail (SA)


Inside a prison cell at Yatala. Source: Sunday Mail (SA)

BEDROOMS about the same size as a jail cell could soon be home to hundreds of overseas students.

The 10sq m bedrooms - complete with toilet and shower - could be home to hundreds of students if two proposed city apartment buildings get the green light.

The controversially compact layout - designed by the same architect behind the F Division cells in Yatala prison - has been criticised by Adelaide City Council for a second time this month over its tiny size and "poor amenity" including toilets in the bedrooms.

But developer Tangcheng Holdings, which lodged the plans for a 15-storey student accommodation building at 399 King William Rd and a 12-level development at 260 Pulteney St, have vowed to take the plans "as far as they need to go" to get approval.

With the two developments both costed at more than $10 million, final approval lies with the State Government's Development Assessment Commission, which will assess the plans in mid-August.

In the wake of the controversy over the apartments - which were labelled "suicide boxes" by Councillor Anne Moran - Tangcheng's design director and architectural consultant, Carlo Gnezda, took the Sunday Mail for a tour through a mock-up display apartment.

While admitting the 10sq m bedrooms were "quite small" and the occupant could not use the toilet if a guest was in the bedroom, Mr Gnezda - who has won architecture awards for his design of F Division cells and the high security unit at Yatala prison - said the apartments were "completely livable".

"I know what prisons are like and this is nothing like a prison - prisoners don't get a living space and they don't get a window with a panoramic view," he said. Mr Gnezda said he estimated the apartments, which have an innovative space-maximising design, would sell for more than $250,000.

"We're trying to make this affordable for students - it's a small space but we've planned it very well, with storage over the desk and under the bed," he said.

The council's development assessment panel, which first rejected the plans in May, has recommended the Government's DAC refuse the amended proposal.

The documents state that despite the amendments, the council doesn't support the size or the toilets in the bedroom, and that the living room of the apartments relies on "borrowed light" from bedrooms.

But Mr Gnezda said the developments were being assessed against the council's standards for residential apartments, not specifically as student apartments.

"The problem is they have nothing in their Development Plan that quantifies student apartments," he said. "A student's lifestyle is not a family lifestyle - they work at night, study during the day and sleep when they get a few minutes."

Mr Gnezda said this style of living was common in cities around the world and was no different to that provided by mining companies such as BHP and Wesfarmers for workers.

"There's hardly anything unique about this - the difference is we have a toilet in the bathroom," he said.

Cr Moran said "no matter how well designed - these apartments are just way too small".

"These are foreign students, often non-English speaking, away from their families and putting them in an isolated little box is not conducive to good mental health," she said.

[AtD]

Wow what were they thinking when they used a photo from the King William Street bridge as the view? How dodgy!

I wonder if they could be sued for that?

[Norman]

Maybe it's a place to put a photo

[Omicron]

the occupant could not use the toilet if a guest was in the bedroom

Bless their hearts.

[Will]

Despite the accusations of some, to show that the DAC is not just a rubber stamp, at its upcoming meeting this August 25, it is expected to REFUSE this proposal.

[[Shuz]]

Thank god! Sanity now!

[[Shuz]]

So does anyone know if the DAC did refuse this and the other one?

[skyliner]

I don't mind the exterior appearance - on the basis of the renders as such.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

[Zills]

I agree, the exterior renders are pretty good and frankly, I think this apartment block should go ahead based on:

A) The apartments are intended to be occupied by foreign exchange students (mostly chinese)
B) Dog box apartments like this are commonplace in China. It's just what they are used to.. and all they require to be happy.

In some ways you could look at it as 'making them feel at home'.

Just sayin'

[Will]

I agree, the exterior renders are pretty good and frankly, I think this apartment block should go ahead based on:

A) The apartments are intended to be occupied by foreign exchange students (mostly chinese)
B) Dog box apartments like this are commonplace in China. It's just what they are used to.. and all they require to be happy.

In some ways you could look at it as 'making them feel at home'.

Just sayin'

I'm sorry but that is ridiculous. Just because something is acceptable in a developing country does not mean we should accept it here.

Likewise, it is acceptable to live in tin shanties in India. Should we also house Indian students in this same manner?