Sensational-Adelaide.com

I did say that the current state admin building, Wakefield House and the Education Department buildings should be converted into apartments. This would help solve the problem that is the dead heart of Adelaide which is Victoria Square.

And mate, you've met me before in person, so you can vouch that I'm not an old man, and despite how much I love this city I cannot honestly say that I can see a private sector tenant requiring 40 000sqm2 in the next few decades, so call me impatient, but I want to see a new tallest whilst I can still walk and see!

can you foresee another building 100m+ other then Spire, Rundle and Currie in the next few decades?

Will wrote:I did say that the current state admin building, Wakefield House and the Education Department buildings should be converted into apartments. This would help solve the problem that is the dead heart of Adelaide which is Victoria Square.

And mate, you've met me before in person, so you can vouch that I'm not an old man, and despite how much I love this city I cannot honestly say that I can see a private sector tenant requiring 40 000sqm2 in the next few decades, so call me impatient, but I want to see a new tallest whilst I can still walk and see!

It would work if those apartments both appealed to and could be afforded by middle income earners. So far the RoI focused investors have only looked after the top end.

Maybe not one tenant, but several, if those who make their decisions don't decide to place all their admin interstate. And possibly if those buildings were mixed use, so all their tenancy eggs weren't in one basket, ANNNNND if those mixed uses had mixed income properties....

I'm still reasonably confident - it's happened elsewhere, I've no reason to think that it wont happen here, other than some bloody-mindedness by eastern-state-centric decision makers.

Etcetera.

(and yes I can vouch for Will)

russo92 wrote:I was just wondering what would be the reason Adelaide couldn't have the allocated zone (As shown in my terrible render) as a strict height restriction area, but leave the CBD alone? And what exactly are the ACC achieving by having certain restrictions, is it just conservitism? I think it's beyond ridiculous that we can't currently have a building built the same size and/or HIGHER than Westpac house. I understand the economic downturn has effected development and put projects like Spire and Currie Street Glass tower (which were examples we are sort of heading in the right direction) on hold, but still.

The issue is emergency flight paths, not just the typical take-off/landing path highlighted in your post. Aircraft must be able to safely "circle back" to Adelaide airport should problems be encountered soon after take-off, and dodging super tall buildings in the CBD is a complexity most pilots could do without.

That being said, we (S-A) strongly believe there is scope for increasing CBD height allowances, hence our recent submission to the council: http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... 135#p59130. Please read.

monotonehell wrote:The market has handled small to medium moves, like SA Water and DEH moving to Vic Sq

Where in Victoria Square are DEH housed?

iTouch(myself) wrote:

I did say that the current state admin building, Wakefield House and the Education Department buildings should be converted into apartments. This would help solve the problem that is the dead heart of Adelaide which is Victoria Square.

And mate, you've met me before in person, so you can vouch that I'm not an old man, and despite how much I love this city I cannot honestly say that I can see a private sector tenant requiring 40 000sqm2 in the next few decades, so call me impatient, but I want to see a new tallest whilst I can still walk and see!

can you foresee another building 100m+ other then Spire, Rundle and Currie in the next few decades?

Of course. With the improving economy I think there will be a couple more 100m+ buildings, particularly in the residential market. However, I am doubtful of a 135m+ one.

However, no-one can predict the future, so my prediction is as good as anyone elses.

rhino wrote:

monotonehell wrote:The market has handled small to medium moves, like SA Water and DEH moving to Vic Sq

Where in Victoria Square are DEH housed?

In the new SAWater building.

(Hang on my abbreviation might be wrong, what's the state authority for environmental issues and heritage?)

monotonehell wrote:

rhino wrote:

monotonehell wrote:The market has handled small to medium moves, like SA Water and DEH moving to Vic Sq

Where in Victoria Square are DEH housed?

In the new SAWater building.

(Hang on my abbreviation might be wrong, what's the state authority for environmental issues and heritage?)

Hmmm .... according to the DEH website, only the EPA is housed in Vic Square, at 250 Vic Square - is that the SAWater Building? (the EPA used to be housed in SAWater House, on Grenfell St).

The issue is emergency flight paths, not just the typical take-off/landing path highlighted in your post. Aircraft must be able to safely "circle back" to Adelaide airport should problems be encountered soon after take-off, and dodging super tall buildings in the CBD is a complexity most pilots could do without.

That being said, we (S-A) strongly believe there is scope for increasing CBD height allowances, hence our recent submission to the council: http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... 135#p59130. Please read.

Whats the update with that? Has the council responded?

Wayno wrote: The issue is emergency flight paths, not just the typical take-off/landing path highlighted in your post. Aircraft must be able to safely "circle back" to Adelaide airport should problems be encountered soon after take-off, and dodging super tall buildings in the CBD is a complexity most pilots could do without.

I don't recall seeing planes take off towards the city - do they do that? I've only seen them take off over the sea, and approach from the North Adelaide direction.

rhino wrote:

Wayno wrote: The issue is emergency flight paths, not just the typical take-off/landing path highlighted in your post. Aircraft must be able to safely "circle back" to Adelaide airport should problems be encountered soon after take-off, and dodging super tall buildings in the CBD is a complexity most pilots could do without.

I don't recall seeing planes take off towards the city - do they do that? I've only seen them take off over the sea, and approach from the North Adelaide direction.

They do take off to the north east from time to time depending on the wind direction, otherwise they usually take off towards the south west.

AG wrote:

rhino wrote:I don't recall seeing planes take off towards the city - do they do that? I've only seen them take off over the sea, and approach from the North Adelaide direction.

They do take off to the north east from time to time depending on the wind direction, otherwise they usually take off towards the south west.

And sometimes, after a take off to the NE, they make huge right-hand turns that puts them right over the centre of town. One morning a week or so ago I watched a good half dozen flights following that pattern.

And how much higher than Westpac tower were they? (Approx. - of course!). This seems to me to be the pertinent point.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

skyliner wrote:And how much higher than Westpac tower were they? (Approx. - of course!). This seems to me to be the pertinent point.

More pertinent might be how low could one be, with mechanical troubles, and still make it back to the airport...

Excusing the fact that this is my desktop wallpaper; since I can't find the location of the original image file... but just to give you an idea, this is typically how low a plane flies over the Adelaide CBD. And, believe me, I've seen them fly much lower.

Shuz wrote:... this is typically how low a plane flies over the Adelaide CBD. And, believe me, I've seen them fly much lower.

Yes, I was taken aback by how low these planes were.