Sensational-Adelaide.com

regardless of whether or not you like the carpark, it's probably the best looking in adelaide
i enjoyed seeing the progression of the site over the years! thanks!

drsiggs, remember that there are two ways that people may be disappointed with a particular building on a particular site. First, it may be worse than what was there before, which is the worst outcome as it means that you're going backwards. Second, it may be better than what was there, but not as good as the site may have been used for, which is a wasted opportunity (aka the opportunity cost). For example, that's the complaint that many people on the site have for building the new hospital on the railyards.

And for me this is in the not-as-good-as-it-could-be bucket. Now that the construction equipment has come away from the site, it seems to have clarified things: it's a typical apartment building on top of a typical office building on top of a car park that offers us views of their grills and badges. My hope now is that this will at least be financially successful enough to encourage further development around the square (perhaps in a few years time) and we have the chance to be more demanding about how they turn out.

in what sense do you mean typical Prince George? Im assuming you mean the outside facade

oh wait.... it is taller than we thought!

For a mixed-use building, it's come off pretty well! I love it. And yes, thankyou to all those who did photos over the years. Marvellous building. I look forward to James Hines' next project(s). (Hint; taller, much taller )

Instead of the glass louvres over the carpark levels, maybe they should get all Rundle Lantern on its ass.

Something different to the Lantern of course, but the glass with views of corrugated steel tanks, concrete and cars' grills is what most people see at street level. This brings the aesthetics down on what is for the most part a really nice building.

I love it, except for the carpark levels.

This building is for sale (EOI) in today's Financial Review, boasting a 10 year govt lease, 4,000sqm net lettable space and a net income just shy of $1.6m pa with fixed 4% pa growth.

Also in today's AFR:
- Holiday Inn on Hindley St is up for sale (EOI)
- An office block at 79 Fullarton Rd, Kent Town, sold for $1.4m. The site is noted as being under-developed.

It's unusual for Adelaide to rate a mention in AFR's property section.

I really like this building. Its very contemporary, looks awesome, mixed use, and will help generate hype in the area.

Let just hope this type of development occurs more often.

Well done and congratulations to the developers.

Why not join the fanfare. I think this is a great building too and I don't think it's a typical apartment building at all.

I like what they've done with it. It's probably my favourite of the recent development so kudos to the developers.

Developments like these are bulking up the skyline, now we just need a couple more taller buildings to give Adelaide that real developed city look.

Benski81 wrote:Why not join the fanfare. I think this is a great building too and I don't think it's a typical apartment building at all.

I like what they've done with it. It's probably my favourite of the recent development so kudos to the developers.

Developments like these are bulking up the skyline, now we just need a couple more taller buildings to give Adelaide that real developed city look.

It is not just tall buildings that helps with the look, we need more people to be around the city, meaning more residential apartments in the city so people will live in the city and be around the city at all times. That to me, is what a developed city is than just tall buildings.

But I also welcome more modern buildings in the city.

Edgar wrote:

Benski81 wrote:Why not join the fanfare. I think this is a great building too and I don't think it's a typical apartment building at all.

I like what they've done with it. It's probably my favourite of the recent development so kudos to the developers.

Developments like these are bulking up the skyline, now we just need a couple more taller buildings to give Adelaide that real developed city look.

It is not just tall buildings that helps with the look, we need more people to be around the city, meaning more residential apartments in the city so people will live in the city and be around the city at all times. That to me, is what a developed city is than just tall buildings.

But I also welcome more modern buildings in the city.

Yeah totally agreed, I was more thinking when looking at the city from a distance. I saw a photo of Adelaide that was taken from a distance (I think it was earlier back in this thread) and the lack height was quite noticable.

jk1237 wrote:in what sense do you mean typical Prince George? Im assuming you mean the outside facade

Yes I do mean the facade, but not just that. I think that the office section seems eerily like another clone of city centre, and if the residential section was chopped off and flown over to Glenelg or Newport Quays it would hardly look out of place at all; from that point of view it seems very typical. And beyond that, it's typical in some more subtle ways. I don't mean this as an attack on the designers & builders: obviously they do take a lot of responsibility for how the building turns out, but everyone on this site knows that council, governments, the "market", and the wider public all have a part to play in what ultimately gets built in Adelaide.

Starting from the bottom and working our way up, I was interested to learn that blame for the carpark likely falls on the state government: back in 2006, Will posted some history of this plan, and he had learned that the original plans had included underground carpark; the DAC got cold-feet about that idea, and so we're stuck with multiple levels of carparking just above the street. I think that the building has at least tried to make a silk purse from that sow's ear (with the louvres rather than a blank concrete wall), but nothing's going to hide the fact that this building hasn't got as much street-appeal as it could have.

On the office levels, the building's from the big-empty-square school of design, waiting to get filled with desks, partitions, cubicles (or what have you) by the tenants: I can hardly think of anything more typical for an office than that. I particularly dislike this layout because it limits the amount of natural light that will be shared by the occupants. You can judge the amount of light that reaches the centre of a building by comparing the floor area with the perimeter: the more outside surface you've got compared to the amount of inside space, the more light can get in. A square has a very poor perimeter-to-area ratio compared to more "interesting" shapes; as a result, fewer people in the office will get to enjoy natural light. In fact, I guarantee that the window desks/offices will become status symbols - do you suppose the views of Hindmarsh Sq will be given to the managers or the recptionists?

Also, it seems to be another hermetically sealed box, because having built all that north and east facing glass we need high-efficiency aircon. Well I'm pleased to see that the opening window is making a comeback - take a look at this recent building just north of downtown Seattle. Notice too its central courtyard that gives a light channel instead of what would have been a dark central area.

In the residential section, I dislike that, by starting so far above the street, it's been so separated from the city around it. It's almost like a gated community in the sky. What really appeals to me about urban settings is that public/private mix, those places where apartments are just above the street (or square, as the case may be) and the two have a certain amount of interaction. Maybe not much interaction, maybe just seeing that each other are there, but it's more than you get from seeing distant figures on the balconies of their ivory tower. I wonder if it would be plausible to arrange the stacking the other way around - put the resi bits at the bottom and the offices at the top?

And is there any "affordable" housing as part of this "major project"? Not as far as I can tell, it seems to just be 50-ish very expensive apartments so a hundred-odd people with six-figure salaries can walk to their offices (and still have parking for a couple of cars, but that's another story). Why did we need a major project to give a bunch of lawyers, dentists, and GMs some ritzy digs?

Prince George wrote:
And is there any "affordable" housing as part of this "major project"? Not as far as I can tell, it seems to just be 50-ish very expensive apartments so a hundred-odd people with six-figure salaries can walk to their offices (and still have parking for a couple of cars, but that's another story). Why did we need a major project to give a bunch of lawyers, dentists, and GMs some ritzy digs?

General Manager Omi would like his new city apartment building to be free of uncultured riff-raff, thank you. One does not live amongst the hired help.

GM Omi must also remember to pay royalties to Mister Cruise for the use of his third person, assuming GM Omi is not liquidated in the imminent Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.

Ten News have created a new projection image to put behind George Donikian for the Saturday Adelaide AFL news bullitens.

Its bright, bright blue so matches their weekday set and consists of a tram, some indistinguishable oval in the background and the just completed Conservatory on Hindmarsh building.

Very, very ominous timing because last time they replaced the background they stuck City Central (ANZ) on it just after that was completed.

This bldg looks particularly impressive on that corner - much better than the one before - and framed by open space and adding to the south side Grenfell St of high rise - I like the black western side as well. Got the tick from me guys!(Sorry for late response to this line of thinking - have not been on the site for a while).

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE