News & Discussion: Low/Mid-Rise CBD Development

[crawf]

The 2st building on Light Square is nothing special in person

[Ben]

Small new development on Franklin St - The Vitality.

Type: Development Application Received
Application Number: DA/502/2009
Lodgement Date: 9/07/2009
Location: 242-248 Franklin Street, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: Construct 5 level and 3 level mixed use building containing ground floor retail and carparking with apartments on upper 4 levels and use 3 level building as offices.

Name: The Vitality

Address: 242 - 248 Franklin Street Adelaide SA 5000

Value: $9,800,000

Description:

Located in the fast growing western side of Adelaide CBD. So close to the park and Central Market. The Vitality offers you the very best city living.

The Vitality has been divided into three different parts: The Student Apartment; The Office building and the 8 individual Townhouse.

[Norman]

Google Street View shows the site as an empty site. Good to see it being filled up with something like this.

[Ben]

Google Street View shows the site as an empty site. Good to see it being filled up with something like this.

Yes I could be wrong but is this the site of the "Space" sales office? As that was recently taken down. I assume it's not going ahead anymore.

[Ben]

Looks like the DAC will approve the following development on thursday. However I don;t think we will see any action any time soon as SABA are about to open their second stand alone store on this site in the next month. Rundle Street is starting to get back the big labels again.

1.
Application
•Proposal is to demolish an existing two storey building and construct a four storey building, with retail at ground floor and three stories above as hotel.
•Site is on the corner of Rundle Street and Union Street in the East End of Adelaide.
•The Commission is the authority for development in the “East End” area.
•The proposal is a “merit” assessment.

2.
Key Issues
•The Council Panel does not support the proposal as it demolishes a building the Panel considers to be of heritage value. Note the building is neither state or local heritage listed.
•The Council Panel is concerned about noise from the Hotel.
•The Development Plan for the area envisages a mix of uses including hotels, shops, cafes and a vibrant street life.
•The proposal complies with Development Plan height limits.

3.
Report Prepared by Gabrielle McMahon

4.
The recommendation to GRANT CONSENT is supported
•The proposal in land use terms is consistent with the Development Plan.
•The proposal meets height limits.
•The building to be demolished is not heritage listed. The Heritage Branch does not object to the replacement building, subject to some design conditions.
•The recommended reserve matters and conditions deal with the design issues raised by the Council Panel and Heritage SA.

[AtD]

That's a shame. I hope it doesn't go ahead.

[Norman]

A distance shot to the CMI Toyota Showroom under construction. Might get a few more photos later this week.

High Resolution

[Omicron]

I object to the lack of objection from the Heritage Branch. The entire intrinsic appeal of Rundle St. as a historically and architecturally-significant strip is based on the almost uninterrupted stretch of character-laden buildings from east to west, without any one building being of exemplary heritage value. To cross out buildings here and there devalues the whole area.

[Ben]

Government over-rules hotel rejection

MATT WILLIAMS

July 24, 2009 12:01am

PLANS for a multi-million dollar hotel in Rundle St have been endorsed by the independent Development Assessment Commission - two weeks after Adelaide City Council rejected the project.

The plans submitted by the Rundle East Company, owned by property developers Theo Maras and Bill Manos, were "not supported" by council's Development Assessment Panel on July 6.

A report of the State Government's DAC, however, states it supports the four-storey, 21-room hotel plan, subject to various conditions.

The development involves demolishing a two-storey building on the corner of Rundle and Union streets.

Council determined it was a "distinctive" building of historic and commercial character and demolition "would be at odds with the desired character for the East End policy".

Before deliberating on the hotel plan, the council excluded the public so its discussion would "remain confidential".

The building is next to the Nova cinema complex and near the State Heritage-listed former Adelaide Fruit and Produce Exchange building.

The DAC report says the Heritage Branch "raised no objection to the proposal" and the Government's Urban Design Unit found it "has the potential to offer much in terms of the streetscape, built form and land use." If the hotel is built, two retail shops will make up the ground floor.

Council has been criticised for refusing to support development applications, most recently a 13-storey office block in Light Square because it would be "a few storeys too high" and would "stick out like a very tall sore thumb".

The Government, in July last year, stripped council of its planning powers for projects of more than $10 million. Council since has provided comments and recommendations to the DAC on such developments.

[Briggzy_03]

Isn't this development under the 10 mill mark? Hopefully it is, the ACC got the decision right this time round.

Btw, Adelaide Now is running the story with the headline: "Council gets it wrong - again", do the reporters even try and compare what's currently there to what is being proposed or are they just looking for some good ol' ACC bashing?

[Just build it]

Bland to the core. I still can't get over the design of the second level facing Rundle. Awful. The fins on the roof...cues to modern design(?)........ugh. This is the type of development I could do without TBH.

So is it going to be a half decent hotel or a lowly backpackers?

[Mants]

this new proposal really does make a mockery of the existing building.

and in some ways the ACC could be to blame for the approval of this development. it appears that recently, the ACC have been "anti-everything", it's only natural that they receive some backlash from the public, and in turn, the DAC probably thinks theyre a joke, hence offering their support to new proposals regardless of their architectural merit, or how they empathise with the surrounding area.

[adam_stuckey]

this new proposal really does make a mockery of the existing building.

and in some ways the ACC could be to blame for the approval of this development. it appears that recently, the ACC have been "anti-everything", it's only natural that they receive some backlash from the public, and in turn, the DAC probably thinks theyre a joke, hence offering their support to new proposals regardless of their architectural merit, or how they empathise with the surrounding area.

I reckon its due to the Economic climate the DAC think anything is better than nothing at all. As far as jobs in construction go

[Ben]

I wouldn't worry too much guys as I said previously this building has recently been leased to SABA who are currently fitting it out. Usually a 5 year lease.

[adam_stuckey]

Thats what i forgot to say. Also with all the approvals going on i wouldn't be surprised if only half of all that get approved by the DAC actually get built, just like the ACC approvals