Sensational-Adelaide.com

Fencing is up and the developer has stated an intention to demolish Shed 26 this coming week.

Meanwhile a very wide cross section of the community is appealing for a reprieve.

https://indaily.com.au/news/2019/05/03/ ... ue-effort/

https://indaily.com.au/opinion/2019/05/ ... g-shed-26/

Very pleased to have got a call from Port Adelaide Plaza, offering 3 masts to the ship. The masts are part of the older buildings that are being pulled down, and which we will be able use on the 'City of Adelaide'. Thank you for thinking of us. As a volunteer organisation which is not government funded we appreciate the support. #shipcityofadelaide #TheCityofAdelaideclippership
https://www.facebook.com/ClipperShipCoA ... 1880924948

Not sure if this has been posted...do we have a Port Adelaide Plaza thread?

rev wrote: ↑

Mon May 06, 2019 10:02 am

Not sure if this has been posted...do we have a Port Adelaide Plaza thread?

Don't think so just been posting in this thread.

State Government received EOI for Fletcher’s Slip that could have kept Shed 26

A major South Australian developer submitted an expression of interest for Fletcher’s Slip that included the possible retention of Shed 26 at Port Adelaide, it can be revealed.

Correspondence seen by The Advertiser shows Starfish Developments — which is also constructing a $168 million housing estate at Dock One in Port Adelaide — would likely have kept the last remaining boat shed on the Port Adelaide inner harbour had it won the development.

The land was ultimately sold to Cedar Woods — which has begun demolition of the shed — for a total of $10 across five titles by the previous Labor government.

As part of its submission to Renewal SA, Starfish Developments said it wanted to retain Shed 26, subject to assessment of the building’s safety.

The sawtooth shed would have been used as a community space — not for housing.

As part of the Dock One development, Starfish will redevelop the old Harbours Board building — the tallest building in Port Adelaide — into a boutique hotel to the tune of $30 million.

Local activist Emma Webb, who has been involved with the campaign to save Shed 26, said the revelation was “deeply disappointing”.

“We’ve known that Starfish are investing $30 million in the Harbours Board building and have shown themselves to be interested in the heritage and character of the area,” Ms Webb said.

“The fact they themselves can see how the shed could have been adaptively reused … shows that it’s possible to envision a future for Shed 26.

“I understand why the State Government at the time wanted to give contracts to different developers … however we need to now be looking as how we do not have this happen ever again because it’s outrageous.”

Demolition of Shed 26 began this month but has been delayed due to the discovery of loose asbestos.

The SA Heritage Council in March found the shed met four of the seven criteria for state heritage listing.

Environment Minister David Speirs last month overturned the heritage listing on the basis of public interest — which is within his powers.

A Starfish Developments representative declined to comment.

The Planning Department was contacted for comment.

I really think it's time to move on from this shed. So Starfish said in their original submission they wanted to keep the shed "if possible" . How is this even relevant, when the current developer also wanted to keep the shed " if possible" then guess what.. it's riddled with asbestos etc etc. time for the action groups to regroup, and make sure that everything possible is being done to protect and develope the real heritage of the woolstores and the pidgeon poo infested buildings along St Vincent street. Now they ARE worth saving at all cost. Move on people.

claybro wrote: ↑

Mon May 27, 2019 4:09 pm

I really think it's time to move on from this shed. So Starfish said in their original submission they wanted to keep the shed "if possible" . How is this even relevant, when the current developer also wanted to keep the shed " if possible" then guess what.. it's riddled with asbestos etc etc. time for the action groups to regroup, and make sure that everything possible is being done to protect and develope the real heritage of the woolstores and the pidgeon poo infested buildings along St Vincent street. Now they ARE worth saving at all cost. Move on people.

Shed 26 was declared “real heritage” by the Heritage Council and got trashed by the Minister of the Environment in favour of a developer. Where does that leave the whole heritage program? Similarly trashed I would suggest. Regardless, which St Vincent St buildings and wool stores are you interested in?

The shed's a bit of a difficult one in my opinion - I like it from an architectural perspective in the context of the Port and such a large space does offer both opportunities and problems with activation - I think to be successful it really needs a large-scale drawcard tenant such as a maritime museum or similar, as opposed to trying to activate such a large space with pop up markets etc such as at Plant 4 in Bowden (this space is so much bigger).

One of the problems I can see with retention is what would actually be left of the original structure after restoration? The external cladding looks like it needs to be completely renewed and, if the asbestos roof is decayed to a state where loose asbestos has been found inside the building, the roof sheeting will need to be replaced too. So all that would be left of the original shed would be the metal frame which, according to the developers (so perhaps take with a pinch of salt), needs repair too.

Brick and stone buildings are generally much easier to justify retention as you're usually left with a lot more original material, even after a full restoration. With a shed though, after you've replaced the roof and the walls and some of the frame, is what's left still heritage?

Random Port related question - the former Observation structure from the old Jervois Bridge was removed before the new government building was built behind the Fishermans Wharf building and Quest. I read recently that the tower was supposed to be re-erected next to Harts Mill but nothing has happened. Does any one know what happened to this structure? Or is it going to become another Gawler Railway Station canopy issue where the canopy was removed but never re-instated...

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Wed May 29, 2019 8:42 am

Brick and stone buildings are generally much easier to justify retention as you're usually left with a lot more original material, even after a full restoration. With a shed though, after you've replaced the roof and the walls and some of the frame, is what's left still heritage?

Just like the proverbial grandfather's axe. The head's been replaced twice and the handle replaced five times, but it's still my grandfather's original axe.

Couldn't find the development application myself, so you have to make do with a Messenger article:

Plans lodged for $30 million hotel in old DMH building at Port Adelaide
https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/messenge ... 35621eccdb

Plans for the transformation of the derelict Marine and Harbors building at Port Adelaide into a $30 million boutique hotel have been lodged with the State Government.

The 10-storey building, which has been vacant for more than two decades, would be turned into a 71-room hotel — plus another 10 floating rooms directly over the Port River which would each have their own landings, moorings and pontoons.

The accommodation would include a rooftop bar, restaurant and outdoor cinema.

It would form part of the $168 million Dock One housing development, being built by Starfish Developments.



Starfish was in negotiations with a number of international hotel chains to operate the building in conjunction with Starfish.

The hotel was expected to open next year.

Starfish Developments managing director Damon Nagel believed the hotel would help attract more people to Port Adelaide and help revive a neglected corner of the Port.

“Our focus as a developer is always to break new ground, to create enticing and attractive places to live, work and visit that build on the foundations that already exist in the community and locality,” Mr Nagel said.

Architect Enzo Caroscio, who is working on the Dock One project, said the board-formed concrete building was an “outstanding example” of 1970s “stripped-down brutalist architecture”.

“It’s great to have the rare opportunity to retain such an iconic structure, with a contemporary reinterpretation to bring it up to date,” Mr Caroscio said.

The building was constructed in 1971.

Since the Department of Marine and Harbors left it in the mid ’90s, it has occasionally been used for Star Force training.

Starfish last year won approval from the State Government’s development panel for the first stage of its Dock One development.

At its completion, the development will feature 750 homes in townhouses and apartments along with public spaces including a waterside piazza and boardwalk.

Honey of a City wrote: ↑

Tue May 28, 2019 6:43 pm

claybro wrote: ↑

Mon May 27, 2019 4:09 pm

I really think it's time to move on from this shed. So Starfish said in their original submission they wanted to keep the shed "if possible" . How is this even relevant, when the current developer also wanted to keep the shed " if possible" then guess what.. it's riddled with asbestos etc etc. time for the action groups to regroup, and make sure that everything possible is being done to protect and develope the real heritage of the woolstores and the pidgeon poo infested buildings along St Vincent street. Now they ARE worth saving at all cost. Move on people.

Shed 26 was declared “real heritage” by the Heritage Council and got trashed by the Minister of the Environment in favour of a developer. Where does that leave the whole heritage program? Similarly trashed I would suggest. Regardless, which St Vincent St buildings and wool stores are you interested in?

St Vincent st.. south side between Black diamond corner and Nelson st, and the old warehouses in the SE corner area of the port behind the railway museum. Even the restored black diamond corner building, whilst being saved from its former perilous state, was not really restored with sympathy to its heritage shopfronts, leadlighting etc. these are the fights the heritage groups should be starting now to put developers on notice.

claybro wrote: ↑

Wed May 29, 2019 10:45 pm

Honey of a City wrote: ↑

Tue May 28, 2019 6:43 pm

claybro wrote: ↑

Mon May 27, 2019 4:09 pm

I really think it's time to move on from this shed. So Starfish said in their original submission they wanted to keep the shed "if possible" . How is this even relevant, when the current developer also wanted to keep the shed " if possible" then guess what.. it's riddled with asbestos etc etc. time for the action groups to regroup, and make sure that everything possible is being done to protect and develope the real heritage of the woolstores and the pidgeon poo infested buildings along St Vincent street. Now they ARE worth saving at all cost. Move on people.

Shed 26 was declared “real heritage” by the Heritage Council and got trashed by the Minister of the Environment in favour of a developer. Where does that leave the whole heritage program? Similarly trashed I would suggest. Regardless, which St Vincent St buildings and wool stores are you interested in?

St Vincent st.. south side between Black diamond corner and Nelson st, and the old warehouses in the SE corner area of the port behind the railway museum. Even the restored black diamond corner building, whilst being saved from its former perilous state, was not really restored with sympathy to its heritage shopfronts, leadlighting etc. these are the fights the heritage groups should be starting now to put developers on notice.

Agree. But now that we have the fuzzy statutory cop-out of “public interest” being flaunted by the government to overturn heritage listings on the principle that big developers’ interest and public interest are necessarily mutually inclusive the road to historically sensitive development has become much steeper. On a brighter note, the Black Diamond Corner to Nelson/Church Street stretch is looking a lot healthier recently with increased shop occupancy and the commencement of the redevelopment of the Globe Hotel. The small business revitalisation in the Port is changing the streetscape for the better within the context of its heritage, not in spite of it. Pirate Life Brewery have also produced an inspirational model for the adaptive re-use of the Baker St warehouse, and Starfish have just revealed their hotel plans for the old Marine and Harbours Building, respecting its signature architectural design and role. Where there’s vision and a will there’s a way. Meanwhile Shed 26 sits there silent waiting for the wrecker’s beat.

Rooftop looks great. Shame though that the surrounding area will be taken up by low rise residential only.

rev wrote: ↑

Thu May 30, 2019 10:46 am

Rooftop looks great. Shame though that the surrounding area will be taken up by low rise residential only.

Yep one of the reasons for the drive to save the structure. The site is pivotal on the sharp bend of the river, and visually linking the Inner harbour with Semaphore Road. Now it will most likely be a flat suburban sea of boxes. But who knows? The developer hasn’t publicised any master plan for that site yet, other than demolition.