Sensational-Adelaide.com

i must admit i'm not a fan eitheir. Very 80's and not enough glass. I also don't like or know why it is set back SO much from Hindley St. I understand it needs to be for ACC planning reasons but that much? Looks like it starts rising half way down the site.

I think its a good thing to know that so many people are either for or against this proposal - shows that it's architectural style is controversial and unique enough to warrant its own construction, just as the Commonwealth Law Courts did years ago. I think its fabulous, and I wholeheartedly agree with what Omicron said - that because there's few like it, all the more reason to let this one get up.

82m is a decent height - Just a tad shorter than City Central 1 without the spire.

not sold on it i'm afraid, but there are plenty of worse buildings around , will await a better render...

Shuz said: I think its a good thing to know that so many people are either for or against this proposal - shows that it's architectural style is controversial and unique enough to warrant its own construction, just as the Commonwealth Law Courts did years ago. I think its fabulous, and I wholeheartedly agree with what Omicron said - that because there's few like it, all the more reason to let this one get up.

I wouldn't say its architectural style is controversial, just dated.. so in that sense it is far different from the Commonwealth Law Courts..

Maybe will can turn Hindley ST into a tourist attraction in it's own right....

The street of bad and dated modern architecture. This building will be just up the road from Spark 88. Hindley St is a disgrace as it is and although this building will bring much needed life to the street. The look of the street is far from a street of a capital city in 2008. More like 1988.

i like it for no other reason that it brings variety to the skyline. More glass would make me happier.

Hmmmm, yeah, it's ok, I guess.

Shape looks good, however it could be brought up to a "more modern standard" with the correct use of materials.

Still love it! Something of an international 'feel'. Outside the box (no pun) and draws attention.
The northern face appears to be pretty close to North Tce. Good height impact from the north as well.

ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE

im hoping for some nice sa water style aluminum cladding.

I was hoping the more I looked at this, the more I'd like it, but it's the opposite really.
It's hideous.

As someone else suggested... I personally think the Commonwealth Law Courts building is hideous, but hey, it's controversial, is a great talking point, and is thought provoking and modern, whether you love it or hate it.

This proposal just screams "80's".
Actually... it just screams, full stop.

It's an ify one to judge - to like it or not to. It's still a little boxy, maybe it would have been nicer if the corner facing southwest was at a 45 degree angle with balconies wrapping around. There still seems to be a lot of bare cement. Would be nice if that was covered in aluminium panels (cladding), but I doubt they'd go for the extra expense. I do like the steel-framed glass roof. That's something that the old SA Water in Grenfell should have had!! As for set back from Hindley, I think that's fine, it follows ACC regulations and will benefit any building that goes up next door (on the two properties east). I like the western facade (which I would think will be the same for the northern one). Only real worry is the eastern facade, will it be bare cement? I have a bad suspicion the grand majority of it will.

Cheers

P.S. Wanted to add that the southern balconies (the ones that are stepped-back) could have glass balustrades instead of what seems cement plant boxes.

Ho Really wrote: P.S. Wanted to add that the southern balconies (the ones that are stepped-back) could have glass balustrades instead of what seems cement plant boxes.

While that would look great, I think there would be an issue of privacy there. I personally wouldn't want someone looking down at me while I'm relaxing on the balcony. If they are balconies, then that's why I assume the planter boxes are there.

Anyway despite all the controversy, I'm sure we can all agree this proposal looks MUCH better than Spark down the road.

Joely wrote:

Ho Really wrote: P.S. Wanted to add that the southern balconies (the ones that are stepped-back) could have glass balustrades instead of what seems cement plant boxes.

While that would look great, I think there would be an issue of privacy there. I personally wouldn't want someone looking down at me while I'm relaxing on the balcony. If they are balconies, then that's why I assume the planter boxes are there.

That's one probable reason, the other could be that they just want some greenery (maybe hanging plants). Privacy can be an issue to some and that's the unfortunate thing about stepped back balconies. One solution would be to have the balustrade set back, not up to the edge, or have an eave (louvre) that could also be useful for the midday sun in summer.

Anyway despite all the controversy, I'm sure we can all agree this proposal looks MUCH better than Spark down the road.

Too right.

Cheers

Render of the current proposal: I think this building could look spectacular, check out the ACROS building in Fukuoka City, Japan, not only aesthetically pleasing, but a big step towards sustainable design, as green roofs have better temperature regulation, thus saving on power for heating and cooling.

This is now on public notification. Hear are new renders. I'm more impressed now with these new renders.

The new renders look awesome, any doubts I had before have been resolved. Hopefully the ACC will be of the same opinion.