[PRO] Festival Plaza Tower 2 | 149m | 38 Levels | Office

[ChillyPhilly]

You can have your say on the broad Festival Plaza public realm.

https://yoursay.sa.gov.au/festival-plaz ... newsletter

This is great reading on the second tower: https://yoursay.sa.gov.au/96090/widgets ... nts/295082

[abc]

I can foresee a future where this gets built and the Masonic tower doesn't... then Adelaide would be stuck with a high-rise 1 metre short of being its first skyscraper for probably the next 30 years by which time the definition will change to 200m. That would be the most Adelaide thing ever.

[Nort]

The fact that the documents go out of their way to argue that this development doesn't at all diminish the sites zoning as part of the parklands hints a lot at the sort of shady dealings that have gone on with this whole precinct.

[baytram366]

The whole thing was shady from the start. What would have been better for this site was more a Federation Square type development with buildings with at least their first few levels having attractions for people to look at for free or pay an admission price. Plonking purely office buildings there was never a good idea.

[Nathan]

The whole thing was shady from the start. What would have been better for this site was more a Federation Square type development with buildings with at least their first few levels having attractions for people to look at for free or pay an admission price. Plonking purely office buildings there was never a good idea.

Especially when we have cultural institutions that have been crying out for years (decades) for expanded space.

[Spotto]

That's what you get when you elect dodgy people like Malicious Mali.

A project that was started by Weatherill and mostly presided over by Marshall?

[ChillyPhilly]

That's what you get when you elect dodgy people like Malicious Mali.

The original vision (2015) for the Plaza had only one tower, and did hint at a three-level person-oriented building behind Parliament House. But this was purely part of the vision.

[HiTouch]

Back on topic: Duxton is selling the building that is home to 2KW. I wonder if they're predicting a loss of revenue from 2KW's main drawcard, the river views with this going up.

[rev]

Yeh I saw that, surprised how little it was picked up for.
The article mentioned them looking for office space in the cbd, not sure if that was implying they were needing or looking to sell that to fund that move or what.

[ChillyPhilly]

Back on topic: Duxton is selling the building that is home to 2KW. I wonder if they're predicting a loss of revenue from 2KW's main drawcard, the river views with this going up.

Good thought, I wonder if Sol at SkyCity is also stealing some business.

[rev]

Back on topic: Duxton is selling the building that is home to 2KW. I wonder if they're predicting a loss of revenue from 2KW's main drawcard, the river views with this going up.

Good thought, I wonder if Sol at SkyCity is also stealing some business.

There's a few options for rooftop bars now, sora is another new one.

[VinyTapestry849]

Lord Mayor is having a bitch and whinge about the second tower

Council want the building reduced in height to the same as or less then Festival tower 1. That request is expected to be ignored

Here’s the indaily piece:

Lord Mayor slams “unaesthetic” second festival tower
Adelaide’s Lord Mayor has taken aim at the 38-storey festival tower the state government has planned for being “thuggish in size” and “overpowering” the heritage of Parliament House.

Helen
Karakulak
Nov 07, 2024, updated Nov 07, 2024

Lomax-Smith is a vocal defender of heritage buildings and doesn't want to see the new development overshadowing Parliament House.

Jane Lomax-Smith made these comments when the council’s City Planning, Development and Business Affairs committee discussed their response to the state government’s Festival Plaza code amendment.

The Malinauskas government confirmed a second tower in April, which will be developed by Walker Corporation, the same developer responsible for the existing festival tower.


The government said the “sleek, modern” tower would have 36 floors of commercial office space, and “two floors of high quality food and beverage space with direct access from Festival Plaza”.

“I think the real issue about this is a heritage one,” Lomax-Smith told the committee on Tuesday night.

“There is a very important heritage building next door to it which is Parliament House and my dislike of this development, or the plan amendment is the fact that it’s unneighbourly, its unaesthetic, it’s overpowering and it’s thuggish in its size.

“I think we’ve got one and one is enough.”


The Festival Plaza code amendment has just closed for consultation and the government will review responses from the community and stakeholders before it’s adopted by the planning minister.

It doesn’t consider specific proposed developments, but it provides building height and design guidance for any future development in the Festival Plaza.

The council are largely unsupportive of the second tower, and in their response to the government consultation some of their suggestions include:

– Reduce the building’s maximum height to less than the height of the 29-level Festival Tower 1.
– Increase the setbacks from Parliament House to increase its visibility and retain valuable public space.
– Emphasise canopy and greening, pedestrian wayfinding and disability access in the design of the festival plaza area and create a safe night-time area for cultural events.
– Provide an architectural response that uses principles for economically sustainable development and improves surveillance of the laneways to the north and west of Parliament House.

Lomax-Smith said she thinks it’s “charming” to think they can move the setbacks, the minimum distance a building needs to be from a property line, but that the project has “reached the stage of no return”.

“I do think if it was two or three stories, I could just about bear it, but I do think a notion of another huge tower is actually an unaesthetic piece of vandalism,” she said.

Originally, the second tower was planned to be three storeys. In April, the government said the 38-storey tower “delivers an improved heritage outcome” because the three-storey option “would have obscured views of Parliament’s heritage facade and balcony entirely”.


A state government spokesperson told InDaily today “the proposal for the second tower includes a taller, more slender tower that allows for Parliament House to be seen and accessed, not blocked out”.

“The former Marshall Government signed a contract which would have seen construction of a three-storey retail building the height, length and width of Parliament House that would have obliterated all sight lines of the historic building from the North.

“The Festival Plaza Code Amendment focuses on providing clear building height and design guidance to maximise the remaining development site and make Festival Plaza a world-class hub for the arts, culture, tourism and entertainment.

“The proposed development is expected to draw a further 9,500 workers to the revitalised Riverbank Precinct – bringing $1.3 billion in economic activity to the area annually.

“The proposal for a second tower on Festival Plaza would create an additional 800 square metres of public space adjacent to Parliament House as well as the option of public civic space which could be used for arts and cultural events.”

Construction on the second tower is expected to begin in 2025 subject to planning approvals and tenancy agreements, with a completion date as early as mid-2027

[Patrick_27]

Lord Mayor is having a bitch and whinge about the second tower

Council want the building reduced in height to the same as or less then Festival tower 1. That request is expected to be ignored

Here’s the indaily piece:

Lord Mayor slams “unaesthetic” second festival tower
Adelaide’s Lord Mayor has taken aim at the 38-storey festival tower the state government has planned for being “thuggish in size” and “overpowering” the heritage of Parliament House.

Helen
Karakulak
Nov 07, 2024, updated Nov 07, 2024

Lomax-Smith is a vocal defender of heritage buildings and doesn't want to see the new development overshadowing Parliament House.

Jane Lomax-Smith made these comments when the council’s City Planning, Development and Business Affairs committee discussed their response to the state government’s Festival Plaza code amendment.

The Malinauskas government confirmed a second tower in April, which will be developed by Walker Corporation, the same developer responsible for the existing festival tower.


The government said the “sleek, modern” tower would have 36 floors of commercial office space, and “two floors of high quality food and beverage space with direct access from Festival Plaza”.

“I think the real issue about this is a heritage one,” Lomax-Smith told the committee on Tuesday night.

“There is a very important heritage building next door to it which is Parliament House and my dislike of this development, or the plan amendment is the fact that it’s unneighbourly, its unaesthetic, it’s overpowering and it’s thuggish in its size.

“I think we’ve got one and one is enough.”


The Festival Plaza code amendment has just closed for consultation and the government will review responses from the community and stakeholders before it’s adopted by the planning minister.

It doesn’t consider specific proposed developments, but it provides building height and design guidance for any future development in the Festival Plaza.

The council are largely unsupportive of the second tower, and in their response to the government consultation some of their suggestions include:

– Reduce the building’s maximum height to less than the height of the 29-level Festival Tower 1.
– Increase the setbacks from Parliament House to increase its visibility and retain valuable public space.
– Emphasise canopy and greening, pedestrian wayfinding and disability access in the design of the festival plaza area and create a safe night-time area for cultural events.
– Provide an architectural response that uses principles for economically sustainable development and improves surveillance of the laneways to the north and west of Parliament House.

Lomax-Smith said she thinks it’s “charming” to think they can move the setbacks, the minimum distance a building needs to be from a property line, but that the project has “reached the stage of no return”.

“I do think if it was two or three stories, I could just about bear it, but I do think a notion of another huge tower is actually an unaesthetic piece of vandalism,” she said.

Originally, the second tower was planned to be three storeys. In April, the government said the 38-storey tower “delivers an improved heritage outcome” because the three-storey option “would have obscured views of Parliament’s heritage facade and balcony entirely”.


A state government spokesperson told InDaily today “the proposal for the second tower includes a taller, more slender tower that allows for Parliament House to be seen and accessed, not blocked out”.

“The former Marshall Government signed a contract which would have seen construction of a three-storey retail building the height, length and width of Parliament House that would have obliterated all sight lines of the historic building from the North.

“The Festival Plaza Code Amendment focuses on providing clear building height and design guidance to maximise the remaining development site and make Festival Plaza a world-class hub for the arts, culture, tourism and entertainment.

“The proposed development is expected to draw a further 9,500 workers to the revitalised Riverbank Precinct – bringing $1.3 billion in economic activity to the area annually.

“The proposal for a second tower on Festival Plaza would create an additional 800 square metres of public space adjacent to Parliament House as well as the option of public civic space which could be used for arts and cultural events.”

Construction on the second tower is expected to begin in 2025 subject to planning approvals and tenancy agreements, with a completion date as early as mid-2027

Once again, spouting out bitter remarks and talking down about people (who are far more qualified than you) that are opposed to this development; as if you genuinely believe there is no legitimate reason that one might want this proposal to be scaled back or abandoned. Grow up.

[Algernon]

I wonder what the cut-off point is for a building to be labelled .......... thuggish

Just so we're clear here.... thuggish.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... h/thuggish

acting in a violent way, or looking violent:

Jesus h fuckin christ. Don't oppose it becase it's tall. Oppose it because it's gonna fuckin belt you one apprently. That is some building

[VinyTapestry849]

Once again, spouting out bitter remarks and talking down about people (who are far more qualified than you) that are opposed to this development; as if you genuinely believe there is no legitimate reason that one might want this proposal to be scaled back or abandoned. Grow up.

[Personal attacks removed]

The Government architects and ministers behind this tower are far more qualified to speak then the Lord Mayor who is elected to speak opinions. Thankfully the council will be ignored