#Article: City Tower 'Would Draw' Tourists

[Mants]

Well thats where 150m+ buildings come into the picture. I'm a bit lost at what crown has to do with this, though yes Crown is awesome and done wonders for Melbourne. However Melbourne is 4 times the size of Adelaide, we already have a casino and we really don't have the demand for such a complex especially with the huge number of restaurant/entertainment/retail precincts around Adelaide.

you do realise that there was a time when Adelaide was up there with Melbourne and Sydney as one of Australia's most important cities. what has happened since the early 20th century to see our city rapidly decline in terms of popularity and image? why arent we making drastic changes in order to reverse this?

Going back to the original topic of 'ob towers' in Adelaide - If we are going to have one in Adelaide I would rather it on Mt Lofty (200m) or not at all. I know my idea is controversial, but I just cannot support a city observation tower, prefer a 200m building with a ob deck aswell as other things to boast the CBD for the locals and visitors.

no offence, but i think this is a bit of a dumb idea, you clearly havnt given it much thought. the current lookout is covered with fog half the year, one wouldnt even know there was a city below you. adding another "250-280m" to that height would be quite pointless, and it would spoil the beauty of the Mt Lofty ranges.

the idea of a CN/Centerpoint/Skytower styled observation deck, although tacky, is far better.

[AtD]

I’m not sold on this. I think the idea of an observation deck has been over done by other cities. It would definitely be a “me too” statement, and it would be hard to bring in some originality. I can’t see how this would draw in tourists. I think Melbourne has the best idea; have an observation deck on the top of an actual building.

Besides, both Canberra’s and Sydney’s are rather dated (and somewhat tacky). To be honest, I find Telstra Tower hideous. It’s worse up close, and worse still inside. I much prefer the natural look out at Mt. Ainslie to Telstra Tower.

I like Crawf’s Mt. Lofty tower idea, but I wouldn't put it as a priority for the state.

[Cam]

I went up to Mount Lofty last week and to me the observation facilities are inadequate. Too much growth on the viewing lines.

http://www.mtloftysummit.com/about.htm

Look at the panoramic photo at the bottom to see what a disaster it is.

A proper observation deck will give the observer a complete picture.

The idea of a gondolier chair lift is great , just need sufficient tourism to make it viable.

The city requires an iconic Tall Building ( not a tower ). The challenge is creating a building which honours Adelaide , a masterpiece that stands the test of time.

[monotonehell]

I’m not sold on this. I think the idea of an observation deck has been over done by other cities. It would definitely be a “me too” statement, and it would be hard to bring in some originality. I can’t see how this would draw in tourists. I think Melbourne has the best idea; have an observation deck on the top of an actual building.

Besides, both Canberra’s and Sydney’s are rather dated (and somewhat tacky). To be honest, I find Telstra Tower hideous. It’s worse up close, and worse still inside. I much prefer the natural look out at Mt. Ainslie to Telstra Tower...

AtD's statement pretty much mirrors my views on this subject. Observation Towers are so last century. Calling for one is tantamount to saying "Let's be different, like everyone else."

I think an observation deck that is incorporated into a useful tall building is a much better idea. ObTowers alone are terrible white elephants and are only good where you already have the other drawcards necessary to bring in great volumes of tourists. They are something else to do for tourists not a destination in their own.

An observation deck in an mixed use office/residential tower on the other hand is simply another tenant, instead of trying to support the maintenance of an entire tower on ticket sales, you would have other tenants to support the structure.

You could have a combination of an observation floor with retail opportunities, perhaps even a mezzanine restaurant. Would a mile high club food court work? If we ever get a annoyingly high skyscraper I'd say that the penultimate floor should be set aside for something along these lines.

[AtD]

Would a mile high club food court work?

Probably not. The main appeal of food courts is their convenience. I can't imagine your average busy office worker being patient enough for the elevator. The upper floors of Myer are a good example.

[monotonehell]

Would a mile high club food court work?

Probably not. The main appeal of food courts is their convenience. I can't imagine your average busy office worker being patient enough for the elevator. The upper floors of Myer are a good example.

Yeah that's why I posed it as a question, on one hand you have the usual thing that food courts need to be close to the action, but on the other hand would panorama views make it a preferred destination?

[AtD]

Yeah that's why I posed it as a question, on one hand you have the usual thing that food courts need to be close to the action, but on the other hand would panorama views make it a preferred destination?

Well they say 80% of a retailer's business comes from 20% of their customers. I'd suspect the novelty of the views would ware off after a while, so the regulars would stop bothering.

[crawf]

Well thats where 150m+ buildings come into the picture. I'm a bit lost at what crown has to do with this, though yes Crown is awesome and done wonders for Melbourne. However Melbourne is 4 times the size of Adelaide, we already have a casino and we really don't have the demand for such a complex especially with the huge number of restaurant/entertainment/retail precincts around Adelaide.

you do realise that there was a time when Adelaide was up there with Melbourne and Sydney as one of Australia's most important cities. what has happened since the early 20th century to see our city rapidly decline in terms of popularity and image? why arent we making drastic changes in order to reverse this?

Being more important has nothing to do with it, those cities have always had a greater population than Adelaide.

no offence, but i think this is a bit of a dumb idea, you clearly havnt given it much thought. the current lookout is covered with fog half the year, one wouldnt even know there was a city below you. adding another "250-280m" to that height would be quite pointless, and it would spoil the beauty of the Mt Lofty ranges.

the idea of a CN/Centerpoint/Skytower styled observation deck, although tacky, is far better.

I pass Mt Lofty summit 4-5 days a week and I can tell you that statement is nonsense. And I did say the ob deck would be around 30m above ground with the top of the tower at 200m.

Plus its a 'pie in the sky' dream.

I'm quite surprised hearing no tall towers coming from you also Crawfie. The CBD has been flagging for decades, we really need to step up to the plate and take it up another level.

I just can support the idea of of a observation tower in the CBD, however I am all up for taller buildings with one of them including a observation deck.

[Shuz]

I totally agree with whoever mentioned about the city skyline being built without an observation tower, and instead have a building with a deck atop. However, I think Adelaide should opt to have a cylindrical shaped tower (ala Space in Sydney) as its feature tower which has an ob deck atop so to fully enhance the '360' panoramic view of the city, and not like the Rialto/Eureka decks which are compromised by its square edges.

Does any city in the world have an observation deck within a cylindrical tower? If not, Adelaide could claim to a world first in this retrospect.

For those of you playing at home. Just think...

(c) Emporis

[flavze]

Hi there, first post. Only recently found this site, lovin it so far. Great to have some way of knowing whats happening or not happening in SA.

People say we need an "iconic" building an a 6 star hotel in adelaide, why not combine the two together.

Build a Hotel with two towers, one each side of the Torrens connected with a bridge at the top with a massive palatial suite, or a top class restruant high looking out at the river, parklands and the city.

It could have several bridges connecting the two towers, maybe even having a hanging section from the bridge with all glass walls with a 360 view for a restruant.

[Cruise]

Lol, a lot of you say building a stand alone observation tower should not be done "because everyone else has"

yet you all cry out for an inner city stadium, No one else has ever done that!!!

[monotonehell]

Lol, a lot of you say building a stand alone observation tower should not be done "because everyone else has"

yet you all cry out for an inner city stadium, No one else has ever done that!!!

Flawed is your logic, listen to Yoda you must....

People want something iconic, something that gives Adelaide an identity (apparently) but every other city has an ob.tower, and most were built last century. You're not going to make Adelaide's skyline look uniquely Adelaidean and iconic if you build something that looks just like Toronto, Seatle, Las Vegas, Sydney ... etc.

A stadium on the other hand is a practical (hopefully) piece of infrastructure with an economic purpose. Just as a railway line is, and most cities have those.

What we're looking for is something of architectural merit, that is unique and that has economic as well as cultural and touristic value. A tower whose only function is an ob.tower is a white elephant, there's no way it would be able to pay for itself, and these days you would never find a backer for such an undertaking, considering the history of these things.


Wouldn't a nice skyscraper, with a unique design, that contains an observation deck level be preferable? After all it not only gives Adelaide something unique that has much more chance of being economically feasible, but it also gives tourists something to mount.

(j'desire mont vortre tour! is that how it went?)

[Cruise]

Lol, a lot of you say building a stand alone observation tower should not be done "because everyone else has"

yet you all cry out for an inner city stadium, No one else has ever done that!!!

Flawed is your logic, listen to Yoda you must....

People want something iconic, something that gives Adelaide an identity (apparently) but every other city has an ob.tower, and most were built last century. You're not going to make Adelaide's skyline look uniquely Adelaidean and iconic if you build something that looks just like Toronto, Seatle, Las Vegas, Sydney ... etc.

A stadium on the other hand is a practical (hopefully) piece of infrastructure with an economic purpose. Just as a railway line is, and most cities have those.

What we're looking for is something of architectural merit, that is unique and that has economic as well as cultural and touristic value. A tower whose only function is an ob.tower is a white elephant, there's no way it would be able to pay for itself, and these days you would never find a backer for such an undertaking, considering the history of these things.


Wouldn't a nice skyscraper, with a unique design, that contains an observation deck level be preferable? After all it not only gives Adelaide something unique that has much more chance of being economically feasible, but it also gives tourists something to mount.

(j'desire mont vortre tour! is that how it went?)

I should have made my arguement clearer, i was talking about a stadium on the railyards, and seeing as most postcard pictures are taken from next to Mr. Light's statue a stadium would become that icon we are seeking, And to me that just seems tacky.

As for an observation deck on a tower with "architectural merit" (the main point being) I'm all for it. But where in the city would you position such a tower?

[Edgar]

To me, an observation deck at Mt. Lofty is a bad idea. We already have an observation area up there, all we need is just a few super magnifier up there and that is pretty much enough to cover what you would see from up there.

But to have an observation tower in Adelaide city itself makes more sense, why? Because the city is located in the middle, the beach is just a few kms away, so are the hills, so is the airport, so is the port. If you have an observation tower right in the middle of CBD, you can pretty much see every spots that I have just mentioned.

Just to add to Howie's photo, the traffic officers in Malaysia utilise the KL Tower as their traffic observation for the very busy everyday traffic in KL, where they then broadcast the report over the radio because they can simply observe the traffic status on major roads leading to the CBD.

[Howie]

And an observation tower in the heart of the CBD could provide everyone with next generation Wi-fi technologies (e.g. acting as a WiMax and 802.11n base station). Rather than building hotspots all over the CBD we could have one single WiMax tower that covers the whole CBD.. imagine that free city wide broadband.