[U/C] Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Message
Author
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4498
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 389 times
Been thanked: 545 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#976 Post by rev » Fri May 01, 2020 3:45 am

Neko Neko Peko Peko wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 3:01 pm
how good is he wrote:
Thu Apr 30, 2020 11:15 am
While I agree with your points the reality is that all the buildings there have been built at very different times throughout history. The buildings you mention are built and reflect the 1900s, 1970, 1980s, 1990s, 2020 etc. Combine this with different owners/stakeholders all with different agendas and all in a confined environment and I can't see much alternative to the outcome we have got.
This is a good point.

The railway station and parliament house were both built at the outset of the 1900s? Before many modern building technologies and styles were introduced. For a newer building to not be "out of place" would cost a tonne to match the materials used back in the day, and we'd continue have a city full of buildings no higher, innovative or livable than those originally built during Adelaide's settlement..

The only way to stop new buildings being "out of place" is to not build them at all... or for buildings to be designed more sympathetically with heritage in mind? I am not sure what people exactly mean when they say something is out of place?
Its all in a poor location, and there is overall poor planning or lack of. Which is a constant theme here in Adelaide.

Ideally you'd have the gardens of government house continuing around the parliament. Even better would be for parliament to be perhaps where the parade ground is and the gardens continuing that way.
Heck why don't they build a new parliament there? What have we got to lose at this point its not like this state is moving forward. Perhaps a small reset is what's needed. Could use the exterior of the current parliament to build a hotel tower above or some office space or appartments.

A shake up wouldnt be a bad thing, either nothing much will change or we will start moving forwards again with a renewed confidence that most od us have never seen in our time in SA.

User avatar
Norman
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5954
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:06 pm
Has thanked: 843 times
Been thanked: 1623 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#977 Post by Norman » Fri May 01, 2020 12:28 pm

Some posts have been moved to the Beer Garden. Let's get back on topic.

Does anyone know who the tenant(s) of the office tower are?

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 767 times
Been thanked: 381 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#978 Post by SRW » Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm

Norman wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 12:28 pm
Does anyone know who the tenant(s) of the office tower are?
I hope it's someone like SGIC or the state government. I think it would deeply unseemly for a big miner (e.g. SANTOS) or big developer to have naming rights towering over parliament; with the casino right beside, it would be a pretty shocking visual metaphor of the influence of corporate money over power.

I note that Treasury Wine Estates is looking to demerge the Penfolds brand into a separate and larger company. I know there are arguments both ways about whether it's a good use of money, but I think the state government should be pitching for them to based here. It'd be cool to see either of those names promiently on the skyline.
Keep Adelaide Weird

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2139
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 255 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#979 Post by claybro » Fri May 01, 2020 3:08 pm

SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm
Norman wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 12:28 pm
Does anyone know who the tenant(s) of the office tower are?
I hope it's someone like SGIC or the state government. I think it would deeply unseemly for a big miner (e.g. SANTOS) or big developer to have naming rights towering over parliament; with the casino right beside, it would be a pretty shocking visual metaphor of the influence of corporate money over power.

I note that Treasury Wine Estates is looking to demerge the Penfolds brand into a separate and larger company. I know there are arguments both ways about whether it's a good use of money, but I think the state government should be pitching for them to based here. It'd be cool to see either of those names promiently on the skyline.
So a mining company is a bad look, but a large wine company is ok? Not sure I understand the logic. Don't fret about SANTOS being up there to be a "bad look" BTW.. they are moving most of their operations to Brisbane where presumably they have no such concerns.

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 767 times
Been thanked: 381 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#980 Post by SRW » Fri May 01, 2020 3:33 pm

claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:08 pm
SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm
Norman wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 12:28 pm
Does anyone know who the tenant(s) of the office tower are?
I hope it's someone like SGIC or the state government. I think it would deeply unseemly for a big miner (e.g. SANTOS) or big developer to have naming rights towering over parliament; with the casino right beside, it would be a pretty shocking visual metaphor of the influence of corporate money over power.

I note that Treasury Wine Estates is looking to demerge the Penfolds brand into a separate and larger company. I know there are arguments both ways about whether it's a good use of money, but I think the state government should be pitching for them to based here. It'd be cool to see either of those names prominently on the skyline.
So a mining company is a bad look, but a large wine company is ok? Not sure I understand the logic. Don't fret about SANTOS being up there to be a "bad look" BTW.. they are moving most of their operations to Brisbane where presumably they have no such concerns.
Yes. The two biggest legislative fights in SA at the moment (and in recent times) relate to mining and development, and even a quick perusal of declared political donations and the lobbyist register will indicate who's doing the leaning. But, as I said, it's my opinion of what's unseemly and hope to avoid it, not the measure by which the building will actually be tenanted.
Keep Adelaide Weird

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2139
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 255 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#981 Post by claybro » Fri May 01, 2020 4:57 pm

SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:33 pm
claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:08 pm
SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm


I hope it's someone like SGIC or the state government. I think it would deeply unseemly for a big miner (e.g. SANTOS) or big developer to have naming rights towering over parliament; with the casino right beside, it would be a pretty shocking visual metaphor of the influence of corporate money over power.

I note that Treasury Wine Estates is looking to demerge the Penfolds brand into a separate and larger company. I know there are arguments both ways about whether it's a good use of money, but I think the state government should be pitching for them to based here. It'd be cool to see either of those names prominently on the skyline.
So a mining company is a bad look, but a large wine company is ok? Not sure I understand the logic. Don't fret about SANTOS being up there to be a "bad look" BTW.. they are moving most of their operations to Brisbane where presumably they have no such concerns.
Yes. The two biggest legislative fights in SA at the moment (and in recent times) relate to mining and development, and even a quick perusal of declared political donations and the lobbyist register will indicate who's doing the leaning. But, as I said, it's my opinion of what's unseemly and hope to avoid it, not the measure by which the building will actually be tenanted.
God forbid SA should be troubled by too much mining influence. But sure... let's fill this building with public servants and hangers on, less anyone should think there was something shonky going on.

User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4498
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 389 times
Been thanked: 545 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#982 Post by rev » Fri May 01, 2020 5:12 pm

Why does the building need naming rights, or a big logo at the top?
I think it would be a lot more visually appealing if lights were left on inside the building at night.

User avatar
Algernon
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1181
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Moravia
Has thanked: 350 times
Been thanked: 165 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#983 Post by Algernon » Fri May 01, 2020 5:38 pm

SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 2:14 pm
Norman wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 12:28 pm
Does anyone know who the tenant(s) of the office tower are?
I hope it's someone like SGIC or the state government. I think it would deeply unseemly for a big miner (e.g. SANTOS) or big developer to have naming rights towering over parliament; with the casino right beside, it would be a pretty shocking visual metaphor of the influence of corporate money over power.
Back in the day there was a big 'my budget' sign on the building over the road from parliament and it was a pretty fkn apt visual metaphor

User avatar
SRW
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 9:42 pm
Location: City
Has thanked: 767 times
Been thanked: 381 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#984 Post by SRW » Fri May 01, 2020 10:14 pm

claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 4:57 pm
SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:33 pm
claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:08 pm


So a mining company is a bad look, but a large wine company is ok? Not sure I understand the logic. Don't fret about SANTOS being up there to be a "bad look" BTW.. they are moving most of their operations to Brisbane where presumably they have no such concerns.
Yes. The two biggest legislative fights in SA at the moment (and in recent times) relate to mining and development, and even a quick perusal of declared political donations and the lobbyist register will indicate who's doing the leaning. But, as I said, it's my opinion of what's unseemly and hope to avoid it, not the measure by which the building will actually be tenanted.
God forbid SA should be troubled by too much mining influence. But sure... let's fill this building with public servants and hangers on, less anyone should think there was something shonky going on.
Oh, so this is your idea of logic :toilet:
Keep Adelaide Weird

User avatar
ChillyPhilly
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 1755
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:35 pm
Location: Adder-Laid, South Australia.
Has thanked: 303 times
Been thanked: 633 times
Contact:

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#985 Post by ChillyPhilly » Fri May 01, 2020 10:18 pm

I wonder if ABC, Channel 44 and other tenants would be keen to shift out of Collinswood...
Our state, our city, our future.

All views expressed on this forum are my own.

citywatcher
Legendary Member!
Posts: 660
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 84 times

[U/C] Re: [U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#986 Post by citywatcher » Fri May 01, 2020 10:50 pm

SRW wrote:
claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 4:57 pm
SRW wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 3:33 pm
Yes. The two biggest legislative fights in SA at the moment (and in recent times) relate to mining and development, and even a quick perusal of declared political donations and the lobbyist register will indicate who's doing the leaning. But, as I said, it's my opinion of what's unseemly and hope to avoid it, not the measure by which the building will actually be tenanted.
God forbid SA should be troubled by too much mining influence. But sure... let's fill this building with public servants and hangers on, less anyone should think there was something shonky going on.
Oh, so this is your idea of logic :toilet:
X2

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk


cmet
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 146
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:03 pm
Been thanked: 111 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#987 Post by cmet » Sat May 02, 2020 10:45 am

rev wrote:Why does the building need naming rights, or a big logo at the top?
I think it would be a lot more visually appealing if lights were left on inside the building at night.
Because the tenants pay good money for it.

Jaymz
Legendary Member!
Posts: 621
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 5:12 pm
Has thanked: 45 times
Been thanked: 88 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#988 Post by Jaymz » Sat May 02, 2020 12:28 pm

I for one definitely hope any type of Govt. Department doesn't take up space in the new tower, although sadly, it seems like a given in Adelaide to get a major office tower off the ground, aka City Central 2 and 3 (ATO and Attorney Generals Office).

claybro
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2139
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 9:16 pm
Has thanked: 57 times
Been thanked: 255 times

[U/C] Re: [U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#989 Post by claybro » Sat May 02, 2020 12:55 pm

citywatcher wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 10:50 pm
SRW wrote:
claybro wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 4:57 pm


God forbid SA should be troubled by too much mining influence. But sure... let's fill this building with public servants and hangers on, less anyone should think there was something shonky going on.
Oh, so this is your idea of logic :toilet:
X2

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk
So you would actually rather a new tower filled with public servants, costing additional millions in rent for you the taxpayer, rather than have a mining company pay to rent the office space and have its logo on top in case there is a conflict of interest.? If that kind of anti mining sentiment is the norm over there, no wonder SANTOS is packing up for Brisbane.

User avatar
gnrc_louis
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 250
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:04 pm
Location: Grange
Has thanked: 232 times
Been thanked: 71 times

[U/C] Re: Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

#990 Post by gnrc_louis » Sat May 02, 2020 1:07 pm

Jaymz wrote:
Sat May 02, 2020 12:28 pm
I for one definitely hope any type of Govt. Department doesn't take up space in the new tower, although sadly, it seems like a given in Adelaide to get a major office tower off the ground, aka City Central 2 and 3 (ATO and Attorney Generals Office).
Why? What is wrong with government tenants? Government jobs provide workers with reasonably good, stable incomes in fair working conditions. Also Covid has further reiterated the important role Government plays in the economy in general.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests