[SWP] 51-57 Hutt Street | 49m | 13 Levels | Mixed

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Message
Author
Ben
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6317
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 216 times
Been thanked: 825 times

[SWP] 51-57 Hutt Street | 49m | 13 Levels | Mixed

#1 Post by Ben » Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:43 pm

I can see this one becoming controversial.
Type: Schedule 10
Application Number: S10/26/2016
Lodgement Date: 28/07/2016
Location: 51-57 Hutt Street, ADELAIDE SA 5000
Description: Demolish existing building and structures and construct a 12 level building comprising retail, commercial, 41 apartments and associated car parking.
Applicant Name:

PROTON DEVELOPMENTS (SA) P/L 68 Wattle St, FULLARTON SA 5063

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1290
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 359 times
Been thanked: 560 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#2 Post by Llessur2002 » Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:08 pm

Yep.

Image

Personally I'd like to see these retained. The heritage buildings are part of the appeal of Hutt Street as a destination.

User avatar
Nathan
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2938
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 1:09 pm
Location: Bowden
Has thanked: 173 times
Been thanked: 510 times
Contact:

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#3 Post by Nathan » Thu Jul 28, 2016 2:45 pm

Haven't one of these been the site of a proposed development before, or was that the next block up?

User avatar
rev
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3426
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 253 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#4 Post by rev » Thu Jul 28, 2016 3:51 pm

Llessur2002 wrote:Yep.

Image

Personally I'd like to see these retained. The heritage buildings are part of the appeal of Hutt Street as a destination.
Heritage or not those sorts of small dwellings don't belong in or around a CBD.
They are limited to what can be done with them. It's not like you can incorporate the 'facades' into another building, it would look utterly ridiculous.
There's always talk of street level interaction and activation. How much "activation" do you think you'll get out of those houses on street level? Not much.
There's nothing at all special about them that cant be found in hundreds of others dwellings around Adelaide.
This whole heritage thing is ridiculous. Next the footpaths will be heritage listed.
What have those two buildings contributed, culturally, to our city and state? Was a former premier of significance born in one of them? Did the first govenor build and live in them? What..?

If there's nothing significant culturally about those two buildings, then they shouldn't stand in the way of a development.

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1290
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 359 times
Been thanked: 560 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#5 Post by Llessur2002 » Thu Jul 28, 2016 4:10 pm

You can say that about many of the historic buildings along Hutt Street. Apply those rules consistently and Hutt Street won't be distinguishable from any other street in the CBD.

Many of these smaller heritage buildings are quite successfully used as offices for small businesses.

User avatar
Wayno
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5138
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 2:18 pm
Location: Torrens Park
Has thanked: 86 times
Been thanked: 130 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#6 Post by Wayno » Thu Jul 28, 2016 4:30 pm

rev wrote:Heritage or not those sorts of small dwellings don't belong in or around a CBD.
They are limited to what can be done with them. It's not like you can incorporate the 'facades' into another building, it would look utterly ridiculous.
There's always talk of street level interaction and activation. How much "activation" do you think you'll get out of those houses on street level? Not much.
There's nothing at all special about them that cant be found in hundreds of others dwellings around Adelaide.
This whole heritage thing is ridiculous. Next the footpaths will be heritage listed.
What have those two buildings contributed, culturally, to our city and state? Was a former premier of significance born in one of them? Did the first govenor build and live in them? What..?

If there's nothing significant culturally about those two buildings, then they shouldn't stand in the way of a development.
Sorry Rev, that's a bit misguided. Imagine these configured as cafes, front and backyard, with outdoor music, etc. Also as wine bars at night. Some innovative design elements and it'd be awesome. I'm a nearby local, and would love that. There's only 1 wine bar in the region - need 2-3 ideally.

Regardless i would happily welcome a 12 level development too. More people is good.
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.

thecityguy
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 189
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2015 2:32 am
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 29 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#7 Post by thecityguy » Fri Jul 29, 2016 1:25 am

Although the houses are nice and well maintained, they are hardly anything special....similar things are found all over the place! I agree with rev, a 12 story building will do a lot more for the area than anything these 2 building could ever could




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
rev
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3426
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 253 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#8 Post by rev » Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:03 am

Llessur2002 wrote:You can say that about many of the historic buildings along Hutt Street. Apply those rules consistently and Hutt Street won't be distinguishable from any other street in the CBD.

Many of these smaller heritage buildings are quite successfully used as offices for small businesses.
They might work as small boutiquesque offices but that doesn't mean they should remain.
These sorts of small insignificant buildings that can be found across suburban Adelaide should have been gone long ago from our cbf and vicinity.
We've lost significant buildings that were something to look at and were worth keeping and preserving. These two little dwellings pale in comparison to what's been lost.

Waewick
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 3288
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 1:39 pm
Has thanked: 53 times
Been thanked: 91 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#9 Post by Waewick » Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:47 am

rev wrote:
Llessur2002 wrote:You can say that about many of the historic buildings along Hutt Street. Apply those rules consistently and Hutt Street won't be distinguishable from any other street in the CBD.

Many of these smaller heritage buildings are quite successfully used as offices for small businesses.
They might work as small boutiquesque offices but that doesn't mean they should remain.
These sorts of small insignificant buildings that can be found across suburban Adelaide should have been gone long ago from our cbf and vicinity.
We've lost significant buildings that were something to look at and were worth keeping and preserving. These two little dwellings pale in comparison to what's been lost.
In a way I am with you on this one Rev, if a building offers no cultural or architectual benefit and can not be used in a modern context there doesn't appear to much point keeping it.

The only part of disagree with is, just becuase we made mistakes in the past by demolishing prominet buildings, that doesn't mean we should repeat that mistake because the buildings we want to demolish now are less significant.

User avatar
monotonehell
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5465
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:10 am
Location: Adelaide, East End.
Has thanked: 192 times
Been thanked: 286 times
Contact:

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#10 Post by monotonehell » Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:42 am

The photo from Street View is a little misleading. It only shows the front, which looks like two detached cottages. Both cottages are actually the facade of a (two storey at the rear) red brick complex which goes back quite a depth.

Still worth knocking down and building something else, however.
Exit on the right in the direction of travel.

ghs
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1445
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:09 am
Location: Brighton
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 57 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#11 Post by ghs » Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:44 am

Llessur2002 wrote:Yep.

Image

Personally I'd like to see these retained. The heritage buildings are part of the appeal of Hutt Street as a destination.
They're obviously not heritage. If they were then the owner wouldn't be planning a 12 level development.
Adelaide has a big CBD and quite a few dead zones. In my opinion Hutt street is a bit of a dead zone which needs some
new developments.

Seems like we have a new NIMBY on the forum.
Last edited by ghs on Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

noted
Gold-Member ;)
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 5:11 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 8 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#12 Post by noted » Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:01 pm

Will only be a shame to see them go if they build something completely ugly there, but if the design is half decent then bash them down. They are the sorts of houses which would appropriately be heritage listed in the inner suburbs, but not in the CBD. Especially when you compare them to the two houses on the other side of the road which make this pair look pretty ordinary.

Spurdo
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2016 9:20 pm
Has thanked: 6 times
Been thanked: 54 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#13 Post by Spurdo » Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:08 pm

ghs wrote:
They're obviously not heritage. If they were then the owner wouldn't be planning a 12 level development.
Adelaide has a big CBD and quite a few dead zones. In my opinion Hutt street is a bit of a dead zone which needs some
new developments.

Seems like we have a new NIMBY on the forum.

Sounds a lot like "uh oh someone disagrees with me, better invoke the strawman fallacy and call him a NIMBY"

ghs
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1445
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:09 am
Location: Brighton
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 57 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#14 Post by ghs » Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:41 pm

Spurdo wrote:
ghs wrote:
They're obviously not heritage. If they were then the owner wouldn't be planning a 12 level development.
Adelaide has a big CBD and quite a few dead zones. In my opinion Hutt street is a bit of a dead zone which needs some
new developments.

Seems like we have a new NIMBY on the forum.

Sounds a lot like "uh oh someone disagrees with me, better invoke the strawman fallacy and call him a NIMBY"
He has also been negative about demolishing similar types of buildings on Hindley street.

User avatar
Llessur2002
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1290
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2014 4:59 pm
Location: West Croydon
Has thanked: 359 times
Been thanked: 560 times

[SWP] Re: 51-57 Hutt Street | ~40m | 12 Levels | Mixed

#15 Post by Llessur2002 » Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:43 pm

ghs wrote:Seems like we have a new NIMBY on the forum.
NIMBY's obviously not the right term to use given the fact that my location is clearly displayed beneath my username - I don't live in the city and therefore neither Hindley Street or Hutt Street could remotely be considered my back yard. I'm very much pro-development in Adelaide but just not at any cost. To be honest, with regards to these two buildings I will understand if they need to be demolished for the right development - I merely stated my personal preference that they be retained to protect the character of Hutt Street. If renders for a fantastic 12-storey building with excellent activation and character at street level were released then I wouldn't be overly devastated to see these two go. There are indeed many similar examples in our suburbs. I do disagree with previous comments that buildings should not be considered worthy of retention unless they were once home to "a former premier of significance" or "the first Governor" - but again, just my opinion. I'm cautious about any development which requires the removal of character buildings within the CBD. We only have a finite number after all.
He has also been negative about demolishing similar types of buildings on Hindley street.
One building on Hindley Street actually - and that one I do feel is absolutely worthy of retaining, despite strongly supporting HQ in their search for a new home. It may not have housed any former premiers or governors but the building (which I would guess dates mid to late 1800s) is well-maintained, fairly unique in appearance for the CBD and contributes well to the streetscape of Hindley Street. It also has excellent potential for street-level activation - arguably more so than any replacement. As the bulk of what HQ will likely propose for the site is to the rear of that building, I do not think it would be impossible or unreasonable for it to be retained in some form.

Image

But that's for a different thread I guess...
Last edited by Llessur2002 on Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:56 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], normh and 8 guests