Sensational-Adelaide.com

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 25, 2019 2:47 pm

If this goes ahead, it’ll be the third recent student accomodation to be built over 100m (along with Twin St and the other North Tce one). Wonder when the market reaches saturation point.

I wonder how easy it is to reconfigure "student accommodation" to anything else when the market moves to require something else (apartments, aged care, offices, housing trust...? )

If this gets built im moving

SBD wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 26, 2019 12:27 am

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 25, 2019 2:47 pm

If this goes ahead, it’ll be the third recent student accomodation to be built over 100m (along with Twin St and the other North Tce one). Wonder when the market reaches saturation point.

I wonder how easy it is to reconfigure "student accommodation" to anything else when the market moves to require something else (apartments, aged care, offices, housing trust...? )

Don't need the market to move in order to "reconfigure" this sort of development, preferably with some nitroglycerin

Hang on has this latest proposal been approved?

SBD wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 26, 2019 12:27 am

gnrc_louis wrote: ↑

Wed Sep 25, 2019 2:47 pm

If this goes ahead, it’ll be the third recent student accomodation to be built over 100m (along with Twin St and the other North Tce one). Wonder when the market reaches saturation point.

I wonder how easy it is to reconfigure "student accommodation" to anything else when the market moves to require something else (apartments, aged care, offices, housing trust...? )

They’re required to demonstrate adaptability. In the proposal document they showed how internal walls could be removed to create two apartments per floor for residential use, but obviously a hotel is also feasible.

I don’t understand the level of opprobrium about this. For me it comes down to materiality — if the SCAP can force the proponents to upgrade to a higher quality material than precast concrete, and assure finished colour, then I’m ok with it. Tbh, I think this is more reasonable and respectful of North Tce than the one proposed at the corner of Frome.

It looks crap from the renders. But....the renders are also of a poor quality. It would be interesting to see something in a higher quality to judge it a bit better. The overall form is fairly uninspiring though.

I think with more/different shaped windows it might look better

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:15 am

It looks crap from the renders. But....the renders are also of a poor quality. It would be interesting to see something in a higher quality to judge it a bit better. The overall form is fairly uninspiring though.

Yes, the renders are poor and because of the last minute change to the façade (deletion of mesh) they haven’t updated many with the new look. The Gov Architect specifically notes the colour shown is not representative of the nominated material. But I think the symmetrical form reflects its setting and the set back from North Terrace limits its impact. And the fins give us more interest than Dwell and mimic the verticality of the old John Martin’s carpark. Not saying it’s great, but it’s not as bad as all that.

Again, ideally, I wish the owners of this and Gallerie Arcade would get together and propose something that addresses these heritage properties singularly.

SRW wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 26, 2019 11:02 am

Llessur2002 wrote: ↑

Thu Sep 26, 2019 10:15 am

It looks crap from the renders. But....the renders are also of a poor quality. It would be interesting to see something in a higher quality to judge it a bit better. The overall form is fairly uninspiring though.

Yes, the renders are poor and because of the last minute change to the façade (deletion of mesh) they haven’t updated many with the new look. The Gov Architect specifically notes the colour shown is not representative of the nominated material. But I think the symmetrical form reflects its setting and the set back from North Terrace limits its impact. And the fins give us more interest than Dwell and mimic the verticality of the old John Martin’s carpark. Not saying it’s great, but it’s not as bad as all that.

Again, ideally, I wish the owners of this and Gallerie Arcade would get together and propose something that addresses these heritage properties singularly.

Yes, but you have to remember that in most cases whatever the final renders look like, you can almost expect that the quality will be somewhat less. Realm, GPO Exchange are rarities. Whereas Adelaidean is an example of "look how glossy this looks in the renders" and instead it's completely muddied glazing.

This was approved with little fuss. Standard conditions apply.

Fucking hell.

These student accoms go up so fast. This will be rising by next year.

#shitadelaide

Is there nobody on Sensational Adelaide with even the slightest level of influence on Adelaide City Council or State Government decision making? Not one person? Anyone?

If it's you, and you're reading this now... what the fuck is your problem? You have an army of researchers and place-makers at your disposal right here on this site. Use us to better your vision, your designs, your enthusiasm and your budget. Everybody here would rather see the density of the city grow, but not at the expense of culture, identity and self respect.

The 'World Class Cultural Boulevard' vision is so far from being realised right now. Two steps forward with Lot 14 repurposing, one step back by deliberately removing the charm at street level (trees, pavers, lighting). Two steps forward with the Science and Medical Precinct, one step back not building short stay accommodation for visiting researchers, doctors, nurses, regional patient visitors, patient support workers, etc. That West / North Terrace corner is depressing. Should instead be a hub of wellness.

Who’s in charge of finishing a fucking job around here? How hard is it to curate the appearance of one street?

Here’s rev with the weather...

Have a read through the DA and see the mandated redesigns. Originally this tower was purely glass, but it was deemed “unsuitable” for North Terrace...

The current design is a directed evolution. The board WANTS this design...

Pikey wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 28, 2019 12:47 am

Have a read through the DA and see the mandated redesigns. Originally this tower was purely glass, but it was deemed “unsuitable” for North Terrace...

The current design is a directed evolution. The board WANTS this design...

I did, and what I read indicated it was a metal mesh not glass. Besides that, it was initially set back only one metre from North Terrace and absolutely gutted the heritage building, with plant services at ground level. The revised designs increased that set back to 4.6 metres, broke up the vertical mass into three sections, and retained the heritage floor levels with communal space overlooking North Terrace. Among other changes. To me, this is an example of the process working. It's just unfortunate that Brown Falconer seems to need so much revision to their designs and is not creative enough to find more aesthetic solutions.