Sensational-Adelaide.com

I don't agree that this and the GPO proposal look similar. Obviously they're both of a similar height with some retail potential at ground level, but that's about the extent of the similarities.

While it's subjective to some extent, for starters I prefer the glass of this building to the windowed module look of the GPO development. That's just me.

Additionally, that GPO building is incredibly bulky, being of similar length to height. The building looks like a wall of identical windows, which is monotonous to look at in my opinion.

While this building is bulky too, they've broken up the monotony by splitting the building into two sections of different height with different setbacks, so there's more variety. The north west section also has a more interesting, almost "stretcher bond" pattern with the glass. All these things prevent this one from being a big, boring wall of height like I feel the GPO development is.

That said, I think the GPO development, particularly the podium, integrates fairly well with the heritage building next door. I also recall reading that the cladding for that building is to be reflective, although I don't think that is conveyed in the renders. So I hold out hope that this reflectivity can give that building a bit more visual interest than the renders depict.

Mr Smith wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:15 pm

Nort wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 3:38 pm

Nathan wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 2:18 pm

The difference is in the way they frame their respective heritage buildings. The GPO development does that particularly poorly, and it's especially noticeable as a prominent corner site.

As much as the Myer Center is an ugly POS the one thing it does well on North Terrace is how it blends in with the older structures, I'm happy to see this same type of thing spreading down North Terrace.

Your joking of course. The Myer Centre is an absolute disgrace. A visually hideous and jarring, cheapskate monstrosity - and that's putting it in polite terms.

I mean what's with that stupid clock tower FFS.

If there is one prominent building that should be razed it's that one IMO.

Like monotonehell said, I agree it's an ugly building, however I'm just referring to how on the street level it uses mostly the old (I assume heritage) facades.

Go look at the Rundle Mall side of the Myer Centre and tell me that the North Terrace side doesn't look a thousand times better.

crawf wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:10 pm

monotonehell wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 1:07 pm

crawf wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:58 pm

The carpark is owned by the ACC.

I'd love to see that hideous monstrosity demolished, especially with Gawler Place soon to be revamped.

Is it? I thought Gawler Upark was leased from the building's owner? I could be remembering wrong or things may have changed.

You could be right. I just always presumed it was owned by the council considering it's a Upark.

Car Park is leased by ACC. Interestingly the current facade is up for renewal so while it will be remaining a car park for the foreseeable future, there is an opportunity for the facade to be upgraded... potentially with some greening elements that could tie together nicely with the Gawler Place upgrade

obituary resider wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:08 pm

Car Park is leased by ACC. Interestingly the current facade is up for renewal so while it will be remaining a car park for the foreseeable future, there is an opportunity for the facade to be upgraded... potentially with some greening elements that could tie together nicely with the Gawler Place upgrade

Is this inside info or is there a proposal somewhere? I'm interested to know about this façade renewal.

Given that the final materials and colours have not been chosen yet, I won't comment on the outside design yet. The inside, however, looks fantastic.

SRW wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 9:34 pm

obituary resider wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:08 pm

Car Park is leased by ACC. Interestingly the current facade is up for renewal so while it will be remaining a car park for the foreseeable future, there is an opportunity for the facade to be upgraded... potentially with some greening elements that could tie together nicely with the Gawler Place upgrade

Is this inside info or is there a proposal somewhere? I'm interested to know about this façade renewal.

There's lots of interesting things they can do these days with metal screens to make car parks actually look like a work of art.

slenderman wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:41 pm

While this building is bulky too, they've broken up the monotony by splitting the building into two sections of different height with different setbacks, so there's more variety. The north west section also has a more interesting, almost "stretcher bond" pattern with the glass. All these things prevent this one from being a big, boring wall of height like I feel the GPO development is.

This is an ongoing problem in Adelaide, when linking heritage buildings to new developments. There seems to be still a desire to fill the whole block with a low box shaped building (granted, the façade outcomes seem to be improving). Taller sleeker buildings, set at different angles with public plazas and linked areas in between are far less dominating of the existing heritage buildings, and allow them to shine in their own right. It also creates space for interesting laneways and small parks within blocks. I think this development and the GPO are similar in that these over bearing bulky boxes distract from the older building. Indeed as pointed out the same outcome was for the Myer Centre with the only improvement to design 25 years later is the facades of the new builds have improved.

That looks sensational !!!

The best part of this development is that the biggest eyesore in Adelaide being Club 199 will finally be gone, and whats replacing looks like it will compliment its surroundings

Club 199 being Adelaide's biggest eyesore?

I can name fifty buildings, minimum, that are worse.

serca wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2017 8:26 pm

That looks sensational !!!

The best part of this development is that the biggest eyesore in Adelaide being Club 199 will finally be gone, and whats replacing looks like it will compliment its surroundings

Looks sensational? Adelaide people are easily pleased. Its just a couple of boxes plonked behind some heritage buildings. Serviceable probably, adequate possibly...but definitely not sensational. And be aware, the finished product will look nothing like the shiny pictures.

Another day, another box. Yawn!

claybro wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:35 pm

serca wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2017 8:26 pm

That looks sensational !!!

The best part of this development is that the biggest eyesore in Adelaide being Club 199 will finally be gone, and whats replacing looks like it will compliment its surroundings

Looks sensational? Adelaide people are easily pleased. Its just a couple of boxes plonked behind some heritage buildings. Serviceable probably, adequate possibly...but definitely not sensational. And be aware, the finished product will look nothing like the shiny pictures.

Quite a few people are just pleased that something gets built so they have something to talk about.

Not every proposal is going to be a masterpiece? I think Adelaide has produced so much needed architectural merit to its skyline in recent times. The whole medical hub looks great and the 2 new talls going up among others. There is some truth in just being satisfied with some development. Adelaide was quiet for so long, its good to see so much private investment. This development is well set back from north tce and suites its surroundings IMO.

If folk are not complaining about blank walls its glass boxes. Most buildings will be a box in nature and predominately glass. Out of curiosity what other buildings in the CBD are "yet another glass box"? Sure there are a few but not as many as people perceive there to be

Club 199 is the biggest disjointed run down turd, given its location and surroundings. Id like to see your list of 50 eyesores that top this Shuz

claybro wrote: ↑

Wed Nov 08, 2017 12:14 pm

This is an ongoing problem in Adelaide, when linking heritage buildings to new developments. There seems to be still a desire to fill the whole block with a low box shaped building (granted, the façade outcomes seem to be improving). Taller sleeker buildings, set at different angles with public plazas and linked areas in between are far less dominating of the existing heritage buildings, and allow them to shine in their own right. It also creates space for interesting laneways and small parks within blocks. I think this development and the GPO are similar in that these over bearing bulky boxes distract from the older building. Indeed as pointed out the same outcome was for the Myer Centre with the only improvement to design 25 years later is the facades of the new builds have improved.

Out of interest, and I know you're probably not an architect, but how do you think they should have done these things you mention for this particular site? I'm not having a go at you, just interested.

The site is fairly long, narrow and the buildings on the block are compacted quite close together. There isn't an awful lot of depth to the site to build something and have it much more set back from the heritage buildings than they currently are, let alone with a plaza or small park included in between.

Perhaps they could have split the development into two separate buildings and put in an open plaza where that connecting lobby and forecourt entrance from North Terrace are, but that's about all I can think of, unless you suggest removing one of the two sections entirely? Or maybe add some curved rather than square edges to the buildings to reduce their bulk a bit.

I will agree that it looks like the possibility of activating Fisher Place or that other laneway with this development seem to be a missed opportunity however.

serca wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:38 pm

If folk are not complaining about blank walls its glass boxes. Most buildings will be a box in nature and predominately glass. Out of curiosity what other buildings in the CBD are "yet another glass box"? Sure there are a few but not as many as people perceive there to be

70 Franklin, 400KWS, Rundle Place, U2, City Central 1 and 8, Lot 8, 50 Flinders, that neighbouring building on Flinders and Aurora on Pirie spring to mind in the last decade or so. At the same time, Sofitel/Park Central could be considered glass boxes and they both look pretty good, so it isn't necessarily a bad thing.

serca wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 09, 2017 7:38 pm

Club 199 is the biggest disjointed run down turd, given its location and surroundings. Id like to see your list of 50 eyesores that top this Shuz

I'll make a start in no particular order: Telstra Waymouth Exchange, Hungry Jack's Carpark, Truscotts Carpark, Southern Cross Arcade, Central Market Arcade, that nasty white box on the corner of King William and Currie, that hideous grey building on Hindley Street next to the Mayfair, My Budget building, Unihouse and many of the old RAH buildings.

Oh wow you mean to say there are 9 "glass boxes" (the most common design/material for any high rise) in our CBD built over the last 10 years. Thats just too many, crazy woobly doobly

There are plenty that aren't glass boxes too. I wouldn't call U2 just a glass box, and agreed the Sofitel proposal looks very classy

I dont think any of those buildings are worse than club 199 in its current state, not even Telstra exchange. But your right in those you mentioned are also turds. The whole office complex/block on the eastern end of Hindmarsh square also