Page 1 of 18
University of Adelaide - North Terrace Development Strategy
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 1:44 pm
by Howie
Just in....
The next five years
A comprehensive building audit and master planning exercise
is underway to establish development needs and refurbishment
requirements.
The following development works are currently being considered by
University Council:
Stage 1
A new building in the Engineering Precinct.
Upgrading of 10 Pulteney Street.
Stage 2
The opening up of Hughes Plaza to create a new Learning Hub,
including a new entrance from the Barr Smith Library, an integrated
student service centre and new resource and IT hub.
A new building in the Napier Precinct.
Upgrading of Mawson Building.
Projects underway
There are also a number of projects already underway:
Stage 1 restoration and upgrade of Bonython Hall.
Construction of Proteomics Lab.
Reproductive Health co-location
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 6:05 pm
by sam
Construction of Proteomics Lab.
I had no idea what that was. (For others like me:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proteomics )
There seems to be non-stop construction/rennovations at the Uni.
Still yet to ride in that lift...
Posted: Tue Dec 20, 2005 11:22 pm
by AtD
As a student, I really like the sound of the Hughes Plaza learning centre. The area is ugly and could be used better.
Adelaide University - Developments & News
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 6:16 pm
by Will
I have received some information about this building, and due to the size and scope of the building, it became apparent that it deserves it's own thread.
Here is a summary of the information I was sent:
*The current 3 level Mathematics building (E10) built in 1946 will be demolished
*The building is located off, Frome Road
*The building will be 8 levels high
*The building will be 28.32m to top of ceiling, and 33.37m to top of structure
*It will have a GFA of 14 200m2
*It will have a basement with teaching space
*It will feature a cafe, and exhibition space at ground floor.
*It is designed by DeignInc.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Thu May 31, 2007 6:21 pm
by Will
The building has been designated as Category 3 non-complying by the council, primarily because it exceeds the 6 level / 21m height limit.
When a category 3 development application is made, the council first has to decide whether to proceed with assessment. This does not mean that the building is approved. It means that the council will allow the assessment process to continue.
The good news is that next week, the council will decide to proceed with assessment.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 9:08 am
by Ben
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 12:33 pm
by Norman
Looks great
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:00 pm
by crawf
Theres also a article and render of the new building in the uni mag "Adelaidian".
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2007 4:07 pm
by Pistol
Great find Beamer. Those renders look quite exciting and will add to the atmosphere of Adelaide Uni.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:36 am
by Howie
Apparently some of the academic staff at adelaide uni are pretty upset that they'll be moving to 'glass cages'
This is part of the union email today.
Staff will be aware that the Mathematics building will be demolished later this year to make way for a new $100 million Engineering building, to be completed in 2010. To their dismay, occupants of the Mathematics building are to be "decanted" into a non-academic glass environment in the Pulteney Street tower with offices even smaller than those already occupied by protesting members of the Faculty of Professions.
The issue is important for all staff, because the consultants' plan being circulated is a template for all future office accommodation in this University. You can see this remarkable document at:
http://www.nteu.org.au/bd/adelaide/glass_offices/16693
Key features are:
* glass mini-offices, guaranteed to stop "inappropriate behaviour";
* almost no room for academics' books and papers, so they can go into storage on the same floor "for irregular weekly and monthly access", or to the "archive" in the basement;
* swipe-card access to the academics' area for students/visitors able to get past reception downstairs;
* some offices with less exposure to noise than others;
* attempts to rebut objections from members of the Faculty of Professions, e.g. about exposure of exam material and lack of privacy for students being counselled.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Wed Aug 01, 2007 7:14 pm
by Will
It appears that this building will receive development approval next week, by the ACC. The offical reccomendation to the ACC DAP is for them to approve the building. However keep in mind that like Aurora, this building exceeds its reccomended height limit. In addition, unlike Aurora which was a Category 2 complying development, this one is a category 3 non-complying development. So with all this in mind, I think it would be prudent to await the council's decision next week. Because with the Aurora decision still fresh in our minds, the council should express some kind of consistency with its decisions, and should therefore reject this building.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 12:02 am
by crawf
Reject the building?
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:35 am
by bmw boy
is it just me or does the link come up with an error?
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:39 am
by Ben
Yeh they only keep them on the site for about two weeks and then they drop off.
Re: #Proposed - Adelaide University - Engineering Building - 8 l
Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2007 11:59 am
by Will
crawf wrote:Reject the building?
I am saying that if the council showed some consistency with its decisions, they should reject this one.
I personally hope they don't.