CAN: [Glenelg] Latitude | 42m | 12lvls | Residential

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in areas other than the CBD and North Adelaide. Includes Port Adelaide and Glenelg.
Message
Author
User avatar
Cruise
Banned
Banned
Posts: 2209
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:19 pm
Location: Bay 115, Football Park

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#31 Post by Cruise » Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:23 am

AtD wrote:Cheers for the scoop. Stupid me didn't bother migrating Latitude from the old building list to the new one. I'll add it tonight.

Interesting looking design. Pitty it doesn't address the street very well - ground floor car park? Bleh! Would Holdfast Bay allow the developer to have retail tennancies?
..... and the same mistakes are being repeated at Port Adelaide.

User avatar
AtD
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 4581
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Sydney
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#32 Post by AtD » Wed Jan 16, 2008 10:32 am

Cruise wrote:..... and the same mistakes are being repeated at Port Adelaide.
I know, and from what I've seen, it ruins the whole area. Here it'll be worse becuase it's such a high-traffic area.

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#33 Post by Will » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:11 pm

There is an article in the Messenger regarding this one. It appears that although the project complies with the council's development plan, Holdfast Bay Mayor, Dr. Rollond is quoted as saying he would "fight to block it", and that he will organize a petition to stop the development. Furthermore, residents of the Manson's Towers nursing home have vowed to oppose the development.

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#34 Post by Will » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:13 pm

AtD wrote:Cheers for the scoop. Stupid me didn't bother migrating Latitude from the old building list to the new one. I'll add it tonight.

Interesting looking design. Pitty it doesn't address the street very well - ground floor car park? Bleh! Would Holdfast Bay allow the developer to have retail tennancies?
In all fairness, College Street is a minor back road. I doubt a business would be successful on such a quiet street.

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#35 Post by Will » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:18 pm

Mants wrote:
crawf wrote:The Holdfast shore development has improved Glenelg dramatically and has become a very popular place to live and play.
well, no it hasnt really.
all the sand movement and dredging, caused by holdfast shores marina, has made glenelg beach a continuous work site. quite an "improvement" ey?
I think Crawf was talking about how the Glenelg of today is a vastly different place today than what it was a decade ago. Without a doubt the Holdfast Shores precinct has been the catalyst for the regeneration of Glenelg. I am with Crawf on this one. Glenelg is definitely a better place now.

Ben
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6760
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 11:46 am
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 276 times
Been thanked: 1110 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#36 Post by Ben » Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:36 pm

From The Messenger:
College St battle rises

Kym Morgan

15Jan08

CONTROVERSIAL plans to build a 12-storey apartment block in place of a historic Glenelg house are back on stream.

Developer Urban Construct, which failed in a previous attempt to build a high-rise on College St, has acquired a key property and has lodged new $85 million plans with Holdfast Bay Council.

The council rejected Urban Construct's previous 12-storey development for the site in 2004 a decision upheld on appeals in the Environment Resources and Development Court and the Supreme Court.

On that occasion the developer wanted to demolish half a historic 1870s house, split between 3 and 5 College St, because it could not acquire number 5.

The company has since done a deal to buy 5 College St from Dr Pamela Ryan later this year, and wants to demolish the entire house.

Dr Ryan had previously resisted lucrative offers to sell her property because she opposed the development.

She could not be contacted for comment last week.

Urban Construct chief executive Todd Brown said the new proposal complied with the council's development plan and he expected it to be approved.

``We are hopeful the Holdfast Bay Council will support our development application,'' he said in an emailed statement.

``(It's) a truly environmentally sustainable residential tower that will set new benchmarks for residential developments across the State.''

He said if approved the high-rise would create 160 residential apartments and be ``South Australia's first truly green residential development''.

Solar and wind power would be used to service all public areas, and plans to build rainwater tanks and use stormwater on community areas were also in place.

Opposition to the proposal is already fierce. Holdfast Bay Mayor Ken Rollond said he would ``fight to block it'' and would begin gathering a petition of objectors.

Manson Towers Residents' Association president Kathleen Job also vowed to oppose the development.

She said Manson Towers residents would have their car park relocated if the development went ahead.

The car park, located between the College St properties and the retirement village, was sold to Urban Construct in 2004.

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#37 Post by Omicron » Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:03 pm

Manson Towers is a frightfully ugly building, and I wish this were a thread about its demolition and subsequent replacement by this Latitude proposal.

frank1
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 4:54 pm

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#38 Post by frank1 » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:17 pm

I like twins better, but i think latitude is still good. Just hope the NIMBY's don't win over this proposal.

User avatar
Omicron
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2336
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:46 pm

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#39 Post by Omicron » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:23 pm

frank1 wrote:I like twins better, but i think latitude is still good. Just hope the NIMBY's don't win over this proposal.
Mayor Rollond was elected, in part, on the basis of his promise to cease high-rise development, so he is under some degree of obligation to continue that stance.

Will
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 5534
Joined: Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:48 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 152 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#40 Post by Will » Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:32 pm

For those of you at home, here is an image Jack Messenger (on the right) and a fellow anti-development crusader Jock Gray.

Image

User avatar
Pants
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 1253
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 11:49 am
Location: Back Home
Has thanked: 77 times
Been thanked: 26 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#41 Post by Pants » Wed Jan 16, 2008 5:51 pm

Fine representatives for the future of our city!

Hope they're enjoying the view from that towering skyscraper.

User avatar
Pistol
Legendary Member!
Posts: 910
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:46 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 33 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#42 Post by Pistol » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:20 pm

So they are against development in Glenelg and it shows them standing on the balcony of their multi-storey development... HA that is irony.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken

User avatar
ynotsfables
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 282
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 11:15 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 5 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#43 Post by ynotsfables » Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:32 pm

Bring it on i'm all for it, looks great. when that building is finished we can build a nursing home for the geriatrics in that previous photograph, Jack and Jock.

crawf
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5417
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Adelaide
Has thanked: 181 times
Been thanked: 320 times

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#44 Post by crawf » Wed Jan 16, 2008 7:46 pm

Looks like its going to be a repeat of Liberty Towers again. How fun :roll:

Is it just me but do you think quite alot of elderly residents are quite selfish?, knocking back development after development because most of them are scared of 'change'. Despite when most of them haven't got much life left in them, and young people are the future.

And usually they are the first the bitch and whine, that so many young people get frustrated and move interstate or overseas. Some things that come to mind - Tramline extension (major success), Holdfast Shores (success), 88 O'Connell St (well needed) and so on...

User avatar
JamesXander
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 487
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 8:07 pm

Re: Proposal: Twin Towers (2x17lvl) and Latitude (10lvl)

#45 Post by JamesXander » Thu Jan 17, 2008 12:21 am

It would be good if they actually got someone young in these societies and what not. Maybe a person with children (as in under 18). That way it would not look as bad as jack. He looks like an old twat who just doesn't want to see change. He wants it like the good old days when he could drive down jetty road, have a chat to jill and bob from down the road, and have a tea an scone with Gary, his best friend from Glenelg Primary. And be home by 12, for his afternoon nap.

Oh yes they were the days Jack. None of this High rise, developement, change, progress, money, cars & technology.NONONONO.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests