At its meeting on August 25, the state government DAC is expected to grant planning APPROVAL to this development.
Furthermore to show how out of touch the ACC is, here are some comments from the Heritgae Branch of the DENR:
The Heritage Branch has assessed the proposed development with respect to its impact on the heritage significance of the following State Heritage places. They consider the heritage impact to be acceptable for the following reasons:
The proposed tower development is set well back and maintains an adequate setting and presence to Flinders Street for the Pilgrim Church and Multicultural SA building.
The tower brings the backdrop of tall buildings closer to the heritage places, but nevertheless maintains the integrity of the low-rise heritage precinct comprising the Town Hall, Medina Hotel, Methodist meeting hall, Pilgrim Church and Multicultural SA building (all State Heritage-listed).
The tower building responds to the heritage places with strong vertical articulation into three distinct sections, the two lower sections responding to the scale of the heritage buildings. The middle section is designed with an overlaid grid that relates to the scale of the horizontal and vertical breakdown of the Multicultural SA building facades and to the three-dimensional depth of its balconies and colonnade.
The functional integration of the Multicultural SA building into the Adina Hotel proposal supports its ongoing viable use.
The proposed adaptive re-use of the Multicultural SA building is reasonably compatible with its heritage values. Its highest significance relates to its period of use as a sanatorium, which is comparable to the proposed hotel use in its functional requirements. The exterior is of high integrity, but the interior has been altered in the past. The proposed demolition of the 1920s’ annexe does not impact on heritage values. The new tower is set back from the rear of the heritage building and linked by means of a negative junction that visually separates old and new.
The proposed Pilgrim Church redevelopment strengthens and supports the continuation of the heritage-listed church’s significant use by the church community. The demolition of the 1960s’ annexe does not impact on heritage values.
The design of the new church annexe better reveals and interprets the church itself. It is sympathetic architecturally to the materials, design and proportions of the church, and to the settings of both the church and the Methodist meeting hall.
Meanwhile the Urban Design Unit had this to say:
The Urban Design Unit assessed the proposal in relation to any impacts on the public realm such as scale, massing, external appearance and its relationship with and influence on, the adjacent public realm. The UDU support the proposal and consider that it is a positive demonstration of how opportunity can be wrested from serious constraint by inquisitive clients and a creative design team. Combining major heritage places with enhancement of the public realm while creating a sophisticated new mixed use building, requires levels of facilitation and collaboration rarely seen to these levels in the City.
that's why i didnt upload it with the article 
also, does anyone else think that the render above makes the building look a lot smaller than 100m? 
