Page 12 of 53
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Sat Jul 05, 2008 2:10 pm
by aussie2000
does anyone actually have the original render, the very first one, i have a picture of it in my head, it would be great to see it again
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Sun Jul 06, 2008 12:13 am
by rev
Will wrote:rev wrote:Wasn't the original render of the entire project when this was first started years back, exactly what we are seeing now? I mean, it was an entire block of similar looking buildings.
From memory(its hazy, shh) everyone back then seemed to be all for it. Now that it's being built building by building, people seem to be unhappy. Why?
A reason could be that City Central was first proposed back in 2003. Adelaide back in 2003 was a very different place to what it is today. Back then we were lucky to have 1 high-rise building U/C. As such the mood of the forum members represented this scenario. Back then we were happy to get anything, as long as it was high-rise. Today, when we have more than 30 high-rise buildings at different stages of development, we aren't as desperate for development, and as a result can become more discerning for what we get.
Yeah understandable.
But my point was, in the original render from what I remember anyway, and I may remember wrongly, the original design for all the buildings was pretty much all the same. As in, the same facade style etc.
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 10:55 pm
by UrbanSG
Interesting to see no mention of this one in the latest media release from the ACC referring to the highlights of developments approved at the DAP meeting tonight. It was mentioned in the paper today that this one is going to be around the $180 million mark. I would have thought it would be mentioned if it was approved. It has either been deferred or just not mentioned in the media release. Does anyone have any info?
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:05 am
by david
Tower 8 was refused Development Approval at DAP meeting on Monday night. About 6 detailed reasons were given, including lack of set-backs to Franklin and Bentham Streets and its facade relationships to heritage Darling Building and other heritage-listed buildings, also concerns about inactive frontage to Bentham Street.
Plummo
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:08 am
by Omicron
david wrote:Tower 8 was refused Development Approval at DAP meeting on Monday night. About 6 detailed reasons were given, including lack of set-backs to Franklin and Bentham Streets and its facade relationships to heritage Darling Building and other heritage-listed buildings, also concerns about inactive frontage to Bentham Street.
Plummo
Bless! That will teach the lazy little sods not to turn up with the same plans for every single CC building.
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:10 am
by Joely
david wrote:Tower 8 was refused Development Approval at DAP meeting on Monday night. About 6 detailed reasons were given, including lack of set-backs to Franklin and Bentham Streets and its facade relationships to heritage Darling Building and other heritage-listed buildings, also concerns about inactive frontage to Bentham Street.
Plummo
Fantastic! Now lets hope they go away and come back with something decent.
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:46 am
by UrbanSG
Wow, so refused and not deferred? That is a fairly big deal for such a big project Aspen would be pissed. Although I didn't hate the proposal it wasn't great and had a lot of problems. Hopefully they come back with something decent this time. We won't see any action for a long time as they will have to go through another application all over again if it hasn't been deferred and instead refused outright.
[COM] Re: #Proposed: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 1:49 pm
by Shuz
I'm glad with the decision of this one, and hopefully we can expect something much better out of the next proposal.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 2:47 pm
by SRW
Well this is pleasantly surprising. Even more so if it was actually refused.
Let's just hope that they take heed of the complaints.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:23 pm
by AtD
I’m pleasantly surprised. No one here has called for the heads of the DAP yet.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:35 pm
by Ben
AtD wrote:I’m pleasantly surprised. No one here has called for the heads of the DAP yet.
I don't think anybody liked the building in it's proposed form lol
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:42 pm
by shaun
Glad to hear, now lets hope they go back to the drawing board and design something that is decent and taller.
Definitely do not want to see a blank wall.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:47 pm
by Will
crawf wrote:Glad to hear, now lets hope they go back to the drawing board and design something that is decent and taller.
Definitely do not want to see a blank wall.
That is definately a strong possibility. If the developers are forced to increase the building's setback from both Franklin and Bentham Streets whilst at the same time retain the amount of office space, it is obvious that they will have to increase the height of the building by a couple of floors.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 4:53 pm
by Just build it
Wow, both surprised and heartened. In my last post I said the council sh1tted me for not demanding something better. I take it back*. Good on 'em. This should make the architects think twice about the designs proposed for not only CC8 but the rest of the CC buildings to come and that's a great thing.
* - for now.
[COM] Re: #Deferred: City Central Tower 8 20 Lvl 72M
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 11:07 pm
by Ho Really
Will wrote:crawf wrote:Glad to hear, now lets hope they go back to the drawing board and design something that is decent and taller.
Definitely do not want to see a blank wall.
That is definately a strong possibility. If the developers are forced to increase the building's setback from both Franklin and Bentham Streets whilst at the same time retain the amount of office space, it is obvious that they will have to increase the height of the building by a couple of floors.
It could end up being more than a couple of floors. What will happen then? Will the council refuse it because it will cast too much shadow? I hope not because I don't want to see Spire's blank walls from Victoria Square.
Cheers