[VIS] 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

All high-rise, low-rise and street developments in the Adelaide and North Adelaide areas.
Patrick_27
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Patrick_27 »

Thank God thats only a mock up image...
User avatar
rev
SA MVP (Most Valued Poster 4000+)
Posts: 4861
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 12:14 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by rev »

Nort wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:34 pm
Based on that article it looks like that journalist reads this forum!
Or, the journalist who wrote that article, is a poster on this forum..
CDJ
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:30 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by CDJ »

Almost everything in the article is wrong. The Advertiser clearly hasn't received their information from anyone involved in the project. That 'mock-up' image they've produced is comically bad - did they get the work experience kid to produce it using google?
Mpol03
Legendary Member!
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:39 am

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Mpol03 »

CDJ wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:26 pm
Almost everything in the article is wrong. The Advertiser clearly hasn't received their information from anyone involved in the project. That 'mock-up' image they've produced is comically bad - did they get the work experience kid to produce it using google?
So the final design looks nada like this?
And thank you for confirming the stupidity behind the article.
HiTouch
Legendary Member!
Posts: 534
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:40 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by HiTouch »

CDJ wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:26 pm
Almost everything in the article is wrong. The Advertiser clearly hasn't received their information from anyone involved in the project. That 'mock-up' image they've produced is comically bad - did they get the work experience kid to produce it using google?
Another thing that doesn't make sense in that article is that they state the airport says that the 230m building was too tall and size needed to be reduced 35m but then later in the article, it states that the airport "doesn't necessarily care about size", it just needs approval from the relevant bodies.

Why state any height when nothing has been confirmed? Or has 1990crow *cough* excuse me *cough* I mean the journalist just looked at the title and assumed.
Patrick_27
Super Size Scraper Poster!
Posts: 2155
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2013 4:41 pm
Location: Adelaide CBD, SA

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Patrick_27 »

Mpol03 wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:35 pm
CDJ wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:26 pm
Almost everything in the article is wrong. The Advertiser clearly hasn't received their information from anyone involved in the project. That 'mock-up' image they've produced is comically bad - did they get the work experience kid to produce it using google?
So the final design looks nada like this?
And thank you for confirming the stupidity behind the article.
C'mon CDJ, spill the beans. :wink:
User avatar
Algernon
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1301
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2005 9:46 pm
Location: Moravia

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Algernon »

HiTouch wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:40 pm
CDJ wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:26 pm
Almost everything in the article is wrong. The Advertiser clearly hasn't received their information from anyone involved in the project. That 'mock-up' image they've produced is comically bad - did they get the work experience kid to produce it using google?
Another thing that doesn't make sense in that article is that they state the airport says that the 230m building was too tall and size needed to be reduced 35m but then later in the article, it states that the airport "doesn't necessarily care about size", it just needs approval from the relevant bodies.

Why state any height when nothing has been confirmed? Or has 1990crow *cough* excuse me *cough* I mean the journalist just looked at the title and assumed.
The initial confusion was whether the purported heights were expressed as AHD or height above street. It's quite embarrassing to see how the Advertiser 'journalist' spins that into some apparent high level board discussion where the height of the building was 'reduced'.
crawf
Donating Member
Donating Member
Posts: 5462
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 7:49 pm
Location: Adelaide

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by crawf »

What was the point of this article?
ml69
Legendary Member!
Posts: 946
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 11:16 pm
Location: Adelaide SA

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by ml69 »

HiTouch wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:40 pm
Why state any height when nothing has been confirmed? Or has 1990crow *cough* excuse me *cough* I mean the journalist just looked at the title and assumed.
Think you nailed it HiTouch : )
1990crow
Sen-Rookie-Sational
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2018 3:37 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by 1990crow »

ml69 wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:07 pm
HiTouch wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:40 pm
Why state any height when nothing has been confirmed? Or has 1990crow *cough* excuse me *cough* I mean the journalist just looked at the title and assumed.
Think you nailed it HiTouch : )
Engineer in Ballina, NSW but close!
citywatcher
Legendary Member!
Posts: 765
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:51 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by citywatcher »

I think personally it's in the wrong place

Sent from my SM-J730G using Tapatalk

CDJ
High Rise Poster!
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2016 2:30 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by CDJ »

I personally think it's in exactly the right place. Furthest distance from the airport while remaining within the Capital City Zone for planning and being at the corner of two main thoroughfares. The centre of the skyline will have to start moving east now that height is being constrained by airspace.
HiTouch
Legendary Member!
Posts: 534
Joined: Thu Feb 13, 2014 10:40 pm

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by HiTouch »

CDJ wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:00 am
I personally think it's in exactly the right place. Furthest distance from the airport while remaining within the Capital City Zone for planning and being at the corner of two main thoroughfares. The centre of the skyline will have to start moving east now that height is being constrained by airspace.
I agree. As long as it's in the square mile, it's in a good spot. This spot won't make the skyline look awkward anyway.
From all viewpoints, it will look like it's in between Kodo and Adelaidean/Realm and that's not a bad thing.
Mpol03
Legendary Member!
Posts: 759
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2017 9:39 am

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Mpol03 »

CDJ wrote:
Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:00 am
I personally think it's in exactly the right place. Furthest distance from the airport while remaining within the Capital City Zone for planning and being at the corner of two main thoroughfares. The centre of the skyline will have to start moving east now that height is being constrained by airspace.
Yes I agree. And from street level it will make a wonderful impact to the area.
Any confirmation of the model used in the article is the design being put forward?
Goodsy
Legendary Member!
Posts: 1036
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 10:39 am

[VIS] Re: 207 Pulteney Street | 195m | 60 Levels | Mixed Use

Post by Goodsy »

It doesn't look too bad when the perspective is fixed

Image
Post Reply