THE PLAN OF ADELAIDE AND THE ASER SCHEME

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
On 17th August more than 300 guests attended a ceremony in the Marble Hall of the Adelaide Railway Station at which the State Premier, John Bannon, officially launched the Adelaide Station and Environs Redevelopment (ASER) Project. iThe project site is on the north side of North Terrace, adjacent to the Adelaide Festival Centre. The project includes a 400-room hotel which is to be managed by the international Hyatt group; a convention centre to seat up to 2,500 delegates in the main hall and to accommodate audiences of over 3,000 people at sporting events; a casino; and a commercial office block of 22,000 square metres. The project will also provide for specialty retail space and car parking for 1,000 cars. The project is a joint venture between the South Australian Superannuation Fund Investment Trust and Kumagai Gumi which together make up the ASER Property Trust. The estimated completed cost of the project is $160 million. The joint venturers will each contribute $20 million as equity. In addition Kumagai will provide a further $66 million as loans and SASFIT will provide $54 million. Project and construction management will be the responsibility of a recently formed joint company involving Kumagai Gumi and the Adelaide-based consultancy of Pak-Poy Kneebone Pty. Ltd., to be known as Pak-Poy Kumagai Pty. Ltd. Principal architectural consultants are John Andrews International, in association with the Adelaide firm of Woodhead Hall McDonald Shaw. The project is estimated by its proponents to be capable of providing some 1,250 jobs in the construction industry during the construction phase and of employing 750 people after completion. Since the details of the ASER proposals were released they have been the subject of considerable critical comment in Adelaide from architects, planners and, in particular, from the Adelaide City Council, the responsible planning authority for the area. In the article which follows Judith Brine brings together a number of the major criticisms which have been made of ASER and gives her personal view of why the project should not go ahead.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: