New 90st, 297m proposal for Vision site.

http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/343119-111-222-development.jpg

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/344021-111-222-development.jpg

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/343588-111-222-development.jpg


90-storey building planned for Vision Tower site
by Michelle Hele
From: The Courier-Mail May 18, 2011 3:27PM (http://www.couriermail.com.au/property/storey-building-planned-for-vision-tower-site/story-e6frequ6-1226058343276)



THE site of the failed Vision Tower in the Brisbane CBD has been earmarked for what is being touted as Brisbane's tallest building.

The new owners of the property which spans between 111 Mary Street and 222 Margaret Street, have lodged a development application with the Brisbane City Council for a 90-storey or 297 m-tall development.

It proposes two towers for the site featuring a five-star hotel, commercial and residential development. The project will be known as 111+222.


The property has sat vacant since the Vision project went into receivership. It was sold off by its liquidators for about $40 million last year in a deal negotiated by Jeff Dolan and Damian Winterburn.

Clearing work and excavation works had been finished some years ago with the seven-level hole filling with water following January's floods in Brisbane.

Developers John Kinsella's Billbergia Group and AMP Capital Investors revealed today a premium hotel was a key component of the application.

Billbergia spokesman Rick Graf said the development would consist of two towers - one 90 storeys and the other 34 storeys.

The plans lodged with council are for; a 34-storey tower at 111 Mary Street, a 380 room hotel at 222 Margaret St, with ballroom, restaurants and bars, and a public link from Mary St to Margaret St, a residential tower with a mix of 790 studio, one, two and three bedroom apartments.

The first stage of the development will be to provide eight levels of underground car parking with 980 spaces.

With the site already excavated it is hoped work will start on that stage this year and be finished by the end of next year.

The two towers have been designed by Bates Smart Architects and the project is expected to take about five years to complete.

wow....

I couldn't believe it either!

I just read about this in the news. Looks pretty special!

Soul, looks like your prediction was closest. It seems like about 295m and 140/150m.

When can we expect the documents to be up?? This will be the most important development in Brisbane for the next few years... (hopefully).

My prediction... 2 towers.

290m
160m

Holy mackeral! That's some eyecatcher!

WOW !!

So much better then i was expecting! And taller! :D :D :D

AWESOME!!!! 90 st in Brisbane soooooo goood!!!

OMG 90 stories!, AWESOME!, wow I haven't been this happy in a while,Looks Better and taller than even the most optimistic predictions...OMG!

BTW if someone can change the thread title to 111+222.

XD!

I let out a quiet "yay" in the office. This is SO F&*&*& good :banana:

OMG!!! I cant believe it is that tall!!

If we couldn't have Vision, this is the perfect replacement. Design is great too. But dare i say it... an extra 3, or even 2 metres would have been the icing on the cake.

Surely they would have had an urge to do that to claim australia's tallest to roof. Wonder why they didnt? Hell slap a tall cardboard box on the roof. thats all it needs.

w-o-w.

new thread!

yeah i wonder why they wouldnt give it one extra metre just to beat eureka if for nothing else.

with this and infinity's height being increased today, brisbane will now have a 300m, two ~250m, and three ~200m buildings... and with soleil on one end, infinity on the other, and this filling a much needed gap we're going to have a really expansive skyline!

when this is built we'll be better than where melbourne was 10 years ago. not bad for a city of not much over 2 million!

and a new 5 star hotel!

things looking up again.

to RL isnt this then 301m tall

Blimey, that one came out of the blue a bit. Make a big difference from the big hole there.

^^Samuel I reckon they should slap on a Trilogy inspired 3 section illuminated light beacon take it to 330m(:P Q1).

Im so Happy! XD!

The paper doesn't say whether the 197m height is RL or AGL. We'll have to wait for the documents.

Obervation deck? Is it still included. Wow Infinity height extension and now this:cheers:

Amazing, best possible outcome! Looks great as well... simple but elegant. It is strange that they didn't add the extra 3 or 4 metres though. Can anyone elaborate?

maybe to not "scare" the NIMBY's?, they can alter the height a.k.a as Infinity's was earlier today, so I would'nt worry that much.

Holy F*ing CRAP!!! THIS IS AMAZING!!! :banana::banana::banana:

I gotta say, i did remind people that this was going to be Brisbane's tallest and 'most iconic' tower :P Great outcome for Brisbane!! this is BETTER then Vision in my opinion!

Yay :banana:

CM NIMBYs are at it again :ohno:
carbon tax hater of melbourne Posted at 3:59 PM Today
Don't build these awful things. You'll end up a crappy city similar to Sydney or Melbourne
Comment 7 of 14

bayside bob of the bay Posted at 4:01 PM Today
Another plate glass and concrete monstrosity for the CBD and another 1000 cars to clog up the city.
Comment 9 of 14

eyesore of bne Posted at 4:05 PM Today
well with tunnels we dont use and ugly bridges that 2 year old children could out design being built , i suppose one more eye sore wont hurt,
Comment 11 of 14

I actually think they should have the beacon I talked about earlier at a specific height so that it reaches 333m so 111+222 =333m and taller than Q1 :D

^^ Lev , we must fight back the NIMBYS, this wonderful project MUST not go the way of Northbank!

I'll deflect comment on the spizzy 90 storey tower, but the floorplate shape of the smaller tower, which I assume is commercial, doesn't look all that impressive. I'm sure some government agency will lease it though eventually.

I'm no Town Planning Professional, but my small knowledge would indicate their first stage request for parking is a long shot, considering the councils tough stance of additional parking in the city that isn't specifically their to service the site.

I'll be interested to see the size of the units - I'm expecting shoe boxes.

That may be why they are after the extension of the previous Vision approval which also had it staged. They can also use the arguement that it was a carpark initially and that they will be filling in the site and making a cross block link.

More pics:

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/343985-111-222-development.jpg

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/344009-111-222-development.jpg

What is the tallest tower in Brisbane currently? Eureka? Will it beat it?

If the height is RL, it will be about 4m shorter than Eureka. If the hieght is AGL, it will be the exact same height as Eureka.

This will be 47m higher above sea level than Soleil and Riparians Spire and about 85m taller than Aurora.

It will be massive (taller to roof than Visions spire would've been!)

If the height is RL, it will be about 4m shorter than Eureka. If the hieght is AGL, it will be the exact same height as Eureka.

This will be 47m higher above sea level than Soleil and Riparians Spire and about 85m taller than Aurora.

It will be massive (taller to roof than Visions spire would've been!)

This really puts things in to perspective.

Amazing day for Brisbane development fans....

Fucking amazing news!!

297m tower is far beyond anything I expected for this site, and dare I say it the new tower looks like it might be ever better than Vision!!

The podium/s look amazing and it's great news to be getting a 380 room hotel as well!!

The fact they have AMP backing the commercial componant is very good news and gives the project much more confidence going into the first stage.

Lets hold our horses people, the thing still needs to be built.

At 297m exactly it would be No.2 tallest to the roof behind Eureka wouldn't it? Eureka is 297.3m..

The fact they have AMP backing the commercial componant is very good news and gives the project much more confidence going into the first stage.

Been lurking for too long but had to comment on this one so I joined haha! Not gonna lie absolutely love it, hopefully it gets off the ground. Watching this thread and listening to the hack special on triple J all about Brisbane's growth makes me excited for the future of this town! It will be interesting to see the councils view on the building, how long do DA's usually take for approval (assuming there aren't any major changes that need to be made)?

HOLY F***!

This looks like a much, much, much more refined and timeless project!

WOW!!! Crossing everything for this one. :D

Great news. However, this sentence is a bit confusing:

"a 34-storey tower at 111 Mary Street, a 380 room hotel at 222 Margaret St, with ballroom, restaurants and bars, and a public link from Mary St to Margaret St, a residential tower with a mix of 790 studio, one, two and three bedroom apartments"

There's two towers, not three, right? And 222 is the big one I assume? Anyone able to clearly state what the use of each tower is?

I was assuming that 222 is a mix of hotel and resi apartments whilst 111 is office.

call me when its being built, Brissie has had so many "talls" cancelled, its rather depressing in fact.

OMFG!! I think its fair to say this would be beyond the wildest expectations of any reasonable person when we were first hearing about the Billgergia plans for the site. The design looks stunning, not as good as Vision, but taller and sounds like a project of equal or greater scale and quality. Vision will always be missed, but with something like this to look forward too I think we can finally put that behind us without too much regret. I'm wondering if there will be any plans for an observation deck at the top?

BTW, welcome to SSC DQ, nice to have you. And I've made a new thread for 111+222 split from the old Vision thread.

maybe to not "scare" the NIMBY's?, they can alter the height a.k.a as Infinity's was earlier today, so I would'nt worry that much.

i thought that could be a possibility. So people didnt over react with the mantle of "Australia's tallest" (to roof) and risk having the negative public reaction. Then after approved beef up the height a little bit. Although im sure there would be a cost involved to do that, so not sure thats what they will do - but heres hoping.


This building will be the great pinnacle that brisbane skyline needs. It needs a defining building and this seems to be it.

Wow....just wow.

As others have said, way beyond anything I had anticipated for the site. A simple design, yet one that won't age quickly. Plus the street level component seems fairly interactive.

But....lets not so easily forget our friends - Emerald, Empire, Vision and Trilogy. Until there is a core poking above street level, I can't see why I should be convinced this will go ahead.

Welcome to the forum DQ, good time to finally start posting.

I was assuming that 222 is a mix of hotel and resi apartments whilst 111 is office.

Makes sense. I think it was the "residential tower" part that threw me. Maybe the journo was so overcome with excitement he/she threw grammar out the window...

it does have a great timeless quality to the design. simple form - nice glass (i hope). It will fit in well with Brisbane's other buildings like waterfront place, 111

The good thing about this one is if they decide to go ahead, there won't be many months of digging the basement... Therefore less time for them to change their minds. ;)

Brisbane Times site says that the office building will house AMP Capital, so I guess thats a guaranteed lease.

holy. fuck. build this shit, ASAP

OMG!!!! My loins are quivering in excitment!!!!

At 297m exactly it would be No.2 tallest to the roof behind Eureka wouldn't it? Eureka is 297.3m..

This is too close to be a coincidence. On the face of it, it doesn't make much sense to build a tower 30cm shorter than the tallest in Oz (and 3m short of being a supertall).

But as (I think) someone else said, this is probably a clever tactic to help it slip under the radar a bit. There can be no "AUSTRALIA'S TALLEST" headlines to get NIMBY knickers in a twist. It's just another tall tower to be added to the Brisbane skyline.

Then once build has started expect a small extension. Probably to just over 300m so that it comfortably beats Eureka. Maybe even with a viewing platform or restaurant...

Jaw droppingly, stunning!!!!!!!!

Smarter design too. The constant triangular cross section should make construction faster, less challenging and more cost effective than the original Vision tower design.

Apart from the usually chorus of protests from the NIMBY's will the tower have hurdles to overcome with CASA and its height or with casting shadows over the botanic gardens?

This has literally blown my mind!

Like Whoooooooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Unreal.

Best thing ever.

This is too close to be a coincidence. On the face of it, it doesn't make much sense to build a tower 30cm shorter than the tallest in Oz (and 3m short of being a supertall).

But as (I think) someone else said, this is probably a clever tactic to help it slip under the radar a bit. There can be no "AUSTRALIA'S TALLEST" headlines to get NIMBY knickers in a twist. It's just another tall tower to be added to the Brisbane skyline.

Then once build has started expect a small extension. Probably to just over 300m so that it comfortably beats Eureka. Maybe even with a viewing platform or restaurant...

It would be nice if they made the top of the big tower similar to the smaller one. Perhaps they'll amend the plans during construction to match the smaller tower.

If anyone here likes this development, it might be an idea to post a comment of support on the CM story page to drown out the morons.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/property/storey-building-planned-for-vision-tower-site/comments-e6frequ6-1226058343276

The fact they have AMP backing the commercial componant is very good news and gives the project much more confidence going into the first stage.

No different to the original concept, where Investa back the commercial component.

I just about jumped out of my skin when I ran across the couriermail article .. WOW! this is one amazing tower! awesome news for Brisbane and for the economy in general!

Can't wait to see more renders!

I'm truly stunned by this towers size .. wow .. speechless! :banana:

What's best is that this is 297m flat top, Vision and Q1 were 240 odd metre towers in reality, so this is sizeable.

I gotta say, the developers have really stepped up and put forward something which exceed expectations in so many ways. I always said 300m here would be terrific and almost can't believe we actually got it.

I wonder if they will add a small spire down the line, can't help but think that 111+222=333 after all;)

this just made my freakin' day

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/property/cbd-set-to-reach-new-heights-20110518-1esqy.html

*geeked*

OMFG, I was not expecting this, It looks way better than vision and chances are will get pushed up to 300m after its approved so it doesn't scare anyone.

Seeing the Queensland thread finally being updated regularly shows that Brisbane is well and truly back in business !!!!!!!

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/business/property/cbd-set-to-reach-new-heights-20110518-1esqy.html

*geeked*

OMG!!!!!!!!!!!

The media actually has correct stats :nuts:

dude fingers crossed they actually start building this. THEN fingers crossed they increase the height even by just 1 more floor ;)

good looking building too. if not the tallest possibly the largest looking one in australia?

Looks fantastic and with Bates Smart as the architects the quality of finishes should be top notch. My only concern is that this is a massive step up from anything Billbergia has done previously.

very impressed. can't wait to get more info.

call me when its being built, Brissie has had so many "talls" cancelled, its rather depressing in fact.

WTF??? You sound like a jealous schoolboy. The GFC has seen 3 projects canned - Vision, Trilogy and Empire. However the GFC also gave Brisbane Soleil, Infinity and 111 Eagle - the first two@ 200m+ and the third @ nearly 200m. That's a pretty good record actually and compares exceptionally well with the other capitals.

This one is now cream on the cake. Plus we still have Carrington and Regent towers to come as well.

Good times ahead.

Stunning! As always though, it'll come down to the choice of glass... Exhibit A:

http://www.creativewireworkshops.com/pictures/q1.jpg

http://www.creativewireworkshops.com/pictures/q2.jpg

Ah Mah Gawd. What a sexy piece of glass!

If anyone here likes this development, it might be an idea to post a comment of support on the CM story page to drown out the morons.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/property/storey-building-planned-for-vision-tower-site/comments-e6frequ6-1226058343276Where do they find these people :ohno: I like the guy who said there should be more carparks, to stop congestion, and the guy who told Aussie Bhoy that we don't need a observation deck because the ferris wheel at Southbank has one of the best views of a city anywhere in the world. Also these:

"Don't build these awful things. You'll end up a crappy city similar to Sydney or Melbourne"

"By building tall buildings we are really just cementing our place as a third world bogan city: "hey lookat us, we can build skyscrapers too"."

"Another plate glass and concrete monstrosity for the CBD"

"i suppose one more eye sore wont hurt"

"tacky, hope it doesn't go up."

People are generally stupid, they don't know they want something until you give it to them. If and when this gets built they'll all be glad to have it.

WTF??? You sound like a jealous schoolboy. The GFC has seen 3 projects canned - Vision, Trilogy and Empire. However the GFC also gave Brisbane Soleil, Infinity and 111 Eagle - the first two@ 200m+ and the third @ nearly 200m. That's a pretty good record actually and compares exceptionally well with the other capitals.

This one is now cream on the cake. Plus we still have Carrington and Regent towers to come as well.

Good times ahead.

Yeah - imagine exiting out of a new subway station and looking up to see Carrington & 111+222 towering above.... :banana:

Don't get me started on the retards commenting on the CM article. It seriously baffles me how naive and ignorant some people are. What baffles me more, is that there are plenty of those kind of people working for the Qld Govt and BCC. :)

Where do they find these people :ohno: I like the guy who said there should be more carparks, to stop congestion, and the guy who told Aussie Bhoy that we don't need a observation deck because the ferris wheel at Southbank has one of the best views of a city anywhere in the world. Also these:

"Don't build these awful things. You'll end up a crappy city similar to Sydney or Melbourne"

"By building tall buildings we are really just cementing our place as a third world bogan city: "hey lookat us, we can build skyscrapers too"."

"Another plate glass and concrete monstrosity for the CBD"

"i suppose one more eye sore wont hurt"

"tacky, hope it doesn't go up."

:lol:
If ever I needed a boost I'd just have to go read some of those STUPID un-'edumacated' comments LOL. I really feel quite smart now. The average NIMBY Joe has no idea. God I feel sorry for them :ohno:
Ignorance is bliss I guess.

I honestly never read the comment section anymore, too many dumb uneducated people post stuff on there. It just gets you all wound up for no reason, its not like their views are mainstream.

I don't know that it's necessarily that people are outright stupid, but rather that they insist on commenting things they know utterly nothing about. Everyone is their own expert these days and they wind up saying some utterly ridiculous things, then actually believing it.

Don't get me started on the retards commenting on the CM article. It seriously baffles me how naive and ignorant some people are. What baffles me more, is that there are plenty of those kind of people working for the Qld Govt and BCC. :)

And to think that Murdoch wants to hide this shitrag (and all his puss filled publications) behind a paywall. His constituancy of brain dead rednecks would be outraged at the thought of paying a couple of bucks for access. But where would they vent? Crikey? Fairfax media? The Drum?

Yeah right.

people also often comment when they have negative stuff to say.

Wow great news!!!,i thought something was wrong with the qld thread when i saw infinity at 243m and 111+222 at 297M haha

http://resources0.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/343588-111-222-development.jpg


I love the fact that the smaller tower looks like a stub, yet is roughly the same height as 400 George St... This thing is a monster!

Now if only a white knight comes along and salvages the Trilogy site/plans I could die happy.

"By building tall buildings we are really just cementing our place as a third world bogan city: "hey lookat us, we can build skyscrapers too"."



what are the cm readers smoking?

Has anyone posted this yet?? Taken from Brisbane Development online. http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com

222 Margaret St Tower:

•The taller tower is currently known as 222 Margaret Street and is 90 levels (297m) in height.
•A 5 star 380 room hotel is proposed for this tower, however the hotel operator is not yet known.
◦The hotel will have a ballroom.
•The tower will mostly comprise of 790 one, two and three bedroom residential apartments over the 90 floors.
•Restaurants & bars will be situated throughout the project with a key cross block link from Mary to Margaret Street to be established in stage 1.
•Depending on if the tower's 297m height is AGL (above ground level), 222 Margaret St will share the title of Australia's tallest tower with Eureka Tower - currently the tallest in Australia.
•It is not yet known if there will be an observation deck at the top - similar to what it's predecessor, Vision had.
•The tower is situated next to the proposed Cross River Rail - Albert Street underground station which will provide access to high capacity mass transit.
111 Mary St Tower:
•111 Margaret St tower is the smallest of the two, rising 34 levels.
•This tower will be completely office.
•AMP Capital is funding this part of the development
•980 car spaces will be built across eight underground levels.
The development has been designed by Bates Smart Architects and boasts a glass cylinder like design for the taller building. Billbergia will lodge the development application this week after releasing the plans to the media.


The news of 111+222 today largely overshadowed a significant height increase for Meriton's Infinity tower which is currently under construction. The tower's height which was planned to be 75 levels will now be increased to 81 - a 6 level increase. This new height has been submitted to council today. However 111+222's 297m proposal still trumps Infinity's new 81 level increase.

I gave up on reading comments myself on anything CM has to say and even worse on their Facebook page.

I can't for the life of me think that they won't add 30cm to this when finished to pip Eureka, I mean heck, that's one of these:
http://www.intannyata.com.my/store/images/30CM%20RULER.jpg

Heck, Eureka has probably sunk that much already, I doubt Eureka is actually 297.3m above the ground exactly still.

Given the amount of replies, I must have been in another world last night.

This new plan is very good - two major towers!!! :D. The 11 storey tower in the Vision Tower plans was nothing.

Very good about the plans for the hotel because Brisbane needs a new hotel. Trilogy was going to do that for us, but now it's these guys who can do it.

Win Win for all of us.

awesome news.now the 297m height is taken from a jurno or quote from architects? they never quote above street heights. very rare they do. so is it RL297m? which is 293m above grd? or actually 297m or RL301m?
eitherway its great but just trying to get accurate heights for CTBUH
btw, Eureka is offically 297.3m. always has been.
cant believe they didnt go for 300m?
offically will be 3rd tallest in OZ after Q1 (322.5m & Eureka 297m?)

the render looks great. any observation? tell me theres fuckin observation?????

^^We'll find out when the docs go up.

RE: Eureka, isn't there a 300RL height limit there, therefore they couldn't get 300m above ground.

I gave up on reading comments myself on anything CM has to say and even worse on their Facebook page.

I Know though most CM commenters would prefer to see this development in the form of 500 4 bedroom houses in the middle of no where.

Kj—when do yu thibk da docs will go on line?

:)How exciting! They are putting up new signage
http://111plus222.com/

Nothing much on the site yet, but a nice panorama video of the CBD from the sky.

http://111plus222.com/images/aerial.jpg

here is a new skyline pic to wet your appetite. Credit goes to someone for this pic - but i cant remember who, because i got it off this site a few years ago. The pic is a little outdated - missing a few new additions. But gives a good indication of how 111+222 may look.

http://www.sibleydesign.com.au/111222skyline.jpg

Doesn't make much sense to me that one building has a sloping roof and one doesn't. Say they add a similar angle to the taller one, even if it's just PV panels, could easily add another 5-10m on that.

Jesus titty fucking christ.. just saw the thread!!

FUCK YEAH!!!!! just when I thought.. 'once the meriton's are done that's it for Brissy.. fun's over... pull up stumps' and then bam!! hello!!!

hopefully the hotel can attract a decent brand.. no doubt it will.

FULLY SIC SUB WOOFA!!!!

as George Takei would say.. OOOOHHHHHH MY!

I know most cities have their tallest in the middle to create a "balanced" skyline, but I love samuel's pic above where the tallest create almost a "boundary" of the city limits...

Some great pictures, the surrounding buildings look like door steps next to it.

The skyline is balanced looking from the south now! Although it is amazing I will also only jump for joy when I see it rising about street level.

What is good about brisbane skyline is that it has always had a good density of smaller buildings, so all it ever really needed was a few talls in there. But I would like to see at least one (or 2) +200m around the middle (ie around the Queen st mall area), and that would make Brisbane's skyline well balanced and a real world class skyline/city.

https://picasaweb.google.com/m/viewer#search/matthew.cameron23/2011/5608241134485827794
fuck, tried to post pic from picasa of site from phone, didn't work. New signs up, chanel 7 was there doing story.

Good stuff! Thank God someone bought the plot who had 'Vision' instead of just going with the usual 30-40 story customary mediocre traditional standard box.

Once built we will have a nice CBD triangle that just needs a bit of gap filling with 200m + fillers.

On my way into the city this morning, crossing the captain cook bridge, I looked out the window and imagined what the skyline would look like with this beauty in it. WOW! I can't wait for this.

Renders are up:

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/SoulVisionQ3/d2a0b53b.jpg

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/SoulVisionQ3/347fe366.jpg

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/SoulVisionQ3/62dac6fa.jpg

Amazing bright green pond:

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/SoulVisionQ3/c49b22a2.jpg

:banana: I am loving this already

Why isn't it 333m tall? That would be more logical imho (111+222). There should be a 222m one, a 333m one and perhaps a 111m little brother? :) or am I aiming too high? lol

It looks like there is one floor above the plant rooms. Ballroom? Observation Deck? Penthouse?

^^ I'm hoping an observation deck-cum-ballroom/function room, and maybe even a bar to go with it. Similar to Q1's Skydeck. Imagine something like a school formal or a gala ball held up there with the incredible view, or just to go up there for a drink with your significant other...

Better stop daydreaming before I drool over my keyboard!

Also, the vision hole looks like it's filled with Nuclear Waste or something in that photo! Pumping it out will be an interesting exercise!

well thats what i was thinking, seeing the out of place LMR which rises slightly asbove glass parapet? maybe lift core to observatory level? also whats with large seidler esqe windows near top? aka riparian?

Don't get the Seidler comparison.

That looks like a cool tall tower, i was loosing hope of ever getting something descent in this spot.

So this has been approved? how long can we excpect to wait until it gets started?

^^ lol, no its not even submitted yet.

I reckon there is a rooftop bar associated with the 5 star hotel. This has been done for the Peninsula in HK and repeated in a few other cities like Bangkok.

Why? Because judging by that render, SOMETHING will go there... It's two empy floors above the (possible) plant floors.

I have a feeling Billbergia will use this rooftop bar idea as a key element to attract a good hotel tenant... Like the Peninsula or Shangri la hotel.

It looks like it would be an open air bar too. The floor below that might be an observation floor for the public (like the skydeck in Eureka).

Hope it's not the penthouse like what vision did, wasn't a fan of that aspect of it.

Don't get the Seidler comparison.

the large black window openings near roof?
seidler has that on most of his bldgs.
http://www.kwa.com.au/images/project-riparianplaza.jpg

ps- ive noticed the 5 floors above the typical office floor.? would be cool if they were hotel of convention ob deck. then theres the 2 elevls above plantroom which look interesting?

Channel Seven just said approval could take a year!? Surely that is wrong given the history of tall proposals on this site?

I'm hoping that glass is something like 111 Eagle St. :cool:

Channel Seven just said approval could take a year!? Surely that is wrong given the history of tall proposals on this site?

I doubt it, DAs rarely take that long,

Any ideas on construction?

Im guessing.....

Mid 2012- Carpark Complete
Late 2012 - 34 begins construction
Mid 2013 - 90 starts

The more pictures I see the more I realise how huge this thing is. It sooo f&%#ing huge. It just seems to go up and up for ages. Dwarfs everything else in the skyline. And I agree with the Seidler comparisons, I doubt its any coincidence that it complements Riverside Centre in shape and Riparian in plant structures quite well.

Lets hope Billgergia haven't been TOO ambitious with this - 790 apartments is a lot to sell. It just has to happen though. Imagine how crushing it would be for us for 111+222 ending up been scrapped as well.

http://111plus222.com/images/aerial.jpg

OMFG *drools*

Really hope this one goes ahead, better design than Vision IMO. Just don't like the roof design on the smaller tower. Let's keep our fingers crossed. Brisbane could be one of the greatest cities in the world in four our five years time. Too bad the flood happened, but we will recover from that. If we can get a few decent inner city developments as well as build first class infrasructure, then Brisbane will be a great place!

Guess I'm an eternal optimist. Brisbane could be very different in just three or four years time. And I agree with other posters here, quite a few wnkrs who write to the CM newspaper. Guess they would prefer endless urban sprawl everywhere.......lol!

Yeah the best thing about this tower is that it is a straight up vertical glass facade for 300m! I mean that is going to appear TALL, no matter how you look at it.

Channel Seven just said approval could take a year!? Surely that is wrong given the history of tall proposals on this site?

There should be no shadowing issues in the approval process - according to the renders this tower does not have any..... :P

There is a disturbance in the force - i can feel the nimbys starting to get agitated - starting to coalesce into groups. Before long they will rise up to try and raze this building to the ground.

Lets hope Billgergia haven't been TOO ambitious with this - 790 apartments is a lot to sell. It just has to happen though. Imagine how crushing it would be for us for 111+222 ending up been scrapped as well.

Most of Billbergia developments are around that size (800+ apartments) however they are generally staged in numerous smaller (much smaller!) buildings. I wonder if this tower could be staged considering the three distinct sections of the tower? Which section will house the hotel I wonder?

Meh, it'll get approved, that's not a big deal, give it 6 months.

from today's Courier Mail
http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/6508/111222cm.jpg

It's just too good to be true, I think. This proposal is bound to hit a snag and come unravelled. Will be fantastic while the dream is alive, and when it's over we can take a running bomb dive into the slime...:skull:

Excuse me for saying this but I have to get it off my chest.....NIMBY's everywhere give me the shits :bash:

NIMBY's are an overestimated danger, how many major towers have NIMBY's stopped in QLD the last 10 years?

Zero.

NIMBY's hate stuff like Northbank, but generally speaking they don't care about skyscrapers in a major way, it's not a big deal and never have been.

The simple fact is, neither NIMBY's nor approvals are a concern in QLD, the real concern, the real project-stoppers are the economics. It's all about the dollar bills at the end of the day.

I was also under the impression city councils can put in objections if it doesn't meet certain criteria/asthetics which don't necessarily have anything to do with economics, at least in Melbourne anyway.

Quick shop of how it could look, Brisbane will be the land of the flat tops! In stark contrast to the GC in terms of talls.

http://i.imgur.com/C85QT.jpg

I doubt it, DAs rarely take that long,

Any ideas on construction?

Im guessing.....

Mid 2012- Carpark Complete
Late 2012 - 34 begins construction
Mid 2013 - 90 starts

so tallest tower starts 2nd? what a bummer. this thread is going to get excrutiating.:bash:

I doubt it, DAs rarely take that long,


DA's for CBD towers almost always takes that long. BCC aren't only concerned about height, there are other factors also.

Awesome view from Mt Coot-tha. The CRR "Royal on the Park" site is zoned to 80 storeys as well - if all the planets align, this could be a very nice view in 10years or so if 333 gets built and then gets a sister.

A dumb question for those with more knowledge than me: given that most new towers these days strive for a 6star rating, is it possible to slap solar panels onto the sloping roof of the 111 tower? I would imagine it would not even be feasible given the tower points in a WNW direction - as well as a hundred different other reasons - but I'm curious.

I doubt it, DAs rarely take that long,

yes they do.... i reckon 12mo is a fair estimate. if the consultant team don't have their act together it could take 18 - 24mo.

Quick shop of how it could look, Brisbane will be the land of the flat tops! In stark contrast to the GC in terms of talls.

http://i.imgur.com/C85QT.jpg

Nice photoshop Locke, but i really think that angle of the cbd is one of the city's most inelegant angles. It looks too urbanised because you can't see the river. The Eastern and Southern suburbs definitely have the best angles of the skyline

On an aside, after the satisfaction has worn off from getting this proposal, I really do not have faith that this thing will get built, simply based on Brisbane's history of talls being scrapped.

Nice render Locke but I think 111+222 and Soliel are a bit too tall given other buildings nearby. They both look about 325m in your render given waterfront place and skyline are only about 160m each.

On an aside, after the satisfaction has worn off from getting this proposal, I really do not have faith that this thing will get built, simply based on Brisbane's history of talls being scrapped.

it will be tough. they have 790 apartments to sell.

as discussed in the chalk thread - they need to sell at least 65% to secure construction funding. that's 513 apartments.

off the plan projects in qld have a standard sunset date of 3.5yrs. given this thing will take at least 24mo to construct this gives the developers around 1 - 1.5yrs to secure 513 sales. that equates to 42 - 29/mo. that's a very big number to hit.

they can apply to the govt for an extension to this period to 5.5yrs, which would give them 3 - 3.5yrs to secure their 513 sales. that would mean 14 - 12/mo - which is still very high as an average rate. plus it will be hard to convince purchasers they should wait 5.5yrs for their apartment.

meriton tackles this problem by selling a lot of their apartments offshore (primarily into asia) but harry has been in the paper recently saying this market is dead. it has also been written that harry often buys up to 30% of the apartments himself through a separate/private company.

it will be very interesting to see how billbergia tackles the presales problem.

^^^ oh, and if the 380 rooms in the hotel are intended to be strata titled.. which is most likely (they were in empire and trilogy).. then the numbers just get bigger and harder to achieve.

I think they're probably banking on increases in demand to come within 3 years with the recovery and mining boom though it's certainly far from a certain project. However, with soleil and infinity finishing significantly before it will, it may be one of the few large scale CBD residential projects at the time.

Also, while we're on the topic of renders, could anyone do one including Carrington Tower as well. It may make 111+222 look less lonely (plus, they both involve similar horizonal breaks in the facade).

I think they're probably banking on increases in demand to come within 3 years with the recovery and mining boom though it's certainly far from a certain project. However, with soleil and infinity finishing significantly before it will, it may be one of the few large scale CBD residential projects at the time.

Also, while we're on the topic of renders, could anyone do one including Carrington Tower as well. It may make 111+222 look less lonely (plus, they both involve similar horizonal breaks in the facade).

I'm guessing this is the whole aim of the project, Though after the vision fiasco i really doubt billbergia would have brought this without seriously considering all of the issues such as presale, etc. They obviously have a plan....I hope

I am assuming the 380 hotel units are included in the 790 total. This thing, I would assume, doesn't contain 1170 appartments.

More pics:

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/343985-111-222-development.jpg

http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/18/1226058/344009-111-222-development.jpg

Based on these close up renders, I think the building, from far away, will look a bit less "glassy" than the renders we have seen, and a bit more "liney". I think these horizontal blades will be be more obvious than shown in the other renders.

And on a similar note but unrelated to this thread, I really don't like the curves shapes in Infinity. they already look dated.

^^ I'm hoping an observation deck-cum-ballroom/function room, and maybe even a bar to go with it. Similar to Q1's Skydeck. Imagine something like a school formal or a gala ball held up there with the incredible view, or just to go up there for a drink with your significant other...

Better stop daydreaming before I drool over my keyboard!

Also, the vision hole looks like it's filled with Nuclear Waste or something in that photo! Pumping it out will be an interesting exercise!

It's a bad algal bloom as well. That needs to be fixed up as soon as possible.

If this development does not include an observation deck, I will be highly disappointed, not to mention a huge opportunity to tourism wasted.

From what I've seen so far of Renders, it is quite odd that the tower is tending to face westwards as opposed to the east. You would expect it to face eastwards to capture the views towards Moreton Bay.

Remember the streets don't follow the compass. The sides of the tower from what I can make out face east, north west and south.

Forget your geometry KJ? It's a triangle. If your East orientation is correct, the other sides would face North West and South West.

Yes of course. I got muddled. The eastern face faces directly towards the Airport, with the other two faces facing North West and South West.

Well you may be right if it were a scalene triangle but it doesn't look like it. Run of the mill equilateral. -- not saying the design of the building is run of the mill

The design reminds of one bligh in sydney.

It reminds me of Absolute World in Mississauga though with (what would appear) clearer glass and without the whole twisty thing going on... fucking gorgeous towers though. Also, 111+222 appears to have more subtle balconies (if any? might have sunrooms like Q1?) which I like.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii108/jasonzedd/Mississauga4/20110512084.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii108/jasonzedd/Mississauga4/20110512026.jpg
Jasonized (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=77681875&postcount=536)

Nice render Locke but I think 111+222 and Soliel are a bit too tall given other buildings nearby. They both look about 325m in your render given waterfront place and skyline are only about 160m each.

Thanks, though I actually took the spire from Riparian and put it next to 111+222 and made it a touch smaller, so it should be approx 300m, but really hard to get it right on these telephoto shots, whist the background is crushed and you lose perspective it's probably still not 100% an orthographic view either.

In any case, it's nothing if not tall, chunky as well and not tapering which really adds to the height. I can't wait to do some planking from the top of it.

It reminds me of Absolute World in Mississauga though with (what would appear) clearer glass and without the whole twisty thing going on... fucking gorgeous towers though. Also, 111+222 appears to have more subtle balconies (if any? might have sunrooms like Q1?) which I like.

http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii108/jasonzedd/Mississauga4/20110512084.jpg
http://i262.photobucket.com/albums/ii108/jasonzedd/Mississauga4/20110512026.jpg
Jasonized (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=77681875&postcount=536)


Wow thats an amazing buildings(s). I have never seen them before. what's more I have never heard of Mississauga - i had to google it.

You obviously weren't on the forum back when every 2nd thread was about Toronto.

Ha Ha obviously not. I was a lurker for many years though.

I've been thinking a little about this development. The Stage 1 of the carpark would almost definately be built (so they can get some return off the site at the very least) Stage 2 I would imagine would be the Office and the ground floor retail. Considering AMP will be leasing the office and there are now talks that Brisbane could be running short of A grade stock in about 3 years time I think this would be an almost definate goer.

The taller tower, if they can get a hotelier, the strata rooms would be valuable and could be a good alternative within property for all those that don't want to by and lease out a house or an apartment. My biggest concern would be the remainder of the apartments, however if they need 60% presales with approx 50% of the complex being the hotel, I think there is a strong chance this could get up.

It will be interesting to see if they've managed to get away with a code assessable development so there is no ability for the public to officially comment. I would also imagine they have had a pre-lodgement meeting with CASA to ensure they are happy with the height (otherwise it is very risky to take on a potential show-stopper)

However, as a disclaimer, many things can happen in the market and anything can change. The problem with Metcap (Empire Square) and Austcorp (Vision) was the companies went broke. The towers actually had quite good pre-sales.

The design reminds of one bligh in sydney.

1 Bligh is elipitcal in shape. Not so much the case here. The curves are sharper.

I've been thinking a little about this development.

I have also been looking quite closely at it, and like you I've discovered they have at least done their homework. The office is not such a big deal - it will happen - whilst the carpark makes economic sense and ought to be done. The sales campaign for the main tower will be long and tough I expect, but the hotel component has been a proven success with Hilton and The Westin in the past.

If ever a supertall is going to get up, this is the scheme it'll have. Ready access to finance is the remaining hurdle.

Someone told me the other day that the hotel will be an Intercontinental. May or may not be correct.

I have also been looking quite closely at it, and like you I've discovered they have at least done their homework. The office is not such a big deal - it will happen - whilst the carpark makes economic sense and ought to be done. The sales campaign for the main tower will be long and tough I expect, but the hotel component has been a proven success with Hilton and The Westin in the past.

If ever a supertall is going to get up, this is the scheme it'll have. Ready access to finance is the remaining hurdle.

Someone told me the other day that the hotel will be an Intercontinental. May or may not be correct.

If the hotel is part of the 790 apartments that leaves a reasonable number to sell and I'm sure a lot of people would want to live in Brisbane tallest tower that isn't a meriton ( My parents didnt buy one in soleil purely because it is a meriton). And considering brisbanes lack of 5 star hotels there are sure to be a lot of companies interested, Westin and continental just to name 2. Your definently right Marty if any supertall has a chance it is this one.Billbergia has really done there work

^really, meriton are actually quite good these days./ i recomend them to anyone.good quality

You're wrong.

It's clear to any half discerning eye that Soleil is not a quality building just simply by standing next to it. It's not the worst, but it's not good.

In fact, I haven't understood the Soleil love at all. I think it's just the "Oooohhh it's tall!" factor. It is not a nice bit of architecture, though I will admit it scrubs up reasonably in photographs.

it's not good.

What do you base this comment on?

The quality of the materials, the quality of the finishes, the quality of the most basic fixtures and fittings and how they have been erected. Further to that the smallness of the apartments, the number of apartments and the lack of space for services.

Seriously, you can't tell me anyone that knows anything about construction is impressed with Soleil.

Like I said, it's not a nightmare, but it's not "quality."

The quality of the materials, the quality of the finishes, the quality of the most basic fixtures and fittings and how they have been erected. Further to that the smallness of the apartments, the number of apartments and the lack of space for services.

Seriously, you can't tell me anyone that knows anything about construction is impressed with Soleil.

Like I said, it's not a nightmare, but it's not "quality."

I agree, I mean its tall but meh, the pillars annoy me the most.

And Culwulla my parents lived in sydney in the 80s and 90s and rented a meriton place they said never again.

You might be surprised at the quality of the finishes in major Meriton towers such as World Tower. Culwulla, Finn, Muse (RIP), myself and several others have had the chance to inspect apartments in World tower. I recall Muse scrutinising the apartments for flaws and fortuantely left empty handed.

The buildings may look bad outside, but inside a big improvement.

The internal quality of the Meriton Apartments in Broadbeach is decent. Not spectacular, but I'd definitely say 'good quality'. Outside it is bland at best.

I agree with Marty that Soleil isn't very attractive. I'd rather it was built than not, but it's not a pretty tower. I'd expect that the insides will at least match the Meriton Apartments.

both meriton towers in brisbane have a high number of apartments intended to be used as 'serviced apartments' - i.e. an oaks-style hotel.

if anyone has been reading www.brisbane-apartment.com they know that serviced apartment buildings suck for owner occupiers.

I agree, I mean its tall but meh, the pillars annoy me the most.

And Culwulla my parents lived in sydney in the 80s and 90s and rented a meriton place they said never again.

yes that was 80s and 90s. since 2000 they got there act togther. after many crap jobs. bit dfiffernt these days.

I noticed yesterday that Aurora is now "Oaks Aurora".

I thought they were going to make changes a couple of years ago to prevent residential apartments becoming pseudo hotels?

Aurora was one of the first to change.

I thought they were going to make changes a couple of years ago to prevent residential apartments becoming pseudo hotels?

didn't happen

both meriton towers in brisbane have a high number of apartments intended to be used as 'serviced apartments' - i.e. an oaks-style hotel.

if anyone has been reading www.brisbane-apartment.com they know that serviced apartment buildings suck for owner occupiers.

I don't think Meriton are as bad, because they usually reserve floors specifically for Serviced Apartments and have the proper facilities (instead of crappy conversions)

I've lived in an OAKS building and they suck.

so far Eureka has most floors ever built in australia with 92 (91 above)
Infinity will e qual eureka with 92 (81 above)
looks like 111+222 will have most with 98? (90 above and 8 below?

Cul, I think the number of basement levels in Infinty were reduced, hence the height increase.

BTW Docs are up for 111+222. Application number: A003087333

Excellent news. SOmething good comes even without vision

thanks kj
as i thouight 297m is an RL!!
the elevation isnt that clear but i can read 300mRl at top of lightning rod?lol-which isnt included in overall height only if its on a spire.
RL297m to bldg or 293m above margaret st!
smaller tower is RL164m.160m above mary st
tall tower has 90 floors + 8 basements=98.
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/3254/111300rl.jpg

bit that mentions 300m to lightning rod
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/2738/bilbergrod300m.jpg

Some more goodies from the application:

Summary:

A two tower development scheme comprising:

A ninety (90) storey mixed use tower and podium providing the following

Multi-Unit Dwelling
Short-Term Accommodation
Shop
Office
Hotel
Convention Centre
Restaurant
Indoor Sport and Recreation
Utility Installation (wind turbines)


A thirty-seven (37) storey Office tower with ground floor Restaurant


Counts:

Gross Floor Area (GFA): 157,898m^2
Building height: RL300.00 m on AHD and RL167.780m on AHD
Site Cover: 90%
Number of car parks: 979
Number of stories: 90 storeys and 37 storeys
Number of units: 793

90 story tower levels:

Podium/Office levels 0-3
Hotel levels 5-21
Residential levels 25-90

296.4m to tip and 293.4m to parapet by the looks.

thanks kj
as i thouight 297m is an RL!!
the elevation isnt that clear but i can read 300mRl at top of lightning rod?lol-

Exec summary also says it is 300m tall.

Would be interested to see the aeronautical assessment, will CASA for instance have any issues with a building of this size?

Exec summary also says it is 300m tall.

^if you look closely, the height of 300mRL is top of lightning rod which isnt included in height, thus 297mRL or 293m above margaret street.
same goes fro smaller tower. RL167m to rod or 164mRL top or 160m above mary st
tell me im wrong:nuts:

Serious question....what is the difference between a lightning rod and a spire?

ive asked chief of CTBUH years ago. the rod is included IF atop a spire. not if its just tacked on rooftop.
Eureka also has a rod which is 4m and reaches RL304m. ;-)

reposted overpage
thanks kj
as i thouight 297m is an RL!!
the elevation isnt that clear but i can read 300mRl at top of lightning rod?lol-which isnt included in overall height only if its on a spire.
RL297m to bldg or 293m above margaret st!
smaller tower is RL164m.160m above mary st
tall tower has 90 floors + 8 basements=98.
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/3254/111300rl.jpg

bit that mentions 300m to lightning rod
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/2738/bilbergrod300m.jpg

^^ I would think a spire would be more of a decorative feature, while a lightning rod is simply there to draw lightning away from hitting other parts of the building. Most spires would probably incorporate, or be designed to act as, a lightning rod.

^yes, correct
some rods get added later ,thus height increases original height.
its happened to a couple of bldgs in sydney. only by 1metre or so.
Sydney tower is now offically 309m due to a 4m rod being added in 1994.

chifley tower had a 3m rod added years ago to increase heigth from 241m to 244m
http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/3160/dscf5934.jpg

So it's 300mRL, lightning rod inclusive and there is no observation deck or penthouse.

I have to say the podium design is very cool and has an incredible number of facilities.

There is also an even mix of apartment types from shoeboxes (quite a lot of shoeboxes, TBH) to some very nice looking 3 bed sub-penthouses and twin level sky homes. Lots of ~90sqm 2 bedders too.

^yes, or 297mRL to roof or 293m above street.

There is also an even mix of apartment types from shoeboxes (quite a lot of shoeboxes, TBH) to some very nice looking 3 bed sub-penthouses and twin level sky homes. Lots of ~90sqm 2 bedders too.

The shoeboxes are hotel rooms.

So it's 300mRL, lightning rod inclusive and there is no observation deck or penthouse.

I have to say the podium design is very cool and has an incredible number of facilities.

Bit bummed that there isn't an observation desk at the top, but I'm extremely impressed by the podium design/layout and included cross block link. The amount of included cafe, restaurant and retail space looks pretty good to me.

The shoeboxes are hotel rooms.

I know, but there are some resi ones as well.

A ninety (90) storey mixed use tower and podium providing the following
Shop
Office
Hotel
Convention Centre
Restaurant


90 story tower levels:

Podium/Office levels 0-3
Hotel levels 5-21
Residential levels 25-90

So I wonder what the plans are for the restaurant in the larger tower? Part of the hotel I presume? Same with convention centre?

Sounds like there might be a restaurant with some decent views anyway, even if it is as low as level 5.

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/7888/baseoftower.jpg

Would be interested to see the aeronautical assessment, will CASA for instance have any issues with a building of this size?

CASA backflip on CBD tower risk
Shannon Molloy | June 28, 2008 - 6:32AM

Air safety regulators who today labelled a 79-storey skyscraper project on Mary Street an aviation safety risk told developers 18 months ago that the building was fine, it has been revealed.

Austcorp, the company behind the $1 billion Vision project in Brisbane's CBD, have Brisbane City Council approval to build up to a height of 250 metres, however the developer wants to go 37 metres higher.

The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) this morning said it considered 287 metres too high and warned the building could pose a danger to aircrafts and would throw airport services into chaos.

However in a letter from CASA to Austcorp, dated November 13, 2006, the developer was assured there was no safety risk - even at 287 metres.

"CASA has given the opinion that the proposed development would not be considered unsafe provided that... medium intensity steady red obstruction lights (were fitted) at the highest most practicable point of the structure," the letter, obtained by brisbanetimes.com.au, reads.

In a second letter from CASA in November 2006, it was said the obstruction lights would "mitigate any aviation safety hazard".

The view is in stark contrast to the one conveyed by CASA this morning, when its spokesman Peter Gibson said the authority opposed the extra height.

"We have a view that a 287 metres tall building would interfere with Brisbane Airport's radar services and cause air traffic congestion on the southern approach to the airport," Mr Gibson said.

"If an aircraft was taking off and it lost an engine, it would have difficulty climbing as fast as it normally would (and) the height of the building would be a danger if the aircraft was lower than its normal attitude."

When later asked about the letters from 2006, Mr Gibson insisted CASA had not back-flipped on its position.

"What we were saying (then) is that if (Vision) is 287 metres tall, it needs to be lit to be made safe... we wouldn't consider it unsafe," he said.

However CASA was asked by Brisbane Airport Corporation in March this year what its "preference" was and that is when the position changed, he said.

"The question asked this year was what we preferred... we are just giving our opinion... but we don't get to make the decision."

If the building reached 287 metres, flight paths would need to be moved and radar configurations at the airport changed, he said.

"Basically the radar would just bounce off the building and interfere with the pattern of the radar beyond (the building)."

CASA's preference is for 250 metres because such changes to airport operation would be disruptive, he said.

"It's up to the airport to monitor developments around it that could affect it and take the relevant steps."

Austcorp is required to apply to the federal Department of Infrastructure and Transport to build higher than the approved 250 metres. It is understood no formal submission from the developer has been made.

CASA has lodged a submission with the department formally opposing an increase beyond 250 metres.

Austcorp spokesman Terry Lee said the developer remained confident it could "put a case" for building higher than 250 metres without creating any aviation safety risk.

"Austcorp's aviation specialist consultant and its town planning consultant are in active discussions with Brisbane Airport Corporation and revelant aviation agencies regaring our current application for airspace approval," Mr Lee said.

"It should be understood that this approval process is routine for tall buildings in cities across the country.

"Vision has complied with all relevant approval processes with Brisbane City Council and is now in the process of seeking federal government approval for the building height in accordance with legislative guidelines."

He would not comment on CASA's apparent back-flip.

Construction is already underway on the site, with work on basement levels expected to be complete by September.

Those querying about the number of hotel rooms in the hotel - 369. (not counted in the units total)

Just read the architects document, OMG such a nice tower.

The units all look really well designed and the podium is great as well as the cross block link. Though i think there needs to be a legal injunction to stop coffee club or pie face opening.

Bit bummed that there isn't an observation desk at the top, but I'm extremely impressed by the podium design/layout and included cross block link. The amount of included cafe, restaurant and retail space looks pretty good to me.

so no observation levels near top? you serious? what major fail:bash:

I am assuming the 380 hotel units are included in the 790 total. This thing, I would assume, doesn't contain 1170 appartments.

turns out it does contain ~1170 apartments

h-u-g-e

some more plans
ground floor
http://img847.imageshack.us/img847/3029/bilbergfloorplan.jpg

floor plates
for those interested,the tall tower measures 48m x 40m, very thin (smaller tower 50mx35m)

http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/5804/bilbergfloorplates.jpg

closeup of top
first subpenthouse onlev81 is RL255m

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/8930/bilbergtoprls.jpg

basement reached RL-18m or 22m below grd
which equates to 98floors or 315m of actual building!

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/9753/bilbergbasements.jpg

elevation

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/6058/bilbergelevation.jpg

mary st elevation
http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/200/bilbergmarytower.jpg



top detail
wind turbines

http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/723/bilbergtoptopppvbt.jpg

As I suspected, the Stages are as follows:

Stage 1 - Carpark and Office Tower
Stage 2 - Hotel
Stage 3 - Res up to plant on 52nd level
Stage 4 - Remainder of the Res tower.

The ground floor retail can occur at any stage.


OR



Stage 1 - Carpark and Hotel
Stage 2 - Res up to plant on 52nd level
Stage 3 - Remainder of the Res tower.
Stage 4 - Office Tower

The ground floor retail can occur at any stage.

Im guessing they will go with the first option, Be intersting to see how long the wait would be between level 52 and completion, or possibly go bankrupt and we are stuck with it at 52 stories.

I can't see a construction scheme working out where they add so many extra levels on top. Surely it would be logistically impossible and not exactly acceptable for existing residents and tenants? Such a large construction project is a massive undertaking... I can't even see how health and safety regs would be complied with when the ground floors and podium are fully activated, yet there are cranes and whatnot above.

I really think the tower would have to be built all in one go. Has a two stage tower ever been constructed in Australia?

I love the cladding on this, not just a straight glass skyscraper! Love how they've angled the glass, should look great :)

I can't see a construction scheme working out where they add so many extra levels on top. Surely it would be logistically impossible and not exactly acceptable for existing residents and tenants? Such a large construction project is a massive undertaking... I can't even see how health and safety regs would be complied with when the ground floors and podium are fully activated, yet there are cranes and whatnot above.

I really think the tower would have to be built all in one go. Has a two stage tower ever been constructed in Australia?

i'd be interested to know the answer to this... i struggle to see how it would work too. perhaps they could be undertaking fitout works on the upper stages while the lower stages is open?? but all of the structure would have to be built in one go.

It's the present "Vision" basement exactly what is needed or will they dig further?

Wow, such an information dump. Reading through that DA in less then 5 minutes made me dizzy.

I got to say that it is one amazing tower, although I am quite dissapointed there is no public viewing platform or use of rooftop area. However the tower seems to have a great layout and street integration. I am looking forward to the next 5 years in Brisbane :)

Images from the DA - by Billbergia and Bates Smart. I almost cried when I saw some of these. :P

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower1.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower2.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower5.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower9.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower8.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower4.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/street1.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/street4.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/street5.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/botanicgardens.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/floorplan1.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/floorplan2.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/street2.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/facade.jpg

http://www.brisbanedevelopment.com/images/stories/Article_Images/111_222/tower6.jpg

seems criminal there is no observation deck on a new 300m bldg in a city like brisbane?
so harrys other 250m also wont have any either. wtf???

wow....

again.

It's magical!

I'm not crying, really, I'm not:P
http://www.pageantrymagazine.com/assets/images/features/2006/d06/d06_Miss%20Universe%202006/TearsofJoy.jpg

Shame bout no OB deck, guess i'll have to buy the penthouse then:P I shall console myself with having the tallest most wowoweewow tower in Aus:P

Notice the Penthouse has its own friggin lobby! So one generous person could potentially buy the penthouse and convert it to an ob deck. :D

the core seems to have dropped from all the renders. it would have been 300mRL to core, but looks like its been revised and cut down to parapet level.

http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn131/SoulVisionQ3/4-7.png

Probably my favourite render. The skyline looks a bit like a Chinese city in this one and similarly smacks of economic growth.

^^ Yep, that render is awesome.

From some angles it's so big it actually made me laugh.

In a good way.

And here is the reality check:

(1) The number of apartments for sale is utterly astronomical and almost impossible to acheive without a red red red red (white?) hot economic explosion.
(2) The staged construction of the main tower is a pipe dream. They have to do the whole thing at once.
(3) Bilbergia are almost IDENTICAL to Austcorp when they proposed Vision. It's like they were separated at birth. Lots of smaller, decent quality res projects but nothing very big at all and absolutely zero experience with a project of this size. I worry about their ability to pull it off at the right pace and to secure finance for such a monster.
(4) The promise of AMP occupying the office tower is much like Investa going into Vision. Nothing guaranteed.
(5) CASA are backward. Who knows what they'll do.
(6) Brisbane hates tallies. The gods of the city object. They will kill it if they can! (Insert spooky music here)

Cross everything, guys.

Soul, i get nuthin but a "Photobucket Bandwith Exceeded" image for each.


Where can i see these?

yeah Marty, I agree, while i may revel in this time, the images and promise they bring, I do not hold much hope for it coming to fruition.

In the movie Charlie Wilson’s War, Philip Seymour Hoffman’s character tells the story of the Zen master to Tom Hank’s character like this:

Gust Avrakotos: There's a little boy and on his 14th birthday he gets a horse... and everybody in the village says, "how wonderful. The boy got a horse" And the Zen master says, "we'll see." Two years later, the boy falls off the horse, breaks his leg, and everyone in the village says, "How terrible." And the Zen master says, "We'll see." Then, a war breaks out and all the young men have to go off and fight... except the boy can't cause his legs all messed up. and everybody in the village says, "How wonderful."
Charlie Wilson: Now the Zen master says, "We'll see."

I really, really want to see this one built but I think Marty’s reality check is spot on. As the Zen master says "We'll see."

elevation

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/6058/bilbergelevation.jpg

mary st elevation
http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/200/bilbergmarytower.jpg




Look how big it is compared to river city! unbelievable

I can't see a construction scheme working out where they add so many extra levels on top. Surely it would be logistically impossible and not exactly acceptable for existing residents and tenants? Such a large construction project is a massive undertaking... I can't even see how health and safety regs would be complied with when the ground floors and podium are fully activated, yet there are cranes and whatnot above.

I really think the tower would have to be built all in one go. Has a two stage tower ever been constructed in Australia?

Not 100% sure on this one but I believe that Eureka had residents moving into the lower floor apartments while the upper floors were still under construction. I would expect that would be normal for tall buildings.

Don't know how it wouls work if you essentially finished the first stage of the building then came back later and resumed construction after a period of inactivity.

And here is the reality check:

(1) The number of apartments for sale is utterly astronomical and almost impossible to acheive without a red red red red (white?) hot economic explosion.


Maybe the apartments will be priced very competitively due to savings from excavation work plus the obvious economies of scale.

But yes, you are correct that a project of this scale carries a lot of risk.

Not 100% sure on this one but I believe that Eureka had residents moving into the lower floor apartments while the upper floors were still under construction. I would expect that would be normal for tall buildings.

Don't know how it wouls work if you essentially finished the first stage of the building then came back later and resumed construction after a period of inactivity.

i think you'll find that construction of eureka was 95% complete and while the residents were moving in on the lower floors they were just finishing off the kitchens, paint and carpet on the upper levels. i think the same thing happened with aurora and riparian, and they are planning to do the same thing on soul.

Notice the Penthouse has its own friggin lobby! So one generous person could potentially buy the penthouse and convert it to an ob deck. :D

there are 12 penthouses. and whilst there is a 'penthouse lobby' it shares the lifts with the sub penthouse levels (128 apartments) and the high rise levels (238 apartments). put simply, there is zero chance of a public observation deck with the current scheme. to make one would require a re-design with a separate lift bank.

I'm no engimaneer or architect, so my plan reading abilities aren't too crash hot, but is anyone able to comment on the capability of lifts or podium space to accommodate a future ob deck? The only reason I ask this is because it seems a little odd that they've stayed shy of 300m status nor have included an observation deck. I've been thinking about it and I wonder if their logic is:

1) Get approval for a building that's less than 300m (and not going to break any records) in order to stay under the radar and avoid objections.
2) Once approved, apply for the height increase to achieve super-tall status
3) Rather than just apply for height (which may still come under fire from various parties), bundle the application with "brisbane's first and highest observation deck" and how good it will be for tourism etc... Surely this would make it an easier sell...?

I'm probably way off - but can anyone comment of the tower's capability to accommodate such future changes...?

^^ I can't see that happening TBH because getting approval for a height increase, and building up higher will cost extra money and would involve jumping through all the hoops with Council, and CASA all over again solely for the benefit of having an observation deck. The dollar value of an OD surely wouldn't offset the costs associated with these kind of changes to the approval.

Keep in mind that the only reason that Infinity has put in for the height increase was due to difficulties encountered in digging a deep enough basement. In that case, the height increase process would have cost less, and been an easier option than trying to continue digging down.

My thoughts in the other thread about why an ob deck at the top won't happen. A restaurant/bar on the other hand...


A few reasons all related to the economics.

1) Adding an express elevator for an ob dec must takes up a lot of space across a large number of floors.

2) Assuming it is at or near the top, it will be in one of the best positions in the tower. Positions that would otherwise be taken up by ultra high value penthouse apartments. If you had a penthouse would you want mere mortals trampling around on the floor above you?

3) Maybe the market for an observation deck isn't very large. If Melbourne can't sustain two, then the profits can't be huge.


Some options to make it more economical:

1) Make it a restaurant with an expensive bar, rather than an observation deck.

2) Make it below the penthouses and sub-penthouses. 150m would probably suffice.

3) Share the elevator with residents during peak hours (could be tricky in the evening if shared with a restaurant) i.e. it would only be an express elevator part time.

yeah i seriously doubt they will apply for an extensions of height. Surely council require a valid reason I'm not sure the mantle of Australia's tallest to roof is suffice or even something worthwhile in $ value to the developers, esp if it is simply for an ob deck.

TBH im just happy with the tower, If it was 200 I would still be happy, the design and street level activation are great

showing tallest in oz with 222marg compared
diagram work in progress
http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4566/australls200mplus.jpg

^^ Agreed! The street activation is, personally, one of my favourite parts of this design, and I think this area of the CBD could use this type of well activated landscape. The fact that it would be under an iconic tower complex is an added bonus!

I wonder if the taller tower's height extension (if such a thing were to ever occur) could be through a slopping through like the shorter tower? Though I do like the flat top in a way.

From some angles, this almost looks like a taller version of Rialto, what with the other tower alongside.

I think there would definitely be a strong economic case for additional levels once initial DA has been approved.

If they added say 5 floors, you could have 3 floors of penthouse (~$20million+ in sales right there), then 1-2 floors for a bar and restaurant ($3500/$5000 sqm p.a.), and then finally the obs deck on top (probably charge an operator about $5000 sqm p.a.)....so overall (and I know my numbers are extremely rough), they could be looking at an additional $30+ million in sales, for what really is only a minor alteration relative to the tower. ....Plus push it to around 310m. :)

i think you'll find that construction of eureka was 95% complete and while the residents were moving in on the lower floors they were just finishing off the kitchens, paint and carpet on the upper levels. i think the same thing happened with aurora and riparian, and they are planning to do the same thing on soul.

Looked into it more. First resident moved into the tower in 2004 about two years before the building was externally complete. Don't think the core was even complete at that time.

I think there would definitely be a strong economic case for additional levels once initial DA has been approved.

If they added say 5 floors, you could have 3 floors of penthouse (~$20million+ in sales right there), then 1-2 floors for a bar and restaurant ($3500/$5000 sqm p.a.), and then finally the obs deck on top (probably charge an operator about $5000 sqm p.a.)....so overall (and I know my numbers are extremely rough), they could be looking at an additional $30+ million in sales, for what really is only a minor alteration relative to the tower. ....Plus push it to around 310m. :)

Sounds pie in the sky to me (maybe a good name for the restaurant?).

You are assuming the penthouses would sell.

What about the express lift taking up space on every floor?

You are also assuming that a business case would stack up for an obs deck operator at $5000/sqm. For an obs deck taking up 50-100% of the footprint of the building, that's a lot of outgoings to cover.

I'd also suggest that public areas on the upper floors of the building would reduce the appeal and therefore the prices of apartments. Most obs decks I've been to in Australia look pretty worn and tired.

I think a nice restaurant/bar, probably not at the top of the tower, is the most likely possibility when it comes to some publicly accessible views in this tower.

I vote we put a pie face and coffee club up there =)

I vote we put a pie face and coffee club up there =)

I say McCafe! So we can all enjoy something a little bit fancy whilst taking in the view:)

*dies a little bit inside*

I think there would definitely be a strong economic case for additional levels once initial DA has been approved.

If they added say 5 floors, you could have 3 floors of penthouse (~$20million+ in sales right there), then 1-2 floors for a bar and restaurant ($3500/$5000 sqm p.a.), and then finally the obs deck on top (probably charge an operator about $5000 sqm p.a.)....so overall (and I know my numbers are extremely rough), they could be looking at an additional $30+ million in sales, for what really is only a minor alteration relative to the tower. ....Plus push it to around 310m. :)

good thinking, but....
* 3 floors of additional penthouses would devalue the existing 12 penthouses. plus that'd give them 30 penthouses in total to sell.... that's an incredible ask, especially given sunland's project, which is going to be a lot more successful at attracting affluent buyers.
* those rents might be achievable in sydney where you get heaps of international/domestic tourists, but i reckon you are about 300% over the mark for brisbane.
* putting an observation deck above the penthouses will devalue them further
* they'd need to dedicate a significant chunk of the ground floor to a separate obsdeck lobby/reception
* they'd need to add at least two additional lifts, which would mean re-planning every single floor.
* say that the obsdeck lifts take away 10sqm of saleable residential for 50 floors. at $8,000/sqm that's $4m in lost revenue.

i am not against the idea of an obsdeck, but from where the scheme sits now i think it looks unlikely.

Looked into it more. First resident moved into the tower in 2004 about two years before the building was externally complete. Don't think the core was even complete at that time.

wow. can you find more to share?

Sounds pie in the sky to me (maybe a good name for the restaurant?).

pie face in the sky?

Okay, having looked at some of those issues, I think I've come up with a way that it 'could' work--Not saying it will.

For a restaurant / obs deck lifts, they should just turn the penthouse lobby into the restaurant/ obs deck lift lobby, with those lifts dedicated towards those floors. The outside 'retail space' could then become a souvenier shop / bookings office / restaurant lobby.

I don't think the lifts are the greatest issue. I think that if we all think it's strange that they have a seperate penthouse lobby (especially when the lifts are accessible from both lobbies, it probably is strange.

But I would say a restaurant would be:
1) easier to implement
2) preferable to residents
3) probably the most likely addition.

I think that if we all think it's strange that they have a seperate penthouse lobby (especially when the lifts are accessible from both lobbies, it probably is strange.

I strongly disagree that it is strange. It's something I have seen many times and it is a major value adding point.

^^ If I was paying the amount that these penthouses go for, I'd certainly see a private foyer for the penthouses as a definite selling point.

I strongly disagree that it is strange. It's something I have seen many times and it is a major value adding point.


I agree, if your forking out millions why would you want to associate and share a lift with the commoners

The prices of Australia's main skydecks (not including sydney tower, as its not a building)

They aren't cheap. I would think that if Billbergia could stretch the tower another 3 floors and take that title of "Australia's Tallest Tower", given the excellent CBD location, tourists would use it, I have no doubts about that. If they can't take that title then numbers would probably be a lot less.

Eureka Skydeck Entry:
Adult: $17.50
Child: $10.00
Concession: $13.00
Family: (2 Adults & 2 Children) $39.50
Family: (1 Adult & 2 Children) $29.50
Extra Child: $8.00

Q1 Skypoint:
SkyPoint General Admission - Adult $21
SkyPoint General Admission - Child $12.50
SkyPoint General Admission - Pensioner $15
SkyPoint Family Pass $54.50
Locals Unlimited Pass (Adult/Child/Pensioner) $29

christ q1 is a rip-off, i thought eureka was expensive

I strongly disagree that it is strange. It's something I have seen many times and it is a major value adding point.

It's kind of... unAustralian to have a separate penthouse lobby though, we're supposed to be a very egalitarian society, where commoners and the wealthy don't mind being around each other.

^^hahaha, you will have to Tony Abbott about that one XD!

It's kind of... unAustralian to have a separate penthouse lobby though, we're supposed to be a very egalitarian society, where commoners and the wealthy don't mind being around each other.

Speak for yourself. Only a commoner would say such a thing.

It's kind of... unAustralian to have a separate penthouse lobby though, we're supposed to be a very egalitarian society, where commoners and the wealthy don't mind being around each other.

Bravo! :applause: Australia really doesn't have "commoners" we are all pretty much middle class, which makes this country great.

What an amazing tower. Love the detail.

Bravo! :applause: Australia really doesn't have "commoners" we are all pretty much middle class, which makes this country great.

We are an egalitarian society.

christ q1 is a rip-off, i thought eureka was expensive

Gotta pay for the maintenance on the 'rusting' heap... LOL.

ok. Now the excitement has worn off.. slightly. I just want to add my criticism with this - and it is really just passing comment. I just wish that it was slightly thinner. It looks a little wide and would look more elegant and taller if it was more slender in design.

^yes tis a bit large. floors plates are 48mx40m.
Vison had a dif floor plate 50mx30m.
heres a diagram showing comparisons with other major towers
Infinity will look sensational.
http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/7697/widths.jpg

Don't agree at all. I think it's nice and bulky, Brisbane has enough sticks going up.

Brisbane has a shitload of flat tops.