View Full Version : Sydney est. will be needing 12 New eqv. Australia Square Towers


below-0
June 14th, 2005, 07:11 PM
Appears as though the time is coming for this potential monster of a landmass sitting right next to the heart of Sydney's CBD. Time for politicians, civilians and planners to start looking at the drawing boards and ready to push the buttons of the huge machinery that will help build the next generation of scrapers here.

" Est. 12 Australia Square towers"
" The CBD will be built out within 15 years unless substantially larger buildings are approved for existing sites. "

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/There-goes-the-neighbourhood/2005/06/14/1118645811350.html"][/FONT]

The redevelopment of the wharves at Millers Point is unlikely to provide space for 25,000 workers, as the State Government has promised, the design guidelines reveal.

Even the desired 330,000 square metres of office, hotel and residential unit space - to cover a third of the 22-hectare site - will mean a string of buildings up to 14 storeys high along the waterfront, blocking views from many surrounding buildings.

Patrick Corporation's lease on most of the harbourside site will end in February, and an international competition is under way to redevelop the historic wharves.

The Premier, Bob Carr, said in February that there would be space for as many as 25,000 workers on the site, prompting estimates that this would require the equivalent of 12 Australia Square towers.

But the design guidelines for the competition show it is highly unlikely there will be anything like the number of workers flagged by Mr Carr unless the Government disregards its own competition rules. Under the present rules there may be as few as 11,000 office workers, plus those needed to serve apartments or hotels built as part of the development. The competition rules say apartments should take up no more than a quarter of the planned 330,000 square metres. Hotels should account for no more than 15 per cent of the buildings, leaving at least 60 per cent of new floor space for offices.

Kathy Connell, a spokeswoman for the Planning Minister, Craig Knowles, said the 25,000 figure "didn't come up spontaneously" but the Government was "not going to reject" any proposal because it would not allow Mr Carr's figure to be reached. While the guideline limit of 14 storeys was "a pretty reasonable goal for the [competition] entrants", she would not rule out the possibility of taller buildings on the waterfront.

Under the plan there will be a waterside pathway through half of the site, which will be reserved for a park. The northern point will be kept for a later, unspecified "iconic" project. Terminals for cruise ships and the Tasmanian ferry will be retained, though not necessarily as they are, and the maritime control tower will be preserved.

It is the last significant building site in the CBD, but the Government has not said whether it will sell the land to developers or grant them extended leases. Either way, the Government will net hundreds of millions of dollars.

CAMPAIGN CRITICAL

- The Millers Point development will be important for Sydney's central business district to grow.

- The CBD will be built out within 15 years unless substantially larger buildings are approved for existing sites.

- The Millers Point site is not on the city's major public transport grid, and access is regarded as difficult.

- The Government's original long-term strategic plan for rail included a "metro" underground station in the area on the proposed line from the northern beaches before stopping at Wynyard.

- The Millers Point site has been rated as a priority by the Government, but critical sites with services already in place, such as Green Square town centre, are languishing.

Contact us

Send your emails to urbanaffairs@smh.com.au

Mephisto
June 14th, 2005, 07:33 PM
So they want a whole bunch of low rise buildings and not any big towers? greeeeeaaat :(

Tony P
June 14th, 2005, 11:26 PM
I have a feeling they're softening up the public, i.e, "look what happens when we build low - no space for a park!". I think the eventual outcome will be mid level height towers (150m) and about 1/2 to 2/3 the park they promised.

Here's my lowrise proposal, no? (need a cheesy french smiley)

http://www.urbanaustralia.org/parc.jpg

I'd prefer only a little park (one or 2 hactares max) and a combo of lowrise and supertall. I think the massive park they are planning will be poorly patronised, being far from transport and even most city residents.

Fabian
June 15th, 2005, 12:03 AM
Good to see the SMH stance on the East Darling Harbour redevelopment turn into a more positive one particularly just a day after highlighting the fact that the CBD will soon be full, and after suggesting back in Feburary that only low rise be permitted across the site to achieve a "balance". :okay:

They are only suggesting that 14 storey towers should be permitted on site. Thats ridiclous.:bash: I think thats a giantic waste of a site with so much potential. I agree with SMH full on that these guidelines will not reach the targets set by the Carr government in regards to the the number of workers and residents they want living down there.

With the Sydney CBD running out of space, they will have little choice but to support schemes that allow for taller buildings.

& what about transport for the area, nothing has still come up in regards to this.

CULWULLA
June 15th, 2005, 12:14 AM
believe me when i say the bldgs will be substantially taller then 14storeys.I think they mean 14stoery height limit north of Highgate Towers.Theres no need what so ever for a 50m/14st height limit between Highgate & KPMG HQ.
the highrise to the east (maritime & highrise apts) are all over 100m high and The "nimby" case is really starting to be a waste of time to opposed residents. the land & Enviroment court just laugh at "loosing views" reason.

Muse
June 15th, 2005, 02:22 AM
^ Exactly. The SMH, even though I've been enjoying their Campaign fro Sydney series, are still leaving out chunks. They can only print so much.

Recently with the 33 Bligh St Fin Rev. http://img13.imgspot.com/u/04/338/10/ROFL01.gif report and what I found out about the Redfern/Waterloo Authority that I posted in its thread are just examples of bad journalism.

Here's my lowrise proposal, no? (need a cheesy french smiley)
http://www.urbanaustralia.org/parc.jpgSeen before but still looks great. If only!! Would be a nice altenative to any talls that we can expect. http://www.handykult.de/plaudersmilies.de//person/french.gif

...

SinCity
June 15th, 2005, 04:14 AM
God I hope so. Otherwise it would be stupid not to build some super talls for the long term rather than the short term. :(

MILIUX
June 15th, 2005, 04:18 AM
Seen before but still looks great. If only!! Would be a nice altenative to any talls that we can expect.

If they wanna head their commerical entities in 5 storey blocks, then tell them site it around Glebe/Pyrmont. EDH is too precious and expensive to be wasted on that type of Paris style junk. I do however want an entertainment precinct similar to Times Square.

Another good point about this project is that The Rocks area and Millers Point will be revived. I've seen so many pubs/bars closing on weekdays that it's not funny. More pedestrians = more boutique shops.

Will that terminal tower stay or be used as an observation point?

Fabian
June 15th, 2005, 04:28 AM
Will that terminal tower stay or be used as an observation point?

The article states that it will be preserved.

CULWULLA
June 15th, 2005, 04:35 AM
i dont think council or state giv would like lowrise with bulk at street level which would result in windswept dark streets. they will much prefer slender towers rising above bright ground areas to give space and allow more parkland/plaza areas asa result.

Muse
June 15th, 2005, 04:38 AM
If they wanna head their commerical entities in 5 storey blocks, then tell them site it around Glebe/Pyrmont. EDH is too precious and expensive to be wasted on that type of Paris style junk. I do however want an entertainment precinct similar to Times Square.I don't think most of us would disagree to Matxivolta-town....but Glebe/Pyrmont is considered not so "precious"? http://www.sayhey.co.uk/invboard/html/emoticons/ermm.gif Wha~a~a~a~a~a?

BTW "that type of Paris-style junk" can be quite beautiful....we wouldn't know how to build as such though nowadays....we (often) don't build for beauty as a rule now. We used to get close to it as you can see in parts of Potts Point and Liz Bay.

Don't worry or lose sleep, it's not going to happen. Nice urbany dream there Tony P. http://www.sayhey.co.uk/invboard/html/emoticons/cloud9.gif

...

Ipggi
June 15th, 2005, 04:58 AM
EDH is too precious and expensive to be wasted on that type of Paris style junk.

I would rather have that 'Paris style junk' that is alive and buzzing like Potts Point/Eliz Bay. Then being stuck with a deserted skyscraper canyon such as North Sydney.

Muse
June 15th, 2005, 08:08 AM
Think the closest we'll get to Paris-junk down there is King St Wharf type of developments, which although still worlds away, work quite well.