What a great start to the day :)


Sky rise project floors council
Lachlan Heywood, City Hall reporter
19aug03
BRISBANE City Council has all but failed in its bid to stop the city's tallest residential tower being built on a site roughly the size of two house blocks.
http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,1658,278388,00.jpg

The 77-level Emerald Tower proposal, labelled a "disgrace" by former lord mayor Jim Soorley, is well on its way to being approved after council planning officers acknowledged it complied with the CBD building code.

The $190 million development by Emerald Developments Pty Ltd of Sydney is earmarked for a vacant 1200 sq m site at 550 Queen St, near the junction with Ann St.

Artist impressions show the apartments towering over existing buildings.

Cr Soorley last year attacked the "smart-alec" southern developers pushing the proposal.

"The full resources of this council will be used to ensure this ridiculous building is not built," he said.

Lord Mayor Tim Quinn said the council was still negotiating with the developer for a scaled-down version, but conceded the building might go ahead as planned.

"At some stage we are going to have to decide whether we support the larger development – which we have always said we regard as over development – or whether we refuse it if there can be no agreement on a scaled-down version," Cr Quinn said.

Rejecting the plan could result in a costly legal challenge in the Environment and Planning Court, which the council probably would lose.

No height restrictions currently apply in the CBD so long as developments comply with a geometric formula.

Cr Quinn has serious concerns with the rash of high-rise apartments on small blocks.


Cr Quinn recently signalled new height limits for distinct precincts.

He said the council wanted to take more control over proposals for buildings more than 100m high and would place restrictions on sites less than 1000sq m. The toughest controls would be in less-developed areas on the CBD edge, particularly next to Fortitude Valley.

Emerald Towers project director Chris McLean yesterday said there was no prospect of the development being scaled down. "We are confident it will go through," he said.

Liberal lord mayoral candidate Campbell Newman said planning of the CBD had lost direction resulting in "ad hoc additions".

"They (the council) don't have a plan in place," he said.

Property Council of Australia state director Robert Walker said the Emerald Towers developers were simply trying to maximise their investment within the existing laws.

"If the laws are there to be worked within, and they do that, good luck to them," he said.

Woohoo!! :D

I all but gave up on this tower.
I am not sure what to think anymore, I like it but? Dunno.

OK I loved it when it was first proposed but its too tall for the area I think. The site is big enough for One Rialto tower so I don’t think the size is a problem. The problem is it will make the skyline look lopsided.

I guess it will grow on me like Riparian.

JT

As a town planner, I cannot help but feel some reservations about such a huge building on such a small site.

But as a skyscraper nut:

WOOHOO!!!


In terms of its impact on the skyline, I feel that it will help to frame it and create a significant and hard edge to the eastern side of the CBD.

Also, it will be an incredibly imposing entry statement into the city as you head in via Ann St.

I think its great as it will encourage larger development on that side of the city.

Brisbane is just too small in terms of space. It needs to grow outwards, its already too dense, so the only place to go is out.

I assume you are referring to the CBD

At least for the next 20 years the CBD is large enough to cater for any further capacity.

What should happen then is for satellite regional centres to develop to take pressure off the CBD.

This is aready being planned for with the development of the

Indooroopilly
Carindale
Chermside &
Mt Gravatt regional centres

Expect to see taller and taller buildings in these areas within the next 20 years.

Yay!!!

If I was in charge of the company putting in the proposal, i'd triple the height!:D


Honestly I think it should be built on the Festival Hall site.

good stuff!!!

Awesome news.
Looks like Emerald will be built on schedule as planned. Also this is the first proper colour render of Emerald. Would Aurora be visable in that pic if it were built?

I still can't see how they're going to fit such a large building on that site. Nevertheless, it's still great news!
:guns1:

This is excellent news!!!

It also fits with what my friend who works in the town planning firm thats working on this told me yesterday. He said November we'll know 'yes or no'. I guess no will mean the court case.

I still can't get over the counicl though. I mean, they don't want this built cause its too big yet they allow Wiharha Tower to be built with THE WORSE colour scheme of any building in Australia next door. Geez! It seems you can build the most hidious building in Bris solong as its not over 100 and impacting on our precious skyline (which will look alot better with Emerald in it!!!!)

I like the colour render. It looks nicer than black and white. Doesn't Wihlarha standout next to it! It will definately be a colourful part of town!

If the site is so small what about car parking?? Or will it have some levels of parking above the ground?

No such thing as too tall JayT, it will encourage and allow other buildings in the city to be taller.

Originally posted by nagelixin
If the site is so small what about car parking?? Or will it have some levels of parking above the ground?
I looked at a map and compared Melbourne to Brisbane at same scale. Basically you could easily fit One Rialto tower on the site so it is plenty big enough for a 230m building.

By One Rialto tower I mean because technically the Rialto is two towers joined togeter.
jt

I heard this on the radio this morning and for a moment I was saddened because I thought it was rejected, but I heard more of the news report and they said it was"most likely be approved".
I couldn't believe it, I was positive it would be rejected. But it sounds like its a goer!
The colour render makes it look massive, I channel 9 news they showed it imposed on the skyline, it looks like a pencil!
They interviewed Christian Skou about the project and he said there are no ground on which it can be rejected.

I awoke to this news on my radio this morning - what a great way to begin the day! :D

I was under the impression it was 230m tall. However channel nine reported tonight that it will be a 250m tall tower. Has it it changed height? or more likely is it merely sitting at RL 20.00?

They had a lot of different rendered views on the news, including one that channel nine made from Kangaroo point, which made it look extrememly tall. From some angles it looked good but from others it looked terrible - crude, white painted, boxy concrete. (that view was from Spring Hill direction)

Wearing my town planners hat I don't think that this site or area is suitable for such a tower. I'm really concerned about the affect it will have upon one's experience of St John's Cathedral on the site next door. I fear will be much the same as the devastating affect that the new tower next to Custom's house had.

It'll certainly make a provocative CBD entry stement for visitors coming from the airport.

Originally posted by Brizbane2
I awoke to this news on my radio this morning - what a great way to begin the day! :D
From some angles it looked good but from others it looked terrible - crude, white painted, boxy concrete. (that view was from Spring Hill direction)

I also saw this, however, the angle that they showed was not in colour, but in black and white. It will not look like this in real, it has green glass like the render shows!

It seems that the building presents a bare corner as you head towards it down Ann street.

Wouldnt it be wonderful if they put some sort of lighting display along that edge of the building.

A lot of buildings in Hong Kong do that for example the Bank of China Tower, at night it has to be seen to be believed.

Originally posted by Orodreth
I also saw this, however, the angle that they showed was not in colour, but in black and white. It will not look like this in real, it has green glass like the render shows!

The renders Im reffering to were in colour and the north west facade was definitely boxy white painted concrete. The green glass didn't wrap around the whole building.

Originally posted by Brizbane2
I awoke to this news on my radio this morning - what a great way to begin the day! :D

I was under the impression it was 230m tall. However channel nine reported tonight that it will be a 250m tall tower. Has it it changed height? or more likely is it merely sitting at RL 20.00?

They had a lot of different rendered views on the news, including one that channel nine made from Kangaroo point, which made it look extrememly tall. From some angles it looked good but from others it looked terrible - crude, white painted, boxy concrete. (that view was from Spring Hill direction)

Wearing my town planners hat I don't think that this site or area is suitable for such a tower. I'm really concerned about the affect it will have upon one's experience of St John's Cathedral on the site next door. I fear will be much the same as the devastating affect that the new tower next to Custom's house had.

It'll certainly make a provocative CBD entry stement for visitors coming from the airport.
I talked to Christian Skou in january and he told me it would get thru! he also told me its RL would be 248m above sea level or 230m above grd! So i think thats what they mean by 250m!
just for comparison Rls with other city bldgs-

Riparian antenna-RL253m (RL roof-204m)
Aurora spire-Rl252m (RL roof-214m)
Emerald-RL248m
CP1-Rl180m

cheers

Not exactly sure how the system works up there but in Melbourne if the council didn't want it to be built and the state government agreed then the planning minister would simply call it in and make the decision to refuse it, no appeals.

Surely the state government up there must have some overriding power to have the final say in whether something is approved or not?

I just checked and the planing minister in Queensland can "call in" a permit and make a final decision if the development involves a state interest. I think such a development could be considered of state interest and not just of local interest as the development of Brisbane effects the whole of the state not just those living in the City of Brisbane.

Shhhhhhhhh, don't give those labour nimby's any ideas!

"I just checked and the planing minister in Queensland can "call in" a permit and make a final decision if the development involves a state interest. I think such a development could be considered of state interest and not just of local interest as the development of Brisbane effects the whole of the state not just those living in the City of Brisbane"



That is correct but it would be very unlikely for the government to activate a ministerial call in on this type of development. Usually development with a significant economic impact would be considered, for example Lang Park.

Also, given its now the run down to the state election, I think the Government would be at loath to use those powers as BCC would scream blue murder and make comparisons with the Joh Bjelke Peterson ara (which was a time notorious for ministerial rezonings - some very corrupt)

PS: can anyone tell me how to use quotes in this (hehe)

Originally posted by Grollo
I just checked and the planing minister in Queensland can "call in" a permit and make a final decision if the development involves a state interest. I think such a development could be considered of state interest and not just of local interest as the development of Brisbane effects the whole of the state not just those living in the City of Brisbane.
I talked to a BCC planner about Emerald and she said when a highrise is planned higher than RL250m, the State Planning become involved!also Public have a say! Emerald comes in at RL248m!. coincidence?lol

Basically if the building exceed 250m the State Government becomes a Concurance or Advice Agency under the Integrated Planning act, which basically means it can have an input into the assesment process.

For this type of development, I would doubt very much that the State would have any interest and would not interfere with Council's decison making.

Originally posted by gerbilus
That is correct and I agree, it would be very unlikely for the government to activate a ministerial call in on this type of development. Usually development with a significant economic impact would be considered, for example Lang Park.

Also, given its now the run down to the state election, I think the Government would be at loath to use those powers as BCC would scream blue murder and make comparisons with the Joh Bjelke Peterson ara (which was a time notorious for ministerial rezonings - some very corrupt)


Surely in this case the BCC would want the state government to intervene becuase they don't want it approved, but I agree it's not likely just possible. If public opion was strongly against the tower it may even be a vote winner :-)

In Melbourne there are many recent examples of the use of this power for high rise projects. Both Freshwater Place and Southern Cross were approved directly by the minister in this way.

But I don't see why the size of the site would prevent the tower getting approved, what is more important is the spacing between towers, not how large the site is. An 89 metre high tower was recently approved in Melbourne on a site of only 300 square metres!

BCC would love the State Government, to step in to refuse it, although that would never happen in QLD.

W/re to the state government doing a minesterial call in to approve the development if council refused it is also unlikely. They only get involved in such a way if the development is consired of major economic signficance - eg a major employment generator.

The state government in Qld would never care about an apartment building. At the moment there are hundreds of the things of varying sizes being built in QLD. In the overall sheme of things the emerald development is not very significant (apart from its height of course)

To be honest i dont know the exact arguments why BCC is so violently opposed to the development. I reckon part of the problem is that the developers annoyed Soorley at a prelodgement meeting - he was reknowned for holding a grudge.

I can't see why they'd oppose the tower, really.

Originally posted by gerbilus
Basically if the building exceed 250m the State Government becomes a Concurance or Advice Agency under the Integrated Planning act, which basically means it can have an input into the assesment process.

For this type of development, I would doubt very much that the State would have any interest and would not interfere with Council's decison making.
correct! so this project is safe from state Gov interference! by 2metres!
http://skyscrapercity.com./images/smilies/wink.gif

Well not exactly true

The minister can still take over the application from Council via a call in if it so wishes

However as i've said earlier this is extremely!!!! unlikely.

big news!!! Emerald will start this year!
I chatted with architect Christian Skou today and asked him about the timetable for Emerald! he was so excited and had 100 calls already about the big E. He said there haviung a meeting with council within 2 weeks and hope to start construction in 2-3 months!
This is amazing news!
He siad he working on marketing material atm.
cheers

once again Mr C is the bearer of awesum news!!!!

dude how do you get all these contacts???

BTW, any news on any other brissie projects that might be coming to public light any time soon???


cheers c man!

Originally posted by CULWULLA
big news!!! Emerald will start this year!
I chatted with architect Christian Skou today and asked him about the timetable for Emerald! he was so excited and had 100 calls already about the big E. He said there haviung a meeting with council within 2 weeks and hope to start construction in 2-3 months!
This is amazing news!
He siad he working on marketing material atm.
cheers
That's great news!!! BUT...Cul, you MUST reserve the phrase "big E" for THE BIG E (and it ain't Emerald). Let's call Emerald the little E, or, more appropriately, the BIG EM!

...The Big EM sounds good to me.:cool:

can you imagine the uproar from all of us if emerald doesnt go through now. lets hope we dont find out

Originally posted by hoffburger
can you imagine the uproar from all of us if emerald doesnt go through now. lets hope we dont find out
after talking to architect today im 99% sure it will strart this year!
ill be drawing Emerald in my "tallest res towers in OZ 2005".;)

Originally posted by CULWULLA
after talking to architect today im 99% sure it will strart this year!
ill be drawing Emerald in my "tallest res towers in OZ 2005".;)
This is great. There will be a line of 3 200m plus towers all U/C at the same time, with them topping out in order from South to North.

One things for certain, units in this sucker will sell like hotcakes!
Location, location, location!!!!

There won't be any large development nearby in competition (333 Anne St is the closest). The site is right on the edge of the Valley (lifestyle+). Depending on how they market it, this could become Brisbane's latest "must have" address.

:)

I am very excited about this! :D

How many apartments will there be in total in Emerald? I suppose it doesn't really matter since they are willing to begin construction even without a minimum number of presales!

What we can look forward too, thanks Ray and Brizbane2, I used your previous pictures from old threads.

http://www.skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=107&drawingID=1604 http://www.skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=6224&drawingID=6222


http://www.geocities.com/brisbane_australia2000/BrisModel/030525th.jpg

How much do you think decent units on an upper floor would cost?

This is going to be a great investment.

BTW Culwulla, have you made a model of this thing yet?

It is good that we are getting a tall building, but it is in the wrong position regardless of the size of the lot. It is a pretty thin building from what I can tell. What is its height / width ratio?

Originally posted by finn
I am very excited about this! :D

How many apartments will there be in total in Emerald? I suppose it doesn't really matter since they are willing to begin construction even without a minimum number of presales!
344 units in total - five sky-rise penthouse suites, 24 sky-rise suites, 75 high-rise suites, 120 mid-rise suites, and 120 low-rise suites

Hang on!

Whats the council going on about an uneven skyline if emerald is developed? Our skyline is already unbalanced! CP1, Waterfront Plavce and Riverside are practically next to each other and theyre the 3 tallest buildings by a long shot. And Riparian and Aurora are just going to add to this unbalance...Coming by train from the northside you get a great shot of our currently 'balanced' skyline
:guns1:

Live Frodo Falcon Cam from the 27th floor of Admiralty towers.

http://thecouriermail.com.au/extras/frodocam/cam/frodo.jpg

Has anyone noticed that there is a view of the Emerald Site from "frodocam". I hope they keep this camera here so we can watch Emerald Rise, or at least the foundations begin.

jt

yeah i dunno what the Opposition Leader is going on about when he said :

"Liberal lord mayoral candidate Campbell Newman said planning of the CBD had lost direction resulting in "ad hoc additions".

Brisbane never bloody had ANY planning regulations by the looks of things when Liberal/Labor/Nats was in power way back in the 70s/80s

If i had my way I'd blow up all the towers on the western side of town that are all short and all the same height and give the city some definition from the west and south ....

"Lopsided skyline" is such a bullshit non-reason to block a proposal. Lopsided from what angle? This will prove a precedent for building heights and will encourage higher buildings that will stop the skyline seeming lopsided.

If the city wasn't so anti-development it wouldn't stay lopsided for long.

People should also remember that if it is lopsided it is because the idiot planners at city hall have squashed taller buildings in the past that were planned for midtown. Why are these morons so afraid of making Brisbane into a great city with at least one recognisable landmark?

Is that a deceased pigeion I see in that webcam????? lol

Unbalanced my ASS!!! World tower was built far far away from its closest 200m friend citigroup. There was a huge gap in the skyline. Whats happening now????? the 222m Latitude is getting built right next door, the 130m Civic Tower is UC just up the road, 170m Meriton tower is gona be built nearby, Still south of Citigoup tower, the 190m John Boyd tower is proposed and will start construction soon (I hope), fuck I could just go on and on!! Southern Sydney CBD is transforming!!!

Same thing is happening in Melbourne with SouthBank. 300m's of Eureka will not be unbalanced, coz near by the 200m+ FWP apartments are UC, 220m Prima is coming, and fuckloads more!!

Build Emerald, bring a boom to that part of town!!!

Driving into the city along Ann Street this morning, I realised just how amazing Emerald will look. Willahra is quite visible from well down in the Valley and Emerald will be 50 storeys higher!

yeah ann street is the main "in" road from the airport/gateway to the city so it'll be monstrous when people drive up thru Newstead the valley and into the city :) i cant wait ! :)

now all that we need is a big tower near the SE freeway to mark the entrance from the south

^^

You've got it, its called Riparian.

It will look sweet as behind Waterfront place, you can already see it now driving in on SEF.

haha that pigeon in the webcam posted by JayT has PERISHED!!!!

Its been in that same position for like 2 days hahahaha

Originally posted by SydneyDude
haha that pigeon in the webcam posted by JayT has PERISHED!!!!

Its been in that same position for like 2 days hahahaha
Thats the female falcon, its sitting on eggs. There is a competition to name her.

BTW, the developers of Emerald said they would start construction in December as soon as it was passed.

jt

oooohh i seeee! She looked pretty dead to me, but i guess its hard to tell the diference between perished and egg-sitting.

im gona create a thread on naming the falcon :D

Isnt it reassuring that dimwitted dunderhead Jim Sorearse has been gien the flick. Hahahahahahahahaha.

Rock on the big E.

PS; I think they should change the cloros though to a sexy all steel blue.

Mayor won't oppose Emerald!

In the city news today, there is an article that says Lord Mayor Tim won't 'oppose' the construction of Emerald. I think we can interpret this as meaning that council won't be launching any court actions etc. As such its plain sailing now for this baby! Now we can just sit back, crack open a few coldies and watch this RISE!!!!

As a side bar, apparently the tower will have lots of solar panels on it. The energy is going to subsidise the occupants electricity bills!

http://fountainhead.50megs.com/other%20images/emerald-scan.jpg

;) it's rotating!

:nocrook:

The Q1 that never was... [in Brisbane]

:nocrook:

'nuff said.

Damn it's big. Good location too, nice to see the Orient Hotel is still there.

Some of the older Brisbane guys might remember when that part of Queen St was considered the sin area of town with a dodgy strip club and illegal casino.

wow amazing pic fountain!!
i cant wait til architects send me plans so i can make a model of this sucker!! its sort of Q1 /cross world tower.
10/10

thats one sleek tower! Whats the sleekness width/height ratio?

I prefer Q1, its the more classy out of the two, but this tower has a certain excitement to it. I like it alot. 9/10!! Nice Stuff Brisbane, you are finally coming out of the dark ages and entering the 200m+ club! :D

Awesome pic Fountainhead.
This building will tower over the Valley. Maybe it should be renamed the "Gateway to Brisbane"?

FUCK YES!!

If anything is going to get me interested in buildings again, this might just be it.

City news this week reports what must surely be the ultimate in NIMBY-ism.

Apparently residents in Willahra Tower are concerned about Emerald. They say it will reduce the value of their homes, block sky views (whatever they may be), cause shadowing and be an invasion of privacy.

How amazingly arrogant of these people who have just moved into the CBD to try and oppose development on the vacant block of land next door. The invasion of privacy argument is particularly weak. It doesn't matter whether the neighbouring building is 20 or 80 storeys tall. There is always the possibility that your apartment will be overlooked if you buy in a building with a vacant block next door.

I read that too Duke. What complete and utter hypocrites. To have the nerve to complain about losing their views and an invasion of privacy, after they no doubt did that to plenty of people when they moved into their own tower is amazing.

The value of the apartments in Willahra Tower going down can't be blamed on the impending Emerald, it would have something to do with the fact it IS Willahra Tower. Lets hope this building is kept in a permanent shadow to hide that hideous colour scheme.

Amazing..... If anything, Willahra tower will de-value Emerald's units, who will have to look at that monstrosity!! Besides which, Willahra was not very well designed with consideration to the adjacent site in terms of privacy and screening, not to mention aesthetics! (those red metal louvres still look like scaffolding)
Anyway, if anybody will suffer, it is the residents BEHIND Emerald on Ann Street (Pacific Int, Metropolis etc) whose river views will be built out.

I contacted Architect Christian Skou today and he is sending plans next month so i can build a model + draw in Emerald in my "Tallest in oz 2005". He said its definatley starting late in the year!
He also mentioned they are "refining" the design (podium and top). he said its now 229m . But ill have a look for myself when i get elevations to get accurate height.
cheers

One metre is definitely not a substantial loss - and the top REALLY does need refining.

He couldve made it 232 metres, and still been clear though..;)

Originally posted by CULWULLA
I contacted Architect Christian Skou today and he is sending plans next month so i can build a model + draw in Emerald in my "Tallest in oz 2005". He said its definatley starting late in the year!
He also mentioned they are "refining" the design (podium and top). he said its now 229m . But ill have a look for myself when i get elevations to get accurate height.
cheers

Did you tell him that 231m would mean that Brisbane would have a higher tower to roof than Sydney, or wouldn't you ant him to know that hehehe.

FUCK YOU BRISBANE GIVE SOME TOWERS TO PERTH & ADELAIDE:rant:


:D

Originally posted by Grollo
Did you tell him that 231m would mean that Brisbane would have a higher tower to roof than Sydney, or wouldn't you ant him to know that hehehe.
lol, well apparently it can only go to RL250m so the street height must be RL20m+.

also one thing i forgot to mention is that Christian Skou said that a "spire" was to be mounted atop Emerald but was recently "omitted" from the design! I asked how high was it going to be and he said about 30m. So Emeralds official height could of been 260m! oh well Riparian and Aurora have spires so thats enough!

Its been over a month since the last post, does anyone have any info? Approved? Cancelled?

Given the surge of interest whenever information is released on this project, it's pretty damn safe to assume that no-one has heard anything.

As the hottest proposal in brisbane (at least for the loft-minded forumers here), you're guaranteed to know when anything happens.

If you follow the history of this thread, we see a major revelation or media release about every twelve months...

However, if culwulla's information is correct (I've every confidence in him and so should you) we are due to see some activity before the end of the year.

forshizzle dizzle

anybody who said progress was a slow process sure wasn't talking about Brisbane - Check this out, according to the architects Crone Emerald Tower (or 550 Queen Street) is 85 stories tall. http://www.crone.com.au/queen.html

http://www.crone.com.au/projects/queen2.jpg

http://www.crone.com.au/projects/queen1.jpg

awesome pics

Read about the Emerald Tower Case here:

http://www.hopgoodganim.com.au/data/PDF/developmentcontrolarticledln.pdf

http://www.xyz.au.com/public/general_info/details.cfm?info_id=1391&sub_cat=91&category_id=19

Council Minutes (bitching about Emerald);)

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/_downloads/council_meeting_minutes_august_19_2003.pdf

It sounds like the tower has not been approved yet and it also sounds like the council will do everything it can to refuse it or at least delay it as long as possible.

I must agree that the method for calculation GFA and building heights in Cityplan 2000 is the most ridiculously complex piece of planning policy that I have ever seen!

Try and figure out how big a new skyscraper can be on a certain site in the Brisbane CBD using Cityplan 2000:

The gross floor area of that part of a building above maximum podium height must not exceed the development ratio multiplied by the area of the site calculated in accordance with Table 1 and Appendix B of this Code

TABLE 1: Calculation of gross floor area and effective site cover

Abbreviations (for the purpose of calculating effective site cover and allowable gross floor area above maximum
podium height)

GFA - Gross Floor Area above maximum
podium height
DR - Development Ratio
ESC - Effective Site Cover
LA - Average area of Levels:
· where 20 levels or fewer, those levels
· where more than 20 levels, those levels that have the 20 largest areas
- LA calculation excludes any level:
· with an area less than 25% of the site area where the site area is less than 2,000m2, or
· with an area less than 500m2 where the site area is not less than 2,000m2
TR - Average area of the Tangential Rectangles of those levels included in the calculation of LA
SA - Area of the site

Calculation

Step 1 ESC = (05LA + 0.25TR)/SA

Step 2 DR = 25 - 40 ESC (where ESC is between 0.35 and 0.5)
DR = 10 - 10 ESC (where ESC is 0.5 or more)
(where ESC is less than 0.35, GFA is not applicable)

Step 3 GFA = DR x SA

Nah, it's actually, it's more a case of the Council have reluctantly resigned themselves to Emerald going ahead. However, thanks to Emerald sneaking thru, the council is looking to tighten the city plan, so while we do get the Emerald tower, it will be trickier for new developers to do the same thing in the future.

Buildings like Emerald are fine, as long as their in the CBD (ala Austcorp) but the council doesn't like them on the fringes of the CBD, hence the uproar over Emerald, though they were unable to stop it, the council wanted as impact assessment but it didn't warrant one, far as I can tell.

In any case, a great example of how Australia is the most overregulated country on Earth. Sheesh, all this fuss over a 230m building, you'd think they were building Sears Tower there!;)

Cul its been bout a month...has the architect sent you the plans yet? ITs been ay more than a month! Also, its 15th December, their leaving it late to start later this year!

What are the chances this ones going 'BYE BYE'...? >( >(

I think by all accounts early next year (around March) should be the start date (*fingers crossed*).

Originally posted by Lord Mayor Tim
Cul its been bout a month...has the architect sent you the plans yet? ITs been ay more than a month! Also, its 15th December, their leaving it late to start later this year!

What are the chances this ones going 'BYE BYE'...? >( >(
shit, didnt realize it was so late in year, time flys when your having fun. ill try and contact christian skou tommorrow.
wish me luck:D

Has the building actually been approved and if so has marketing of the apartments begun??

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

Originally posted by Dean
Has the building actually been approved and if so has marketing of the apartments begun??

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne
last time i spoke with architect he indicated it was weeks away from approval and the marketing of the project. well now its time to see what story is, ill find out tommorrow hopefully with a straight forward answer.
:)

i dont mean to sound foolish, but why is everyone talking about construction when the tower has yet to gain approval from council and is still to sell a single unit. im sure, in a tower this size, there would be 350-450.

so wouldnt the developers need around 300 of these pre sold b4 any funds from lenders is released for construction.

given the softening of the market, of late, thanks to consecutive rate hikes, doesnt everyone think we are getting a little ahead of ourselves... just a thought

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

Emerald is being financed by cashed up middle eastern interests apparently, and they have said Emerald be be built _without_ any presales! They are not waiting for any sales, simply once it's approved they build, so that why it should be soon, and why it's pretty certain. Of course, that's provided things go well in approval, by all accounts they are, but until something is happening on sites it's all a bit nerve-racking.

a $300+ million tower being built without a single pre-sale. Gee 'thats ballsy... stoopid.. but ballsy' lol..

why u would risk so much money on complete speculation is beyond me. .

Cheers

Dean - Melbourne

After finally contacted Crone Nation , one of the head architects told me the council is due to hand down its decision on its fate.
The architect told me she is pretty confident on its approval.
She seemed to know a far bit about its history and told me that it went to a public poll a few months back and would you believe 77% were in favour of a 77 storey tower for the small site!!!
She said Brisbane has had no skyscrapers introduced to its CBD for a decade due to strict controls which have pushed away developers. The devlopers have had enough and told council visitors to Brisbane say it doesnt look like a CBD at all, devoid of tall bldgs! This is why Emerald might get thru before a 200m height control comes in.
She told me also Brisbane council were a problem and always found issues with the proposal. The architect told me she will ring me thurs or fri to confirm approval!
I hope it gets there as Brisbane really needs this one!
Im also getting plans next year to make a model!
cheers

big news! the decision on EMERALD TOWER is due today!!!!
After finally contacted Crone Nation , one of the head architects told me the council is due to hand down its decision on its fate.
The architect told me she is pretty confident on its approval.
She seemed to know a far bit about its history and told me that it went to a public poll a few months back and would you believe 77% were in favour of a 77 storey tower for the small site!!!
She said Brisbane has had no skyscrapers introduced to its CBD for a decade due to strict controls which have pushed away developers. The devlopers have had enough and told council visitors to Brisbane say it doesnt look like a CBD at all, devoid of tall bldgs! This is why Emerald might get thru before a 200m height control comes in.
She told me also Brisbane council were a problem and always found issues with the proposal. The architect told me she will ring me thurs or fri to confirm approval!
I hope it gets there as Brisbane really needs this one!
At 229m it will be the tallest skyscraper for long time.
Im also getting plans early next year to make a model!
cait wait!
cheers

:rock:

Well you can't leave us hanging like this!!!!??? what happened!!??? ;)

Sure hope this one gets up, it's brissy's big boy atm.

That architect is right though, council are total d***'s. This kind of shit might be permissable in Adelaide but in a fast growing state like QLD you can't have backward thinking foggies running things. That 77 percent approval poll I think simply reflects the fact that as always, the silent majority is fully in favour of such developments.

Ask anyone on the coast if Q1 isn't the coolest thing since sliced bread? Everyones loves it. Likewise who is going to complain about a nice tower that happens to be 250m tall or whatever, it beats all that cookie-cutter concrete Devine stuff out there! Why doesn't council have an issue with that stuff?

Anyway, hopefully Emerald is safe and we can look forward to this cousin of Q1 gracing the skyline of Brisbane as it rises up. Now that will be an exciting building to watch, RTL 250m - the height of Rialto!

Originally posted by CaptainJackSparrow
Well you can't leave us hanging like this!!!!??? what happened!!??? ;)

Sure hope this one gets up, it's brissy's big boy atm.
well there going to makes us all sweat over New Year for this one!
The Brisbane city council are "accessing" it for 20 more working days and descision will be now mid-late January!:bash:
She said because of its "significance" as a landmark structure, the councillors need more time to decide.
ah well, have to be patient on this one.
cheers

*Fingers crossed guys*:)

One hopes that common sense and democracy prevail and Emerald is allowed to be built. It's great for Queensland if it is!

These councillors are meant to represent the people, and public opinion is clearly for the tower and the development of Brisbane and Queensland as a whole. Sometimes I feel like, particularly under Sorely, there was a few councillors doing what they wanted to Brisbane. These crappy devine boxes fly up all over the place, creating these future urban ghettos and polluting the skyline with concrete walls, whilst a graceful glass towers like this are given all manner of grief.

It's a great looking quality development that Brisbane needs. It's not like it's 500 metres tall, 229m would barely qualify in a lot of cities. Quite frankly I can't believe there is such as fuss as it is, they don't have these problems in Sydney, Melboure or even the Gold Coast, honestly, are we country bumpkins or something in Brisbane???

Originally posted by CaptainJackSparrow

It's a great looking quality development that Brisbane needs. It's not like it's 500 metres tall, 229m would barely qualify in a lot of cities.

It may not barely qualify in cities such as New York, or Chicago, however that is a different story in Australian cities. 229m is big in any city in Australia!

well council approval is one thing..... crack a bottle of champagne when it actually starts on site

after 15 months of an approval process, I would not be at all surprised if emerald developments sell the land at a massive profit once they have approval - would probably be worth much more than the profit they would get after developing, and much less risk in the current market

really now, "emerald developments".....it really sounds "legit" eh?

do I sound cynical? maybe just because I have seen that sort of thing happen a lot...after all it is queensland - home of the dodgy deal

I don't think 229m is particularly tall for Australian cities, I think 300m would be tall for Australian cities, but there are a lot of buildings in the 200-250m range.

Gosh, did Brisbane Central have to put up with this much strife? It got approved and it was 450m tall! Honestly, I wish they had proposed a 450m tower in place of Emerald, it would have probably be hardly any more hassle!;)

Anyway, guess we'll wait and see, I think the fact Crone and Nation have it added to the portfolio of their site is a good sign, and from what I heard, legally Emerald is in good stead, but until there's a crane we'll see.

We all know that originally council did not want this tower. But could they be vindictive enough to deliberatley draw out the approval process right through the residential boom. So that at the end of the process, at the moment of approval, the market is in the down cycle, and the developers are literally forced to postpone or cancel the project.

Things smell quite fishy to me. 15 months for a decision is utterly ridiculous. >(

Originally posted by Brizbane2
We all know that originally council did not want this tower. But could they be vindictive enough to deliberatley draw out the approval process right through the residential boom. So that at the end of the process, at the moment of approval, the market is in the down cycle, and the developers are literally forced to postpone or cancel the project.

Things smell quite fishy to me. 15 months for a decision is utterly ridiculous. >(

I think you may have 'hit the nail on the head' - or is that 'prevented the nail from being hit' .... I tend to agree with you B2, but who knows, maybe they are just slow like always...

i remember someone saying someting similar when emerald was first proposed...but they said that the council would draw out the approval process for as long as they could and hope that the developers eventually got sick of waiting around and cancel the proposal. it looks like the council are doing a good job of just that...

Just noticed this, posted by jt in another thread.

--------From jt--------
City highrise battle looms
http://www.couriermail.news.com.au/...55E3102,00.html
Brian Williams, heritage reporter
27dec03
A MOVE to heritage list about 500m of Brisbane city streets could impact on hundreds of millions of dollars worth of highrise development at the bottom of Queen St.


The Brisbane City Council has nominated as a heritage precinct a strip from the landmark 1889 Customs House at the end of Queen St downstream to Admiralty Towers II, taking in the Colonial Building and old stone retaining wall.

A second heritage precinct also has been nominated for nearby Adelaide and Boundary streets, taking in the old Petrie Bight maritime area, now a restaurant strip featuring Circa, e'cco, Cin Cin and MacArthur's HQ.

If the Queensland Heritage Council agrees to the listings, it would contain, if not end, aggressive highrise apartment block development in the area.



Residents living in the Bight's towering apartment blocks have complained to the BCC that they do not want further highrises.

The Bight already has six apartment and hotel towers to about 40 floors and about six more have been mooted in or around the area.

Residents fear Petrie Bight will become a Hong Kong-style highrise nightmare with major vehicle congestion.

Local councillor David Hinchliffe said more than 1000 Gold Coast-style apartments had already been packed into an area of about 1ha as a result of 1980s zonings.

City Plan amendments would limit towers from about 240m to 80m and this had created a rush of proposals. Two had been lodged and a third was on the way.

There was no suggestion the destruction of old buildings was imminent and residents had plenty of time to object.

"I support the listings but have no doubt they will be hotly resisted by some who see them as thwarting development plans," Cr Hinchliffe said.

Peter Deane, a consultant to Morris International which owns the Colonial Building, said the nominations could only be seen as a move by the BCC to use State heritage provisions to limit highrises.

Cr Hinchliffe said the council did not want another highrise beside the Customs House. The reality was that state laws were more powerful than council bylaws.

Mr Deane said rumours his company proposed to build a 65-storey building beside Customs House were incorrect.

But highrise residents could not reasonably expect to block others, given they were living in a modern, developing city where change was expected.

"It's a bit like saying 'I'm living on a hill and I don't want anyone else coming in'," Mr Deane said.

Robert Riddel, a Heritage Council member and owner and resident in 510 Adelaide St in which e'cco is situated, said apart from cultural heritage issues, the area could not cope with a predicted additional 1000 cars as more towers were built.

The Heritage Council is expected to discuss the precinct nominations next month.

Mr Riddel said he could not take part in discussions on the Adelaide St precinct because as a resident he had a conflict of interest.

He might also be precluded from debate on the Customs House precinct because he had been an expert witness in a court case over a proposal to increase the size of the Colonial Building.

He said the nominations had in effect brought a powerful player into the city development debate in the form of the Heritage Council.

If the precincts were listed, the scale of development would probably be reduced but not stopped as several buildings could be raised by two or three floors with little impact.


Bloody NIMBY's - jt

--------From jt--------

So there we have it - many of us thought they were probably up to something, and it certainly appears that they were, and still are.

I found it funny that the people that live in apartment buildings, are the ones who don't want any more apartment buildings to be built.
Tough TITTIES! You people live in apartment buildings, stop worry about your friggen views!

What is wrong with this city!

Originally posted by Orodreth
I found it funny that the people that live in apartment buildings, are the ones who don't want any more apartment buildings to be built.
Tough TITTIES! You people live in apartment buildings, stop worry about your friggen views!

What is wrong with this city!

Whats wrong with this city is that the council caves under community pressure, even if community opinion is misinformed or even plain wrong.

Once the council is seen to cave on an issue, like when they shut down those first clubs/bars in the valley (due to noise complaints by the new residents) everyone saw that NIMBY action could work. We need a council who does not cave under community pressure on issues like the one posted by Ausilencer. Saying that we also need that same council to make the correct and informed planning decisions in the first place.

Once the council is seen to cave on an issue, like when they shut down those first clubs/bars in the valley (due to noise complaints by the new residents)

While I agree with everyone's concerns about Council's new conservatism w/re to development in the city.

It is important to make sure the facts are always presented.

The problems w/re to bars and clubs in the valley and noise complaints actually had nothing to do with Council which was in fact very sympathetic.

Establishments which were closed down or who were threatened were affected by the State's liqour licensing laws. (which have now been amended to provide greater rights to places that were opened prior to any offending residential devlopment)

Fortunately now the valley is doing fine and now there are more clubs there than have ever been (albeit with better noise proofing)

While BCC is a bit of a worry at the moment it should not be blamed for everything

Does anyone know whats happening with emerald tower. Why haven't they approved it yet. And is it still 230m or has it changed? I got my hopes up when that person said it would be 117 stories high, but i doubt that would happen!

The Courier Mail today (page 3) reports that Emerald Developments Pty Ltd are involved with a development in Redcliffe which is also pushing the height envelope - although on a much smaller scale - trying to effectively get a 6 storey building in a 3 storey area.

It appears to be the same company as it quotes Chris McLean as spokesman for Emerald.

There is a long established thread on the subject of Emerald.

I suggest that in future you should take the small amount of time necessary to find the previous thread and add your query to that one rather than starting a new thread.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
well there going to makes us all sweat over New Year for this one!
The Brisbane city council are "accessing" it for 20 more working days and descision will be now mid-late January!:bash:
She said because of its "significance" as a landmark structure, the councillors need more time to decide.
ah well, have to be patient on this one.
cheers

Culwulla - Any word?????????

We're dying here...............

Originally posted by duke
There is a long established thread on the subject of Emerald.

I suggest that in future you should take the small amount of time necessary to find the previous thread and add your query to that one rather than starting a new thread.

geez what a helpful reply. maybe you should leave the job of moderating up to the actual moderaters and answer his question or not say anything at all

As NCC1701D replied to Joel in another thread today, "everything you want to know about emerald will be on the Emerald official thread".

There is no point in having multiple threads on the same building. That is why we have "OFFICIAL" building threads. Having multiple threads fills up the forum and leads to the same questions being asked multiple times.

My reply was meant to be constructive by pointing out to Joel that there is a structure to the forum that should be followed for the benefit of all members.

Asking the question in the official thread will achieve the same aim and will maintain the forum structure.

sorry, i reread what i wrote and its kinda harsh..lol i didn't mean to sound that pissed off... i know u were trying to be helpful, but i guess it just annoys me when people say stuff like that, just leave that stuff up to the moderator

Well in a sense I guess duke was being helpful and answering the question by actually directing the asker to the place where his question will probably be answered... but it shows good character that you could actually admit you were a little harsh - I find it hard to do that myself sometimes lol.. anyway I shall stop my social commentary and return to buildings... :)

Originally posted by breezyboy69
sorry, i reread what i wrote and its kinda harsh..lol i didn't mean to sound that pissed off... i know u were trying to be helpful, but i guess it just annoys me when people say stuff like that, just leave that stuff up to the moderator

Thanks breezyboy69. I figure that the moderators have plenty of work to do and that if, as individual members, we can point other members reasonably gently in the right direction then that will be to the benefit of our whole little community.

ive merged the "Whats happening with Emerald with official thread. i think it will be better.


I actually contacted architect Christian Skou today about the Emerald project after he told me to before xmas,He said,"what a coincidence", we are expecting a letter from BCC today with the results of our amended application.he said i should call him in February and see what the descision will be.
So i guess more patience guys.

Thanks for the merge Culwulla.

Guess we will just have to continue to try and live our lives up here with fingers, toes and whatever else crossed for a while longer pending THE DECISION!

OK it's february now, whats the word?

lol j/k but i'm just anxious to see this get approval and more importantly start being constructed.

this thread been neglected for a while, and i thought i read somewhere else in the forum here that it HAS been approved. can anyone confirm?

a couple of weeks ago one of the architects for Emerald said to me to ring back in feb or you will hear about it in news ect if it gets approved. he thinks they have a good chance. BCC also have to access more documents and issues involved with podium and carparking ect..Im not going to ring maybe til march. let them "breathe" abit.

wow SEQ will have an impressive TALL list soon-

Q1-322m UC
Landmark-250m?
Emerald-229m?
Circle on cavill-219m UC
Aurora -207m UC
Riparian-200m (antenna-249m) UC
Central plaza-174m
Skyline north-172m UC

:guns1:

Here's a couple of pictures I took today to give an idea of how small the site is and why there is so much contoversy over this project. Personally, I think that the site is a little small for a 230m tower, but we'll see how it goes when it finally gets approved.

Looking from Queen St
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid102/p479a81c9b0d1fec9aa95873011a5df70/f9b24319.jpg

From Anne St
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid102/pc4f0355b9b9a57cbc004a36e4b4884a3/f9b24317.jpg

Ive been reading through the Brisbane cityplan lately, and have come to understand the tangental rectangle rules, and the way in which this tower got through council - despite its small site. Either the developer was extremely witty or very lucky in selecting this site. Ive had a look at all of the sites in the whole CBD, and this is the one and only site where the cityplan rules regarding allowable heights can be seriously bent and challenged.

I can understand why the council wants to change the system for allowable heights through. If the architect manages to get the tower in the right confguration on any site, it is possible (and in full accoradnce with cityplan laws) to have no height limit on any site other than the 250AHD. Its so obvious, im really surprised that we haven't seen more such tall towers on smal sites.

And thanks for all of todays new photos Chrisso.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
a couple of weeks ago one of the architects for Emerald said to me to ring back in feb or you will hear about it in news ect if it gets approved. he thinks they have a good chance. BCC also have to access more documents and issues involved with podium and carparking ect..Im not going to ring maybe til march. let them "breathe" abit.

wow SEQ will have an impressive TALL list soon-

Q1-322m UC
Landmark-250m?
Emerald-229m?
Circle on cavill-219m UC
Aurora -207m UC
Riparian-200m (antenna-249m) UC
Central plaza-174m
Skyline north-172m UC

:guns1:
pity most are resi!

Originally posted by dilaz89
pity most are resi!
What is Melbournes tallest?
What is Sydneys Talles?

Melbourne, Brisbane, GC and Sydney all have residental towers as there tallest. So whats your point?

Riparian and the Landmark tower are both mixed towers as well

eureka is an exception as it doesnt look like a typical resi. world tower isnt very attractive as most of us know. riparian is plain ugly! i hope the landmark tower will look like a nice office tower rather than a resi with all crappy balcs

hmm i wish they were all as good as those mammoth residental towers going up in perth hey dilaz!

Originally posted by dilaz89
eureka is an exception as it doesnt look like a typical resi. world tower isnt very attractive as most of us know. riparian is plain ugly! i hope the landmark tower will look like a nice office tower rather than a resi with all crappy balcs
World Tower isnt very attractive as most of us know???? wtf!!!
World Tower is probably the finest skyscraper in Australia atm! Its also one of the best looking super tall apartment towers in the world!!! find one that looks better!!!
Eureka is going to look good, But Q1 is also going to a world class design!!!!
Also theres nothing wrong with Riparian plaza's design!!!
im not sure where your coming from dilaz, but i dont like it!
crappy balcs??? wtf? the latest generation of apartment tower designs are equal if not better than current office tower designs!

An apartment skyscraper can actually look ok! it doesnt have to be an office tower!!!
:ohno: dear o dear!

ok i admit wt isnt too bad BUT its definently NOT the finest scraper in aus atm! there are atleast 20 better looking aus scrapers. eureka and q1 will look much better than wt upon completion.
Riparian plaza is butt ugly and another siedler clone!
new resi towers are certainly not better than new office twr designs.

@TOCC
there is only 1 big resi tower planned for perth that we have actally seen the final design for. it isnt too bad but not as nice as a modern office tower!

hangon i remember what i was on about in the first place now- brisbane will have too many tall resi and not enough office twrs. i hope the landmark tower will be predominantly office like riparian.

Originally posted by dilaz89
ok i admit wt isnt too bad BUT its definently NOT the finest scraper in aus atm! there are atleast 20 better looking aus scrapers. eureka and q1 will look much better than wt upon completion.
Riparian plaza is butt ugly and another siedler clone!
new resi towers are certainly not better than new office twr designs.

still better then nothing and still beats a lot of other buildings that have gone up around australia in the past few years.

@TOCC
there is only 1 big resi tower planned for perth that we have actally seen the final design for. it isnt too bad but not as nice as a modern office tower!
i was joking with you.


hangon i remember what i was on about in the first place now- brisbane will have too many tall resi and not enough office twrs. i hope the landmark tower will be predominantly office like riparian.
Riparian is mixed used
Landmark tower is mixed use
Brisbane Square is commercial

out of the top 7 Brisbane towers only 2 are going to be Residental towers. I think your a little misconceived dilaz.

Brisbane Tall Towers

1.Land mark tower-Mixed use (propsed)
2.Emerald tower-Residental (approved/propsed)
3.Aurora-Residental-Residental (U/C)
4.Riparian Plaza-Mixed use (U/C)
5.Central Plaza-Commercial (built)
6.Waterfront place-Commercial (built)
7.Brisbane Square-Commercial (approved)

Originally posted by dilaz89
pity most are resi!

Yes Dilaz!!!!!!!! - I think what you're trying to say is pity they're in Brisbane and not in Perth !!!!

Perth would have a heart attack if it got all these towers all at once.

Originally posted by dilaz89
ok i admit wt isnt too bad BUT its definently NOT the finest scraper in aus atm! there are atleast 20 better looking aus scrapers. eureka and q1 will look much better than wt upon completion.
Riparian plaza is butt ugly and another siedler clone!
new resi towers are certainly not better than new office twr designs.

@TOCC
there is only 1 big resi tower planned for perth that we have actally seen the final design for. it isnt too bad but not as nice as a modern office tower!
name them???

Originally posted by NCC1701D
Yes Dilaz!!!!!!!! - I think what you're trying to say is pity they're in Brisbane and not in Perth !!!!

Perth would have a heart attack if it got all these towers all at once.
now how did i know that
a) me saying pity they are all resi would cause an uproar
b) perth would be mentioned and you would make it out that i am jealous of brisbane getting new buildings

if they were all in perth they would flood the market and we wouldnt see anything for another 20 years.

@ cul name what?

Originally posted by dilaz89


@ cul name what?

Your fun.

Name the “atleast twenty” towers that you feel look better than World Tower

P.S. you will need to come up with more than twenty to save any face…

Steering the conversation back in to the direction of Riparian....

I had a walk down that end of town for the first time since Riparian was just a hole in ground (sorry.. no digi cam).

Anyway - WOW! Now I have only just realised how much the previously mentioned 'photos don't do Riparian justice' term is actually true. The facade - even for the Carpark actually looks really good close up! Now I'm even that little bit more into the building then I was before.

I also didn't realise how tall River City seems from behind...

Hopefully I'll be getting a digital camera in the next couple of months and will actually be able to do some photos.

What can I say - OOPS and SORRY!

When you have a few windows open sometimes you (well I do anyway) get the threads mixed up...

That wasn't supposed to be in this thread...

Sorry again guys... I've copied and pasted into the appropriate thread - is it possible to remove the post completely?

Originally posted by Orfeo
Your fun.

Name the “atleast twenty” towers that you feel look better than World Tower

P.S. you will need to come up with more than twenty to save any face…
cant be fucked fighting which means im not not showing you! its a matter of opinion anyway

Originally posted by dilaz89
cant be fucked fighting which means im not not showing you! its a matter of opinion anyway

Okay. Let me make sure I understand you.

You say that there are better scrapers than world tower but you wont back that up.:bash:

It’s a matter of opinion? Really. When did you work that out? By the way just because something is popular does not make it good or right. If you actually had written the list and then tried to justify it I would have been happy even though I might not have agreed with it.

I have to ask: do you actually think before you post?

Now, here’s what I think has happened: you can’t win so you wont try. Prove me wrong.
21 scrapers.

sorry about causing a fight guys, but im pretty passionate about WT!lol
Emerald will be approx same height as WT-229m/230m

heres latest pic>

http://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2004/02/242436.jpg

I don’t think this is much of a fight, more a disagreement :). I just feel if you’re going to dis a building you should at least explain why, but I don’t think dilaz89 agrees.

I like world tower, and though it is not my favourite building, it is definitely in the top 20. It would be nice for Brisbane to get an equivalent tall, and I’m very pro emerald design-wise, but I think world tower will be the better scraper. But I guess I’ll just have to wait for the real thing to decide….

Originally posted by Orfeo
I don’t think this is much of a fight, more a disagreement :). I just feel if you’re going to dis a building you should at least explain why, but I don’t think dilaz89 agrees.

I like world tower, and though it is not my favourite building, it is definitely in the top 20. It would be nice for Brisbane to get an equivalent tall, and I’m very pro emerald design-wise, but I think world tower will be the better scraper. But I guess I’ll just have to wait for the real thing to decide….
ill do it when ss.com starts working again.
heres one,
HSBC centre, left of culls pic

Okay, I’ll wait.

The point of my previous post was to say that you are not giving any reasons for you’re saying. Yet again this is the case. Okay, you think HSBC is better: but why?

Unless I'm mistaken this is the official Emerald Tower thread, not "20 buildings better than WT". Stop hijacking the thread and make your own if you must!

fucken hell ya can forget me telling you these nicer bldgs if i have to give a description of why, i have MUCH better things to do. infact, i surrender because i simply cant be fucked! there i loose, you win! are ya happy now?

Originally posted by dilaz89
fucken hell ya can forget me telling you these nicer bldgs if i have to give a description of why, i have MUCH better things to do. infact, i surrender because i simply cant be fucked! there i loose, you win! are ya happy now?
im happy:cheers:

good now lets all be freinds and get back to the topic

Any news on whats happening with this? Im completely lost.

thanks.

Originally posted by m01lim
Any news on whats happening with this? Im completely lost.

thanks.
Not much news yet

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid40/p8c35b47e7e635d58f12071f82b063caf/fcff7651.gif
If anyone wants to use this picture I made of Emerald please feel free to do so.

jt

Originally posted by CULWULLA
a couple of weeks ago one of the architects for Emerald said to me to ring back in feb or you will hear about it in news ect if it gets approved. he thinks they have a good chance. BCC also have to access more documents and issues involved with podium and carparking ect..Im not going to ring maybe til march. let them "breathe" abit.

wow SEQ will have an impressive TALL list soon-

Q1-322m UC
Landmark-250m?
Emerald-229m?
Circle on cavill-219m UC
Aurora -207m UC
Riparian-200m (antenna-249m) UC
Central plaza-174m
Skyline north-172m UC

:guns1:
great pic jayt!
im waiting til march before i contact anyone again. these things take time. Its a very hot item this one.

I can't wait to see the floor layouts and pricing for units in this tower.

Bump.

I doubt this one is going to go ahead. :?

chatted to BCC today and the planner has told me the council is in recess atm til march 27. So in April a descision will be made on Emerald.
another month to wait!
This will definatley happen! its just been a bit slow with approval process!

Originally posted by CULWULLA
chatted to BCC today and the planner has told me the council is in recess atm til march 27. So in April a descision will be made on Emerald.
another month to wait!
This will definatley happen! its just been a bit slow with approval process!

In recess from what????
Thanks for being optimistic - but how can you be so sure that it will 'definately happen'?

Probably something to do with the council elections coming up.

Originally posted by NCC1701D
In recess from what????
Thanks for being optimistic - but how can you be so sure that it will 'definately happen'?
well mainly from the correspondence ive had from the last 12 months with BCC and Skou architects. Theres a couple of small issues which are complicating the approval process. mainly the number of car spaces and podium design. The actual height of Emerald isnt an issue and never has been. It is limited to RL250m which it is (RL248m) and abides the floor space ratio ect. The architects are very confident of its success at council , they just know the council are lengthening the process being typical with council.
anyway fro what Skou have indicated it will be approved and construction will start late in year!

well, i certainly hope so. however i won't be totally at ease until the tower is u/c. but i've found that because we've had to wait so long and nothing's happened, plus there's austcorp's proposal, that my interest in emerald has dropped. if this wasn't approved i prolly wouldn't care very much at this stage. hopefully my attitude will change if it starts to rise. is anyone else feeling this way?

I think it looked good.

Originally posted by CHapmaN
well, i certainly hope so. however i won't be totally at ease until the tower is u/c. but i've found that because we've had to wait so long and nothing's happened, plus there's austcorp's proposal, that my interest in emerald has dropped. if this wasn't approved i prolly wouldn't care very much at this stage. hopefully my attitude will change if it starts to rise. is anyone else feeling this way?
i dont think you know the devloper (Emerald developments) who is building the Emerald tower. They are like Meriton. they dont care if market is peaking or looking like its heading for over supply. They have the funds to erect the tower with or without any pre-sales.The architect -Christian Skou has informed as soon as this gets through its going to commence construction! he said if the market is going bad, it doesnt matter beacuse when its completed in 3 years the market will be back up and then the units will be sold.makes sense!
HarryT also couldnt give a hoot about the markets he has the idea- "just build them" and they will come!

Um, I beg to differ Cul....

Harry T is an established property guru with a track record worth $billions, and has been building towers for decades. He has a stable financial base to back-up risky ventures.

Emerald Developments are a couple of Sydney real estate agents trying to get their first venture out of the ground. They claim they have "financial backing" from the middle east, but they are certainly NOT established developers (yet). Just because they claim to have full commitment does not mean it will actually go ahead, no matter what the architects may think, or hope. The amount of hot air in the real estate business would float the titanic.

It all just sounds a bit too cowboy-ish to me....I'll wait until there's a crane

Originally posted by Fountainhead
Um, I beg to differ Cul....

Harry T is an established property guru with a track record worth $billions, and has been building towers for decades. He has a stable financial base to back-up risky ventures.

Emerald Developments are a couple of Sydney real estate agents trying to get their first venture out of the ground. They claim they have "financial backing" from the middle east, but they are certainly NOT established developers (yet). Just because they claim to have full commitment does not mean it will actually go ahead, no matter what the architects may think, or hope. The amount of hot air in the real estate business would float the titanic.

It all just sounds a bit too cowboy-ish to me....I'll wait until there's a crane
cowboyish? lol i like that. yeah i didnt mean established developers, i sort of ment "go getters" like Meriton, they just want to build the bloody thing. believe me when i say if she gets approved, shes going up!:D

Ummm - hint hint cul, Are they still in recess ??? :wink:

I'm formerly from Brisbane, working in Korea right now, and waiting eagerly on any news of the approval of this building. Lets hope this month we find out for certain wheather or not this gets approved. Ill be damn dissapointed if it dosent!

Welcome andy77aus, we'll all be dissapointed believe me!

Good to have another Queenslander about.

ill contact the architecs or BCC after Easter and ask how things are progressing

Hey Cul, Its after easter now. Do you think Its worth giving them a call yet?

C'mon, whats the story here?

I think it is now time to be doubtful that this will go ahead. There is widespread talk of a downturn in housing... but I'm no expert. (And I would love to be proved wrong!!)

I think it is now time to be doubtful that this will go ahead. There is widespread talk of a downturn in housing... but I'm no expert. (And I would love to be proved wrong!!)

Your thinking of Melbourne and Sydney. Brisbane is Booming, what with all the international and interstate arrivals and students choosing to live and study here there is still more 'booming' to be done. Back in Feb I was reading an article that said at current selling rates there is only 3 months supply left in the inner city. That included all underconstruction and proposed residential towers.

Look at the last residential boom of the 90s when many towers including Grosvenor, Quay West, Sebel, Admiralty Quays, Admiralty Towers, Pacific Plaza and plenty more were built - they said their would be oversupply and it lasted only a few months.

This city has been booming for more than 10 years now and I don't think it will stop.

jt

Hey Cul, Its after easter now. Do you think Its worth giving them a call yet?
yeah i think i ring again and see what story is. Talk about a drawn out DA submission. Ill ring BCC and architects aswell. Ill ask WHEN will we know its fate? But as Jayt has said, the current climate wont effect it, the descion on it has t do with its podium/carparking and some smaller issues. Ive already asked about the 229m/77st height and this is irrelevant beacuse it complies with BCC regualtions.
next week ill post some latest news about. be it good or bad.
cheers

Yes, I think Briz is hitting quite a critical mass that will keep the building boom going for quite some time yet, kind of international position, cheaper than Sidders, warmer than freezing Melbourne, closer to the world and with lifestyle.

Any news on this? :)

still waiting for my calll back. i might hassle them again today! there gonna have to tell me something as its probably giving them the shits!lol

well, finally heard back from Christian Scou (architect) and he has told me the DA has sat with BBC for 2 months without moving, due to elections and new LM ect. He assured me 2 things will happen within 6 weeks.
1. The DA will go thru council and will be approved or
2.It will go to court!(beacuse of backlash from former mayor)
He said he is also inviting Peter Beauty to view plans and "hurry along" the DA which is now becoming way too long at council.This will push the application in council to front of line and should get approval with a few months. When this happens the DA will be lodged and construction will start soon after, hopefully late 2004.
Christian still sounded very confident of this project. he is going to get back with me in 2 months with plans ect for a model i will build for my display.

Thankyou for your time and effort cull - much appreciated.

jt

Thanks Culwulla. Is'nt it great how the leadup and aftermath of an election can delay what is essentially an administrative process (assessment of compliance or otherwise of a project with the city plan).

Hmmmmm?

OK, so we know that the delay has something to do with the podium or the laneway or both. What I would like to know is why it is taking so long to fix the problem and move on to the next stage. I cant get my head around how it is benefitial to drag it out for so long when all involved are playing it down as something relatively minor. Surely it is in everybody's best interest to finalise things regardless of the outcome, the budget for this thing must be going through the roof!

for a council that doesn't want the project, I would imagine that it IS in their best interest to stretch the process out as long as possible... it's been the podium, the laneway, next it will be the impact on heritage listed buildings in the area or maybe traffic congestion....

Site clearing is underway. Spoke to a guy on site who said it is still in council but will definitely go ahead.

Emerald banners are up and everything has the Emerald logo - bobcat, truck, company 4WD (a Mercedes M class!) and t-shirts!

Photos to follow soon.

^^^^
Great News! You have just made my weekend.

Photos as promised.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/johnthay2/22may04emerald3.JPG

http://members.optusnet.com.au/johnthay2/22may04emerald2.JPG

http://members.optusnet.com.au/johnthay2/22may04emerald1.JPG

http://members.optusnet.com.au/johnthay2/22may04emerald4.JPG

http://members.optusnet.com.au/johnthay2/22may04emerald5.JPG

even the license plate of that 4WD has emerald written on it.

im gonna be happy for days now :)

Is the hotel on the corner making way for it??
If not, it is going to be one skinny mother of a building - especially at that height.
Great news though...............

Woah thats a promising sign. I was losing hope, but this has ignited the hope again.

Wow! Thanks so much for the update duke! This is great news! :D

Can't wait to see this beauty start to rise over Brisbane skyline! It's incredible to believe that in a period of about 3 or 4 years, Brisbane's tallest building will change three times!!!

Excuse my french....but FUCK YEAH!

I was a little worried, but I'm over the moon now.

excellent! bout time,ive been phoning Skou architects for 12 months and finally something. last time i spoke ,he said it wont be long.
this is fabulous! last official height was 229m but ill get plans soon to make model and ill post the exact height.
wow 3 bldgs over 200m and maybe 4th with the Auscorp one.
good pix duke, doesnt look far from St Johns cathedrals?
i wonder if it will shade the area?
anyway great news. i reckon it will start early financial year!

Cheers Duke!

This is great news (and a blatant piece of pre-approval PR).

ATM skyscrapers.com and has Emerald's height to roof as being 229m/751ft and 77 levels above ground.

...and skyscraperPage.com has it as 230m/754.5ft to roof and 81 levels.

However as CULWULLA mentioned in his last post, he will find out the final height of Emerald.

This is excellent news for Brisbane (and Australia). :okay:

Reminder of what Emerald may (key word "may") eventually appear as:

________http://www.crone.com.au/projects/queen2.jpg__http://www.crone.com.au/projects/queen1.jpg

If this and the Auscorp proposal go ahead Brisbane could have 2 very tall towers at each end of the CBD.
I know I'm stating the obvious, but anybody driving in from the valey will be struck by the sheer height (slender height) of this tower (supported by Aurora and Riparian not far behind) and commuters heading in on the Captain Cook Bridge could be greeted by another giant in the middle of Mary/Margaret St's.

Anybody driving in from Toowong (or indeed the South as well) will be sight a very bulky Queens Square so whichever way you look at it, Brisbanites may barely know themselves in a few years.

4 years ago who would have thought?

well thats made my day

I can assure everybody that steps will be taken to prevent this from going ahead. Brisbane does NOT need any more of these ridiculous southern-style tall buildings. They're a blemish on this city's wonderful skyline and achieve nothing except threaten our relaxed lifestyle.

http://www.gwb.com.au/gwb/news/soorley/soor1.jpg

:bleh: :bleh: :bleh: :bleh: :bleh: :rock:

I can assure everybody that steps will be taken to prevent this from going ahead. Brisbane does NOT need any more of these ridiculous southern-style tall buildings. They're a blemish on this city's wonderful skyline and achieve nothing except threaten our relaxed lifestyle.


Lol, his shirt doesn't look to be enjoying a relaxed lifestyle, straining against that bulging gut! :booze:

Emerald should send Soorley an info pack for an apartment. :)

LOL guys. finn always the fashion guru ;) . That beer-gut overhang is bigger than Sydney Latitude's overhang.

The Ray Martin style helmut is a screech too. Toupe perhas?

Let's get him sent an Emerald info pack with fresh pigeon poo in it!

look what i found when i went up to redcliffe today...

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid118/p0e3076d47191b25a66b96523cc63514a/f88ef235.jpg

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid118/p8abdd976df517a88775a00eb54b1fa3e/f88ef237.jpg

it located on flinders parade on the waterfront... any ideas?
edited by cul

Excellent....after nearly two years they finally have a bloody sign up on site! For such a high profile project, it has recieved remarkably little hype from the developers.

Good stuff!

Excellent....after nearly two years they finally have a bloody sign up on site! For such a high profile project, it has recieved remarkably little hype from the developers.

Good stuff!
just wait when the big E gets final stamp approval from council!!!
you will see hype then!
it will be everywhere!, sales, adds ect. it will be biggest thing in Brisbane for years. not often a 77storey building comes along.It will probably be the city's tallest building for decades!

Why would that be at Redcliffe???

maybe the "Emerald" company builds apartments, houses ect. and thi is just another project?

Why would that be at Redcliffe???

Presumably this - which I posted in this thread on Jan 14 this year.

The Courier Mail today (page 3) reports that Emerald Developments Pty Ltd are involved with a development in Redcliffe which is also pushing the height envelope - although on a much smaller scale - trying to effectively get a 6 storey building in a 3 storey area.

It appears to be the same company as it quotes Chris McLean as spokesman for Emerald.

Great news, the best news. The Orient Hotel next door won't be knocked down, I'm sure it will be heritage listed. In fact it wouldn't be bad being the owner with all of these well off types about to move into the area.

Back in the 80's a great hotel on the corner of Queen and Adelaide I think was knocked down, I think the AAMI building is now on that corner, the hotel was magnificent and a great loss. The Joh - Dean brothers years. It will look better with the low rise hotel, and the giant tower behind.

Can anyone remember the name of the demolished hotel, it was famous for it's levels of verandas and overlooked Queens St.

Great news, the best news. The Orient Hotel next door won't be knocked down, I'm sure it will be heritage listed. In fact it wouldn't be bad being the owner with all of these well off types about to move into the area.

Back in the 80's a great hotel on the corner of Queen and Adelaide I think was knocked down, I think the AAMI building is now on that corner, the hotel was magnificent and a great loss. The Joh - Dean brothers years. It will look better with the low rise hotel, and the giant tower behind.

Can anyone remember the name of the demolished hotel, it was famous for it's levels of verandas and overlooked Queens St.
Queens Hotel ? :cheers:

I think its name was the Australian National and it was one of Brisbanes grand old pubs.

bribri I think you have got it, a picture I found of the "National Hotel" in 1898,
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/uhtbin/hyperion-image/BCC-B54-A781

Maybe they'll incorporate the Orient Hotel into the design of Emerald, similar to what they did with the Queensland Country Life building facade into Aurora.

if they are gunna knock down the orient, ill be chaining myself to the front doors. its a great pub and will be even greater once emerald is in place

I don't think anything is happening to the Orient Hotel. Should be business as usual ( but with lots of construction workers enjoying a beer after work )

its been 2 weeks now...
Any new updates? Cul, heard anything? or is anyhting esle going on at the site?

well, finally heard back from Christian Scou (architect) and he has told me the DA has sat with BBC for 2 months without moving, due to elections and new LM ect. He assured me 2 things will happen within 6 weeks.
1. The DA will go thru council and will be approved or
2.It will go to court!(beacuse of backlash from former mayor)
He said he is also inviting Peter Beauty to view plans and "hurry along" the DA which is now becoming way too long at council.This will push the application in council to front of line and should get approval with a few months. When this happens the DA will be lodged and construction will start soon after, hopefully late 2004.
Christian still sounded very confident of this project. he is going to get back with me in 2 months with plans ect for a model i will build for my display.
still some time to wait. maybe early financial year?

off the topic (sorry) but any idea when Austcorp tower news will be available?

Just in from CH9 news. New Lord Mayor Campell Newman believes the tower is too tall for the site.
Only 2 days out from being forced to give it approval he has asked the State Government to stop it going ahead at it's current height.
Premier Beattie has stated he will do all in his power to stop it.
Got to hand it to Can Do Campbell, he certainly makes things happen.

The good news in all this is it seems Mr Newman is scrapping Labors height limits. It's all about the right tower for the right site from now on.

More talls are possible.

thats really annoying. This tower should go ahead on the site.

That is not good news at all

How can Beattie stop it?? A bit too late now surely. He could pass through legislation... (as they did for Morayfield Shopping Centre)

This idea of no height limits but the right tower for the right site will never work. Everyone has a different opinion..... Just build it!

from what i read already in this thread, isnt this tower supposedly impossible for them to dis-approve??? I dont see their grounds either. that 77% public poll saying yes is an indication.. we do want it!

i will be contacting them about this for sure.

I wonder why he would want to stop it? Why should one developer be assessed under different standards to others, so long as the proposal complied with all the council regulations?? It is somewhat re-assuring that Beattie is not giving a 100% assurance that it will be stopped!

This "tower too tall for the site" stuff is rubbish as well. Maybe by building this at 230m it will allow even taller towers to be built in a more central CBD location.

i have sent Mr. Newman an email voicing my disapproval!
what a barstard. 77% of people want it, REPRESENT US U BARSTARD

What is the email address? I will send one too, we all should.

I would love to know who is behind the opposition to Emerald. Maybe the developers of Aurora because they want to remain the tallest residential?

Campbell Newman talking about it being a blight on the city is just ridiculous. We are talking about the CBD of Brisbane - not a piece of pristine rain forest or the Great Barrier Reef.

The artists impression on the news just showed another building in the centre of the CBD - didn't look out of place at all!

Email of newman: campbelln@qld.liberal.org.au

man, this is ridiculous! Its a friggin CBD and a small at that! All potential sites need atll towers. 230m isnt that bloody tall! atleast its not large bulky tower. Its nice and slender! C Skou said this might happen but he seemed confident it will slip through?
will be intrested to see how it goes.

ill be assassinating newman

I want this building to go up just as much as everybody else, but I must admit everytime I drive past the site I always cringe and think 'Fuck thats a small site to put a huge tower'

But in saying that - A tall, slender tower is the only thing that would probably look good on that site anyway...

cul can you give someone (architects? council?) a call tomorow an see whats up

The artists impression on the news just showed another building in the centre of the CBD - didn't look out of place at all!Actually, I thought channel 9's little artists impression (the one where they showed Emerald rising on the skyline), made the tower look more than 280 metres.
The other renders they showed (the ones we've all seen) put it in it's true perspective.
Sounds like the developers have managed to get under the skin of everybody at city hall.

I think we all know deep down that the there are legitimate concerns with relation to the height of this tower on the edge of the CBD but at the end of the day, let's put it into perspective. An extension of the CBD towards the Valley in some form is inevitable, and take one look at Emerald's neigbours. Scores (and I mean scores) of towers in the 60 to 140 metre range (with 1 proposed or approved around 165m) and a 207m tower (Aurora) is literally a stones throw away.
What's the difference to the orient or residents of Cathederal Place whether a 129m or 229m tower rises on that site? Shadows aren't an issue. Creating "That Ghetto Feeling" beside the valley can't be an issue, just look at the Admiralty Precinct.

We all know what a classy design Emerald is.

I wonder if the Emerald people have been doing their homework on other potential sites for that tower in the city?
I'm guessing it's location on the edge of the Valley was going to be it's big selling point.

Hopefully they will just stop being fags and let it be built.its not a fat tower, its slender, and will fit on that site well. i dont see the problem.

I know the issue, but i dont know what the problem with a large building being on a small space is. anyone care to enlighten me?

white elephants are bad.. that's a reason

dont dis elephants

I personally think the building is in the wrong place, and would not be totally dissapointed if it didn't go ahead. However I think the way the council is treating this application is shamefull. I mean surely they should have the guts to say yes quickly if they have no real option except dragging it out. Or if they are going to bring in state powers to kill it, why wait so long to do so? Developers deserve to be treated with the basic respect due to human beings.

An article in the Courier Mail yesterday quoted Campbell Newman as saying "the council had no basis on which to reject the proposal because it complied with the relevant city plan"!

He has requested the State Government to use special "call-in" powers and apply different criteria to stop the project from going ahead.

If this happened it would be ironical as I recall that the Government has previously threatened to use these same powers against the council in relation to the Northbank proposals.

As I said in a previous post, it would be very interesting to find the real source of the opposition to this development - other developers who don't want to lose their building's status or the city council town planners who have seen a cleverly designed building achieve an outcome not envisaged as possible under the town plan.

Jellyman's point is well taken. A petulant outburst in relation to development proposals in Brisbane sends totally the wrong message about our city.

scanned from yesterday's Courier Mail:

http://server4.vnpages.net/~one/bne/emcmscan.jpg

. thanks for scan defec.man i hope this goes ahead. even at 200m. but if it gets lower than 200m it wont be worth it.
i like how they didnt get any of the heights right! lol :except Waterfront"/
The 250m height for Emerald should be 248m (above sea level).or 229m above grd.
Aurora is 207m not 210m. (its actually 217m above sea lev).
Riparian is 200m not 198m.
anyway it only hurts us skyscraper fans.

Not like the Courier Mail to make an error, or exaggerate :wallbash:

I'm surprised they didn't quote the height as 300m and compare it to Suncorp's 100m.

Surely the developers could sue the Council/State if they pass these changes??

When all this is forgotten I bet you 10c that Can Do Campbell will be there at the opening ceremony - just go get his face on TV.

If they do stop it, i agree that the developers should be able to sue. This is wasting alot of their money, yes?

an Cull, have you given anyone a call yet?

That article is extremely biased, as not only does it over-exaggerate the height of the tower, but it also fails to seek a quote from the developer, instead providing only the views of the planning authorities, government bodies and some random institute's chief (who has no part in any stage of the proposal).

I'm not sure what the Land and Environment Court (or equivalent) is like in Queensland, but down here the developers could sue the shit out of the council or state government for the opportunity cost and money spent on preparing proposals, site clearing, negotiations etc.

The planning process for this tower has been going on too long now for the council to suddenly go to the highest power and not expect to have to compensate the developer.

Any new news on this? stopping development is extremly stupid. I really hope that this tower goes ahead, and soon. And even if it does, the developers should still be compensated because of the stupid waste of time.
CULWURRA, any word on it yet? you had any contact with council OR developers?

Bris needs alot more tall towers and the stupid council is preventing

Ah so much passion m))

^^ i dont get it

^^

You've asked who knows how many questions about the same thing.

When its approved, or cancelled, I'm sure this thread will be the first place to find out about it.

my repetativeness is to get Culwurras attention. it still has failed to work.

Maybe you should ease off a bit, Cull is the moderator on here, and loves Scrapers, if he knows anything he will tell us.

i was trying to get him to call someone instead of waiting

He has done MORE than enough.

If has hasseled people every 5 minutes then he wouldn't get any info at all. When something happens, he'll be the first to know.

you miss the point... I WANT MY TOWER

you miss the point. You are a ...

never mind I couldn't be bothered

Seems to be quite an anti-development attitude creeping into Briz. Or a phobia of tall buildings yet anywhere around central city that has views of the city is considered to have million dollar views. I didn't have a problem with Emerald having a small site, sounds like good land utilisation to me.

not so much anti-development, you cant really truthfully say that. Considering the amount of new buildings recently completed or UC atm.
i see the issue here, but i dont think it being near the valley matters.

Culwurra? your professional opinion, do u think the changes in law/legislation/heightlimits/restrictions(whatever it is) as a result of this proposal will HELP brisbane get alot more tall buildings, or stop it.

Newman is removing the height limit for closer to the city center? yes? and restricting these outer areas. doesnt this say he wants them, but not in that spot.

If so, emerald should sell their block of land for a nice price, pick up compensation from the council for time wastage, and buy a new site closer to the GPO and if nessacary demolish an old building.

This is not good reading this. Once again i say we need a voice. Letters or some that can respond to this type of nonsene. I dont mind this tower be questioned but let the argument be vaild please !

I really dont understand what is so wrong with that site. It also seems to me that we are limiting the growth of our city by saying that the site is too far from the GPO. I know that there is alot of people out there who dont like tall resi towers but the more of these we have the less urban sprawl we have which IMO can only be a good thing. I am very surprised that Peter Beattie is backing Campbell on this one as I had thought that Peter was a little bit more forward thinking than that.