Developer THAKRAL wont take no for an answer! the tenacious developers are back hasselling the councillors to develop there prime site atop Wynyard station! there massive height limit mixed tower is the pic below, but council want it more slender the best news is there not concerned about the excessive 235m height!!! which is a bloody good thing!
Ive even been asked to build a model over next few weeks for city model.
This is probably the only chance of a height limit scraper in Sydney to be built within the next decade, so hopefully things will turn positive and the damn thing will be built! but still along way to go and many negotiations!
ill keep you updated!!


http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/pd39667f8596279469829793261227080/fd1eff14.jpg

Oh please please please pretty please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go get them Thakral, go get them tiger:guns1:

This must go ahead. It looks so good. No doubt overshadowing issues will arise about Wynyard Park.

Originally posted by climbing_crane
This must go ahead. It looks so good. No doubt overshadowing issues will arise about Wynyard Park.
well that and other issues. ive made many models of this only half width with george st frontage only. the concern is the BULK and being devloped over the laneway!
the shadows arent too bad because its north/ east of park. Only shadows in morning. Also the top might change and architectural features can be added to boost this sucker to 250m+.

Thanks for some mildly good news Cul. I will await with cautious cynicism... ;)
So many questions............I'll keep it to 2 for the time being.

1- So, if the new massing model is considerably thinner, is sympathetic to the bloody laneway (?) and sits hard against the George St side it may have a chance?

2- I recall that this proposal got 'dwarfed' down to 130m by the Council last time it went up ? Was this because it didn't fulfill the criteria listed above ?

Originally posted by spazpecker
Thanks for some mildly good news Cul. I will await with cautious cynicism... ;)
So many questions............I'll keep it to 2 for the time being.

1- So, if the new massing model is considerably thinner, is sympathetic to the bloody laneway (?) and sits hard against the George St side it may have a chance?

2- I recall that this proposal got 'dwarfed' down to 130m by the Council last time it went up ? Was this because it didn't fulfill the criteria listed above ?
1- yeah the council want it definately thinner. Hopefully this will make them happy.
2-A planner 'dwarfed" it down but that was just her proposal. Thakral just laughed and said we are allowed to build 235m!
so move over!!
lol

Good to see this developer has the BALLS to not take no for an answer. Hopefully we'll get something out of this, although I don't hold too much hope because it's the CSPC we're talking about. *blood boils*

Wow just hours after i angrliy wrote how this scraper should be built in the "never built" thread and i see this... Never knew i had that affect on ppl:D :D

I hope it gets the go ahead and it should, especially if a trade off results in a new completely refurbished Wynyard station which is by far the ugliest of the CBD underground stations .........

i think that tower looks a bit bloody ugly. go for the height limit tower, but not if it's ugly like the one in the pic

council should look hard at these photos and not totally mess up the skyline. (btw them looking down at models from above is not the way to plan a city.)

I have absolutely NO idea what you're on about fox- is it the location of the tower or the design that you have a problem with? If it's the design don't worry because Cul's pic is the original model only- it won't turn out anything like this.

Fox1 are you nuts? At what point is a city's skyline "finished" and shouldn't be "messed up"??? I don't see WT in those photos you posted either .. maybe we should tear it down while there's still time, that has the potential to "mess up" the skyline too! God! More buildings = good!

And that design is fine! What's wrong with you!? I think it's great! It looks "future" !

This news has made my day. Thanks Culwulla! Fingers crossed! Tell the planner a height limit proposal - ANY height limit proposal - has broad community support! Hehehe

hk

Yeh, I'll wait with baited breath on this one....It would really LIFT the profile of the Wynyard station area which is in dire need of a major structural change. Cant see any reason why the 235m+ monster shouldn't go up...no overshadowing.
At least S****R is not the mayor anymore, so we may see a more open council with the developers proposal....BRING IT ON!!!

Dont know i kinda like the model.. but ONLY if it is glass like the model suggests. Dont know if structurally it can happen but the translucent look really really makes the builing unique and would be a sight at night all lit up!

I have my fingers and toes crossed for this one.. come on the council needs to wake up to the real world!! Although it is good that they do assess everything like the bulk and the laneway.. but to me these are small issues... the concept is right and thats what matters. Now they just need to builid a 235m+ tower on the site and thats it!!! (would rather 280m but 235 is better than nothing right??) Actually the 235m model shown really resembles the Citicorp building in NYC and thats why i like it!!


@HK-star. It made my day 2!!!

I'm stunned by this announcement. It was not long ago since I threw this proposal into Sydney's Never Built Thread, giving up any hope of this tower ever going ahead.

And very courageous of the developers to approach the council again and they have been rewarded with a height limit tower and I'm stunned too the council depsite their wits threw in the towel!!!

I don't really care as to the bulkiness of the tower but prefer a large tower. The height is all that counts!!!

And if there is a problem, the developer can always take it to the Land and Environment Court which tends to swing in the favours of developers.;)

Well after constant let downs and broken dreams because of SCC, I won't be getting excited about this until it has actually been approved. But here's hoping ;).

The point Thakral have made is that want to build SOMETHING BIG! They want to start next year, they want a major landmark with a railway station on par with Grand cental with NYC! (but smaller scale of course).
I think this a terrific spot for a 235m scraper! Its on george street which is the 'spine" of the CBD which is where the council planners want tall bldgs put!

heres the 'thin" version which i favour. Its set on george st and rises above street perfectly placed in the tall bldg precinct!

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg

I just hope everything turns to a height limit scraper because the CBD is lacking actual sites for these babys and to end up with a shorter structure would be a real disapointment indeed!

Also the devloper has "dumped" original architects-Rice & Daubney and have now engaged an other high profile firm which i dont actual know name ! but will eventually find out.
cheers

WOW, that THIN design is something else and very prominent. It 'truly' blends in with all the other buildings in the area.
It reminds me of the 279m Citicorp building in New York, though much thinner!

We desperately need this one and hopefully it is gonna happen in the next construction cycle! :D

The 'Citicorp' inspired design is ideal for this site - it's a shame this baby is not gonna be built to the originally proposed height but 235m 'skinnier' version is most welcome too!

There are no real issues here - the discussion about 'overshadowing' is just preposterous... (a few years back someone was arguing about Park Plaza tower overshadowing Town Hall as a reason to shelve it....and it still went ahead...)

Not to mention benefits of building a new Wynyard Station! :cool:

I hope we will see a new model soon! And approval process should go smoothly with a major design competition etc. I am not sure if construction will go ahead without pre-commited anchor tenant (John Boyd tower developers are still looking for one??)

This may take a very long time to eventuate but the good news is - this project is not dead!! ;)

Go Thakral!! :guns1:

yeah we DO need this one! Also THAKRAL are keen to build THIS construction cycle not 4-5 years time. Also its a mixed project , mostly hotel/apartment/retail! It involves the demolition and replacement of the 15storey menzies Holiday inn.
So the whole project will proably consist of only %25 office.
anyway things are going to heat up leading into xmas.
Imagine a bldg higher than WT ? :)

This evening as I was closing up my shop, I slammed the door on my left rude finger, and the whole nail has gone a deep maroon colour and it hurt like hell....



but after reading this post i dont feel no pain no more!!



WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Sounds promising!! :guns1:

Btw that thin model looks very much like the 244m Angel Place that nearly got built.

Sydney Dude - Ouch!

Oh, here we go again. I'm not saying anything about this one. I'm sitting on the other side of the fence and not getting one bit excited about it until I walk into the Sydney Council Model room and see "CityOne" coloured Red.

The thin one doesn't look anywhere near as good as the futuristic one with blade! I hope they don't go with such a boring needle design. Does firing the architects mean that they've junked their deisgn as well? Starting from scratch?

This almost makes up for Bligh St ... almost

hk

I actually would've thought it makes economic sense to wait a while before beginning a major project like this. The construction companies must be swimming in work right now, prices must be high. It seems like it might make sense to wait for a couple of the other biggies to finish and the kind of segue into this one .. or are they completely independent with their own gang? They're still gonna need local workers .. must be a shortage of them right now. And you know those builders. When there's a lot of work around they feel they can just name their own price.

I happen to like Wynyard station! Especially the awesome escalators with the wooden large-grain ribbing - looks like it's from WW1. But I agree the arcade through from George St is pretty bad. Gonna be a revamp of shops underneath? Maybe a larger arcade or other development?

hk

Originally posted by hk-star
I actually would've thought it makes economic sense to wait a while before beginning a major project like this. The construction companies must be swimming in work right now, prices must be high. It seems like it might make sense to wait for a couple of the other biggies to finish and the kind of segue into this one .. or are they completely independent with their own gang? They're still gonna need local workers .. must be a shortage of them right now. And you know those builders. When there's a lot of work around they feel they can just name their own price.

I happen to like Wynyard station! Especially the awesome escalators with the wooden large-grain ribbing - looks like it's from WW1. But I agree the arcade through from George St is pretty bad. Gonna be a revamp of shops underneath? Maybe a larger arcade or other development?

hk
revamp? you better believe it! the station/shops everything will be brand spanking new!
Thakral are a BIG company. i dont think theyw ill have any problems recruiting workers.

from one of lucy turnbulls speaches:

"We are all acutely aware that the major city rail stations are congested and need upgrading. Capacity at heavy rail stations in particular Town Hall, Wynyard and Central is approaching 100%."

Originally posted by hk-star
The thin one doesn't look anywhere near as good as the futuristic one with blade! I hope they don't go with such a boring needle design. Does firing the architects mean that they've junked their deisgn as well? Starting from scratch?

This almost makes up for Bligh St ... almost

hk

It completely makes up for Bligh Apartments and this one will be even better.

Originally posted by spazpecker
I have absolutely NO idea what you're on about fox- is it the location of the tower or the design that you have a problem with? If it's the design don't worry because Cul's pic is the original model only- it won't turn out anything like this.

well it's the design basically OF THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL i'm referring to for the moment. like i said i have no problem with height towers but not just height for the sake of it, and especially with what i see as a 1/10 tower for attractiveness. sydney deserves world-best-towers, 10 or 11/10, not just shit that is just seen as good just because it's tall..... 'world tower' ring a bell here??

THEIR own original model looks like a shockingly cheap see-thru concrete box that a work experience kid has designed in ten seconds, with the supposed-to-be-impressive slanted roof echoing the grandure of New York's Citicorp Tower. well it doesn't come anything close to that, and they have to try much harder to deserve a spot on the Sydney skyline.

Originally posted by hk-star
Fox1 are you nuts? At what point is a city's skyline "finished" and shouldn't be "messed up"??? I don't see WT in those photos you posted either .. maybe we should tear it down while there's still time, that has the potential to "mess up" the skyline too! God! More buildings = good!

And that design is fine! What's wrong with you!? I think it's great! It looks "future" !

hk

the photos are a little old. world tower is there but not whereit's at now. while on the subject of world tower, i am not impressed or should i say bowled over by that tower either. now if u were smart and read my post properly instead of just making personal attacks such as 'are you nuts' and 'what's wrong with you!?' when i was just simply expressing my opinions and attacking nobody, you may have noticed that i said i have no problem at all with height limit towers. you seem to have missed that point of mine when you launched into this post. what i did say was that i want towers that blow us away, that DESERVE to be in the world-class skyline of sydney, not just tall shit that is only considered 'great...let's build it' just because it's tall. all i'm saying is 'TAKE A DEEP BREATH', hold it for a second, and consider stuff rationally.. not just 'right, let's build this right now' before we consider the believe me many many better options and more inspiring towers could be built in that location.

Originally posted by hk-star
Fox1 are you nuts? At what point is a city's skyline "finished" and shouldn't be "messed up"??? I don't see WT in those photos you posted either .. maybe we should tear it down while there's still time, that has the potential to "mess up" the skyline too! God! More buildings = good!

And that design is fine! What's wrong with you!? I think it's great! It looks "future" !

hk

of course i'm far from wrong in saying that skylines can get messed up. your post is of the variety that all buildings are great and skylines can't get messed up. generally speaking of course sydney's world top 5 skyline would get totally messed up forever if a massive ugly-ass tower was plonked, no matter where it was put.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
The point Thakral have made is that want to build SOMETHING BIG! They want to start next year, they want a major landmark with a railway station on par with Grand cental with NYC! (but smaller scale of course).
I think this a terrific spot for a 235m scraper! Its on george street which is the 'spine" of the CBD which is where the council planners want tall bldgs put!

heres the 'thin" version which i favour. Its set on george st and rises above street perfectly placed in the tall bldg precinct!

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg

I just hope everything turns to a height limit scraper because the CBD is lacking actual sites for these babys and to end up with a shorter structure would be a real disapointment indeed!

Also the devloper has "dumped" original architects-Rice & Daubney and have now engaged an other high profile firm which i dont actual know name ! but will eventually find out.
cheers

this is more like it! ok so now you can see i just want excellence and won't accept shit like the first proposal. this i pretty much like a real lot. i think it would be an almost perfect sydney tower, but i'm still reserving my judgement on it until i see some more details! :cool:

Originally posted by hk-star
The thin one doesn't look anywhere near as good as the futuristic one with blade! I hope they don't go with such a boring needle design. Does firing the architects mean that they've junked their deisgn as well? Starting from scratch?

This almost makes up for Bligh St ... almost

hk

Remember that this model is simply an envelope for the building mass within which the architects can work - it is in no way a finished and finalised design, and as such, the addition of things like rooftop blades (and hence further increases in structure height) are definitely possible and even likely! :)

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg

I'm sure the council will draw up several building envelopes which will be looked at and assessed.

1. as finn said, the model is JUST a concept by Thakral to give SCC the IDEA of there proposal! So lets hope it ends up something similar!
2. fox1.- World Tower has to be one of the great highrise residential bldgs of the world let only Sydney!!!!
Its a brilliant design! Its currently no 11 in the world and most of the ones taller are "same floor plate" box estrusions" in HK or Seoul! not architectural merrit what so ever!
I dont like WT just because its 230m high! i love its intricate structure and its fine location!

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

wheres THAKRAL located? I gotta go in and shake their hand! KICKASS! If you look at culs, first pic take a look at the way it dwarfs the already big AAPT Tower!

i have absolutely no problem whatsoever with your opinion. i am not blown away pretty much whatsoever by world tower, whether it's a sydney building, or not a sydney building.

this is a residential tower :cool:

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3d722b3127cce8d82bbdeb15b0000001610

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3d722b3127cce8d82bbd330660000001610

Originally posted by fox1
i have absolutely no problem whatsoever with your opinion. i am not blown away pretty much whatsoever by world tower, whether it's a sydney building, or not a sydney building.

this is a residential tower :cool:

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3d722b3127cce8d82bbdeb15b0000001610

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3d722b3127cce8d82bbd330660000001610
its just a box with glass...

Isnt that the AOL Time Warner Centre in NY? I thought it was office? Brilliant none the less

Originally posted by fox1
i have absolutely no problem whatsoever with your opinion. i am not blown away pretty much whatsoever by world tower, whether it's a sydney building, or not a sydney building.

this is a residential tower :cool:

http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b3d722b3127cce8d82bbdeb15b0000001610


You're looking at the design of residential towers from the wrong perspective - you are just thinking about what you as a passer-by feel about its aesthetics, which is quite subjective, and not thinking about what it is like for the people living inside the apartments, which is the most relevant aspect!

In cities like New York with widely ranging climatic extremes throughout the year, glass enclosed buildings without balconies are quite reasonable.

In a city like Sydney though, with mildly-varying temperature extremes throughout the year, and generally pleasant climates through all seasons, to live in a hermetically sealed box is ridiculous! You basically must have balconies if possible - by law in fact! Only on the upper floors of World Tower are balconies exempt from some units, for the reasoning of safety.

On the basis of your subjective view of World Tower's aesthetics, you'll find that most other Sydney-siders (and Sydney forumers) would disagree with your criticisms, but you are of course entitled to your opinion. :)

And SydneyDude - AOL Time Warner has offices in the podium of the building, but the two main towers are residential.

@ finn, thanks - I didnt know that!

Some good points, makes alot of sense.

Great to hear CityOne is back, wynyard really needs an overhaul.

Originally posted by finn
You're looking at the design of residential towers from the wrong perspective - you are just thinking about what you as a passer-by feel about its aesthetics, which is quite subjective, and not thinking about what it is like for the people living inside the apartments, which is the most relevant aspect!

In cities like New York with widely ranging climatic extremes throughout the year, glass enclosed buildings without balconies are quite reasonable.

In a city like Sydney though, with mildly-varying temperature extremes throughout the year, and generally pleasant climates through all seasons, to live in a hermetically sealed box is ridiculous! You basically must have balconies if possible - by law in fact! Only on the upper floors of World Tower are balconies exempt from some units, for the reasoning of safety.

On the basis of your subjective view of World Tower's aesthetics, you'll find that most other Sydney-siders (and Sydney forumers) would disagree with your criticisms, but you are of course entitled to your opinion. :)

And SydneyDude - AOL Time Warner has offices in the podium of the building, but the two main towers are residential.

first off, please don't say i'm looking at the design of residential towers from the wrong perspective. typical argument for excusing crap-looking buildings. by saying, oh that's so subjective saying world tower looks like crap cos it, well, looks like crap. 'we have to think about what it is like for people living inside the tower which is the most relevant aspect...' it's the same argument that was used to excuse the hideous public housing boxes of the 70s. sure, bring on the balconies, but world towers ugliness doesn't just lie in its balconies. i really highly i can't tell u how much i dispute your assertion that 'most other sydneysiders' disagree with my criticisms... from the many sydneysiders i've talked to about it, world tower is seen as being one ugly addition to the skyline. we're not all mugs, you know. we know quality when we see it. for me personally, i have grown to like it, its many flaws are fogotten by me, and maybe cos it's in sydney, i think it's OK. that's different from saying the tower blows me away, and is truly amazing, which by the way, is what i firmly believe Sydney's towers should strive for.... excellence. :)

Time Warner towers arent residential!!! there office/hotel

World Tower is a concrete residential bldg-

http://www.skyscrapers.com/files/transfer/6/2003/02/182142.gif

magnificent structure

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/126wolrdtoweraug28.jpg


the Time Warner bldg is steel framed office/hotel/glass box

http://www.skyscrapers.com/files/transfer/6/2003/07/207206.jpg

both are fab towers but totally different.nothing like WT!
plus World Tower is 1metre taller!;)

As mentioned at Wired New York (http://www.wirednewyork.com/aol/default.htm):

The New Coliseum project was designed by David Childs of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill and developed by the Related Companies LP and Apollo Real Estate Advisors, LP, the $1.6 billion block will house 232,300 m² of space. The 750 feet, twin-towered multi-use complex, named Columbus Centre (or AOL Time Warner Center), will house the AOL Time Warner World Headquarters, a 250-room/suite luxury hotel (the Mandarin Oriental, New York) spaces for retail, entertainment, restaurants and offices, 225 luxury apartments, as well as CNN live broadcast production studios and a 12,500 m² concert hall for the use of Jazz at Lincoln Center.

Originally posted by Noonos
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

wheres THAKRAL located? I gotta go in and shake their hand! KICKASS! If you look at culs, first pic take a look at the way it dwarfs the already big AAPT Tower!

They occupy a tower on the actual site!!!

Here is my vision for City One:

http://www.lewycomputing.com.au/andy/cbd13.gif

dark dark shiny black glass with shiny aluminium cross beams, with goal posts reaching 250m.

not bad but i'm seeing melbourne central! :D and bank of china! :D i think we need a building here for sydney that is absolutely original and totally sydney. and totally great too by the way! :)

Well after looking some more i have to now think that the slimer version is nicer. I really really hope that it is chosen.. with little modification. I know it isnt the final design but i do hope that the final resembles it closely. It just screams out 'International scaper' and is very elegant. If that was built no doubt it will soon become one of the best buildings in sydney. If they do add any blades lets hope the shape of the building stays true to the citicorp look.

A mixed use tower sounds much more realistic than all-commercial building! :) Such tower may be built in the current construction cycle! Thakral occupy part of the actual site and they also manage Menzies hotel! So if they want to upgrade their own properties, add some luxury apartments and completely refurbish Wynyard Station - all in a superbly designed tower within Sydney height limit, it is gonna be very difficult for the Council to reject such a great proposal! ;) I am still cautious but if Thakral are determined to make this one happen, it is going to happen! :D It would be fab to see some initial construction in the first half of the next year and a completion date in late 2006! :cool:

Fox1, as finn pointed out, you can't compare WT to AOL Tower in NY. Sydney buyers won't even consider apartments without balconies. I love that, I LOVE balconies and wouldn't live in an apartment without one. If you can find a picture of a large apartment building with balconies that you think beats WT, please post it. I think it's a great design, and again like finn said, you'd be very much in the minority here to say differently.

I don't know who you've been talking to who doesn't like WT on the skyline but I think they're full of it. What, they don't like change? Fuck that attitude.

Of course I want the best looking tower to be built. But when it comes down to it, anything is better than nothing. The only time anything is not better than nothing is when building something crap might preclude building something good down the track. You almost can't "wreck" a skyline. The only thing that wrecks it is building nothing - or maybe something absolutely hideous - but I don't think anyone rational would say even the first image was hideous?! C'mon. That attitude is stifling, anti-progressive, and smacks of Sartorism, Adelaideism, NIMBYism and inability-to-make-decisions-ism.

Not a personal attack buddy. A vigorous exchange of ideas!

hk

yeah the councillors actual like the slimmer tower. there afraid of the bulk of there original proposal! i reckon sydneydudes vision is perfect. I cant see any probs with 235m and 15m spires. The Rl at the site is 13m so 235m = RL248m which is still 2m lower than MLC but 2m higher than WT rls. A nice shinny glass scraper would go nice there rising abruptly above the park.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
yeah the councillors actual like the slimmer tower. there afraid of the bulk of there original proposal! i reckon sydneydudes vision is perfect. I cant see any probs with 235m and 15m spires. The Rl at the site is 13m so 235m = RL248m which is still 2m lower than MLC but 2m higher than WT rls. A nice shinny glass scraper would go nice there rising abruptly above the park.

It's a cool design, but I think spires are too contentious when it comes to the eventual height.

If the roof height can only be 235m+ max, then I think blades extending from the roof - like the earlier CityOne proposal - would be the best, because they are as integral a part of the structure as the fin is on Aurora Place! Indisputable extra height! ;)

Let's not judge WT until it's completely finished...

anyway, I don't care if CityOne is in the shape of turd, I just want it built.

I like Sydneydudes vision. Sydney's skyline would benefit from more black scrapers and the bracing would be pretty unique too to this scraper.

Thanks everyone!

@ fox 1, yes i agree there is definately an element of BOC with the cross beams and spires- i love cross beams :D I dont see much resemblance with melb central though.

This tower will have a huge impact from the WEST. here is a quick job i did showing how it will impact. (Im not sure EXACTLY the position of wynyard station, but i tried my best! someone correct me if its wrong and Ill fix it- but the heights are just about spot on)

http://www.lewycomputing.com.au/andy/sc2.jpg

BTW im no Larven so dont complain!! :)

top job syddude! but if you want exact posi, city one should go right in front of Aurora tower from that angle!

see in this pic its just about op Angel Place.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg

Here, tell them to build my version of it...

http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/CityOne.01.jpg

BTW I hate World Tower and just about every other Sydney residential tower. I too hate the exposed balconies. Balconies can be approached in a far more integrated manner than we see in Sydney. I think it was the Prima design in Melbourne that integrates the balconies within flat glass walls much like a small and rather innocuous indentation, why can't we see more of this? World Tower appears too much like a very bad version of the Llyods building of London... where (in world tower's case) its intestines have been slapped on the outside to minimal effect. This exoskeletonism works on the Llyods building and it works on HSBC in HK but its doesn't work here, it just looks a mess, like the tower has been turned inside out.

I would rather see more towers like the Time Warner building or any of the trump towers. Sydney architecture downright stinks! Sydney could do with a few more tall builings that feature a 'less is more' approach, I am sick of the fussy and hideous buildings that grace our city.

yeh build avatars cityone, i prefer it to my version :)

lol i was way off with my rendering, but it does give an idea of the sort of impact it will have- just shift the building from where it is to infront of angel place using your imagination ;)


Avatar- send the developers that picture- seriously

Originally posted by Avatar
Here, tell them to build my version of it...

http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/CityOne.01.jpg
brilliant! the blue, purple and silver combination make for an excellent contrast.

man i think i am getting a bit ahead of myself... lets say i will watch this thread closely but will only look at the design of the building only when this must *is* approved..

I do like avatars building!love anything with silver! sydney dude is cool as well a big black building will be very 'a la chicago'.
Lets hope that this does get approved then these designs will be more relavant.
fingers and toes still crossed!!!!

nah i disagree! Residential towers NEED balconies! There living breathing structures! with humans inside!We live in Sydney man! its a nice enough climate for them so why not include with design! Glassed in residential towers suck big time! Trump tower and Time warner (which is mostly office tower-has only a 200 units) are OK but in the end there just glass slabs! (Doesnt snow in NYC?to cold anyway for balcs!
no architectural merit whatsover! you can look at the bldg within 30 secs and thats it!yourve seen all of it, glass wall rising up 260m!
Now if you look at WT you can look at al fuckin day! Its brilliant! thats why it has taken 3 years to build! Its a damn intricate structure!
anyway as for city one, i hope its a mixture of balconies, glazing, exposed concrete blades, ornate elements ect, kinda like Melbournes BHP hose with WT thown in and Angel Place!.

I know we need balconies, I'm not saying we don't.

I would just like to see some buildings like trump tower though. Faceless walls 260m of reflective type glass. These massive towers exude something special. Stand on Roosevelt island and tell me any different... Trump World Tower might lack some flair in originality but it makes up for it in absolute presence, it dominates the east river around midtown.

Anyway what I would like to see is towers with reflective curtain walls with small indents for balconies... backed with the same tint so as to create a homogenous look, there is no need for the siedlerisms of curvey hernias in concrete, or skeletal remains of the day as in world tower, integration can provide a complete and sleek look and still give Sydney people the balconies they desire.

They can build the original Angel Place if they want... it reminds me of the perfect Star Gate Go'auld homeworld skyscraper.

It was awesome... my type of building. Awesome in bronze and gold reflective glass!

Excellent rendering Sydneydude. As Culwulla would say "It will stick out like dogs balls."

66 replies and almost 700 views since this thread was started by Cul only 48 hours ago......I think we're desperate for this one !
How is this going to turn out in the end? Either :rock: or :cry:. I'm guessing it's gonna be this >>>> :badnews:.
Best to be a cynical prick because any good news is a bonus !

lol i bet it will be another angel place...

It's gone public. The State Government could come into this too!!!

From The Sydney Morning Herald (smh.com.au)

Hotel uplift could fund Wynyard upgrade
By Sean Nicholls
October 1, 2003

A long-awaited upgrade of Wynyard station could be partially funded by the redevelopment of the Menzies Hotel, under a plan being considered by State Rail and the City of Sydney council.

It would be the second major Sydney train station upgrade paid for in part by developers. A plan to fund almost half the $43.3 million upgrade of North Sydney station through developer contributions was agreed to by the former NSW transport minister Carl Scully in March.

The development and hotel group Thakral Holdings wants to demolish the Menzies, which it leases from State Rail, and build a skyscraper in its place.

The development would incorporate the Wynyard retail complex above the train station, which includes Hunter Arcade, Menzies Arcade and the Wynyard retail ramps that Thakral leases from State Rail, as well as a 13-storey office block on George Street at the other side of the station owned by the company.

Thakral has briefed the city council's Central Sydney Planning Committee on a plan to redevelop the site, but the committee has expressed concerns over the scale and bulk of the proposal.

However, a revised scheme was presented to the committee two weeks ago. The managing director of Thakral, John Hudson, confirmed the company had put a proposal to the State Government.

"It's still very preliminary," Mr Hudson said. "And what may or may not arise is the subject of some discussion".

The city council would create a special local environment plan for the site to allow for an increase in building density, and the plan would need the consent of the planning minister, Craig Knowles.

A State Rail spokeswoman, Jane Lavender, confirmed talks had been held with the developer about including the station upgrade in its redevelopment plans.

Good to see that the proposal has gone public. Sounds like Thakral is really pressuring the State Government for a go ahead.
Gee it would be a dream if the taller and larger design that was originally proposed was the preferred option.
Let's wait some more with baited breath!!

about time this is out now! Im doing some models of this baby over next few weeks so ill keep you informed on its "progress'!
fingers crossed!
http://www.tccandler.com/elisha_fingers_crossed.jpg

It's good that the public now know what could happen to Wynyard but it was disappointing that they didn't release any renderings or further details, which people should know about too keep them interested.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
about time this is out now! Im doing some models of this baby over next few weeks so ill keep you informed on its "progress'!
fingers crossed!
http://www.tccandler.com/elisha_fingers_crossed.jpg

wow culwulla is that you???? :eek: :naughty:

lol kiddin- I have a good feelin about this. I reckon it will all go ahead because Frank Sartor is no longer Lord Mayor, and every one is a winner! Eispecially the tens of thousands of people that use Wynyard Station every day.

This tower will bump sydneys 200m+ (to roof) count up to 7! impressive to say the least.

Originally posted by SydneyDude
wow culwulla is that you???? :eek: :naughty:

lol kiddin- I have a good feelin about this. I reckon it will all go ahead because Frank Sartor is no longer Lord Mayor, and every one is a winner! Eispecially the tens of thousands of people that use Wynyard Station every day.

This tower will bump sydneys 200m+ (to roof) count up to 7! impressive to say the least.
its the chick from 24.
yeah i have been told that Thakral want to build ONLY the BIG option and wont settle for smaller or alternate schemes. I just hope the council will listen and adapt there plan into reality! seriously though, i think this is Sydney's last chance for a 200m+ tower for at least a decade!! hope it doesnt slip thru our hands!

What's the total height of Thakral's BIG proposal.....is this the Citicorp look a like that's on page 1 of this thread??

Originally posted by SydneyDude
wow culwulla is that you???? :eek: :naughty:

lol kiddin- I have a good feelin about this. I reckon it will all go ahead because Frank Sartor is no longer Lord Mayor, and every one is a winner! Eispecially the tens of thousands of people that use Wynyard Station every day.

This tower will bump sydneys 200m+ (to roof) count up to 7! impressive to say the least.

His successor Lucy Hughes Turnbull has the same attitude as Sartor so were not saved for now. Maybe next year when the residents elect the new mayor.

and andad it's proposed at 235 metres at present.

Originally posted by andad1
What's the total height of Thakral's BIG proposal.....is this the Citicorp look a like that's on page 1 of this thread??

well they would like to go to 235m + features above.
but council think its inappropriate for that area of town, so they would like it lower, say 150m, but thakral are going to put up a hard arguement to keep the height up!

Originally posted by CULWULLA
well they would like to go to 235m + features above.
but council think its inappropriate for that area of town, so they would like it lower, say 150m, but thakral are going to put up a hard arguement to keep the height up!

Cul, what CSPC height zone does the actual site fall under?
I thought it was the full 235m on that part of George St. If it is 235m then the CSPC doesn't have much of an arguement re: its "appropriateness" for that part of town, surely ?

Man, I can so see this becoming a shortened 150m tower - meaning that nothing gets done and we end up with a very average underground station for many many years to come..........:bash:

SCC is a disgrace. So much potential for this site, and they want to cut it down.

Thats right. If the site is 235m then sydney council can go stuff themselves!!
I think this is the case judging from the comments made by culwulla A planner 'dwarfed" it down but that was just her proposal. Thakral just laughed and said we are allowed to build 235m!

So again i think this is only a matter of time.

As for the appropriateness of the building ITS THE CBD U STUPID COUNCIL.. there i said it. Someone should fill them in on that.. Especially in a part of town that right now looks like it hasnt moved away from 50's australia..ahhhhh we really need someone that is willing to develop Sydney not preserve it to a point that no builidngs will be built.

Go thakral they know that the council has no leg to stand on if the site has a 235m height limit so TS!

Can i ask culwulla a queston? What do the council propose to do in 10 years.. keep the height limits.. this would mean Sydney cant grow anymore and thats just plan sad for a city approaching 6 mil.. I know that buildings will spawn out to places like Kings Cross but i mean is the CBD going to keep 235m buildings as the max.

I said to Culwulla today that the development is of significance to
Sydney due to the upgrade of Wynard Station and all the opportunities that could stem from it. Not to build it would be wrong.

you guys need this woman up there.

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1019441500043_2002/05/07/08MARY,0.jpg

CUL: slip the planners a $50 or something ;)

carry on :)

Cul?

Would it be inappropriate of me to forward some of my CityOne renderings to the developer? Is the site's building envelope and their design/model yet public knowledge?

Obviously my design was based on my personal interpretation of their form study/model. What I need to know is could the public know of this design at all? I want to place some seeds of thought in the minds' of the architects for a glossy, glassy tower as with mine.

Originally posted by Avatar
Cul?

Would it be inappropriate of me to forward some of my CityOne renderings to the developer? Is the site's building envelope and their design/model yet public knowledge?

Obviously my design was based on my personal interpretation of their form study/model. What I need to know is could the public know of this design at all? I want to place some seeds of thought in the minds' of the architects for a glossy, glassy tower as with mine.
shhhhh, not public yet! only public knowledge is that Thakral want to erect a 'skyscraper" atop a new Wynyard Station!
Spaz-Thats the thing! Thakral dont want to negotiate or "down grade" to a mid rise scraper, they want the whole she- bang! They will upgrade the much needed "new grand central style" Wynyard station if they can erect there landmark! 6 months ago they were told a more appropriate height would be as high as nearby Westpac Plaza, but they have literally ignored this recommendation and want to plough ahead with the big fella!!
I cant think of any other city that would give a developer this much opposition to erect a 75storey tower while upgrading a CBD railway station??? man it makes me cranky!
I agree with down sizing its mass but let it go to Sydney;s height ceiling!!! I think it actually "balances" the skyline due to no 200m+ scrapers this side of CBD, compared to eastern side!

this was the best version for the site. Imagine this as Avatars all glass facade!

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg

They told them to build another Westpac Plaza! What the f??:rant: They did well by rejecting such a preposterous downsize!

Thakral are entrepreneurs with vision, prophets, saviors of Sydney Skyline!.....They may offer this city a project of the century - a grand rail station and a landmark tower of mixed use to benefit future generations....in other words, a major source of civic pride and Sydney's showcase for the rest of the world.:cool:

If this gets rejected it is gonna be a very sad day in the history of this country...Hope Thakral will persevere and explore all avenues available to make this project succeed!

Go Thakral! :guns1:

if SSC rejects this....

Im bloody well moving to Melbourne.

I'm glad this is going up. It looks a lot better than that Civic Tower going up. eeewww!

I wnat good news when I come back some tell me this is moving forward and is not going to be a on going rappy between developers and SSC counil over the next 4 years like every thing eles

Originally posted by Jase Calvin
I'm glad this is going up. It looks a lot better than that Civic Tower going up. eeewww!

We don't even know the final shape and look of this tower. Thats only just an envelope and suggested shape.

When this first mooted a few months ago, I was very much against the idea, but this new model shown above makes me a lot happier. I want to maintain the low-rise podums around the edge of this wonderful park and this project does that. It reatins a low-rise podum with a tall tower set back to George St. Great idea. I wouldn't mind if it was wider (north-south, but not east-west). The upgrade of that very ugly retail area below the park is needed. Its very 1970s and very old!

If it were to be wider north-south, then there's more chance of the "wondferful park" not getting as much sun in the lighter months of the year, esp. in the morning to midday hours. Possibly couldn't anyway due to the perimeter of the site.

East-west would be the way to go if more width were to be given.

hey is that next to the menzies hotel of is the site the menzies?
[I stayed there twice]

It's on the Site of the Menzies hotel as well as Thrakal House pictured below which is destined to be executed by lethal injection for ruining the George St streetscape (At least it has a nice foyer which is better than many of the city's majors)

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid82/pe6d95123df67b3a5282a4fe896d50411/faeef060.jpg

so is that one going then
Wont be missed

This building along with the Menzies at the back will get knocked down. There is a possiblity more buildings may bite the bullet.

this project is causing a huge headache for all involved.:bash:
I was chatting to planner involved and poor old Thakral are trying to use floor space from Wynyard park to make up the floor space to buid the 235m office tower. (which is ridculous) .
They are also bribing council about getting Wynyard station refurbed. -saying if we cant build tower, we wont fix up wynyard.Thakral are wooing State Gov by telling them they will refurb station if we can erect this tower. -They seem to be interested??
Thakral thought Cityrail would back them for restoring station but City Rail dont care because its being enlarged in 10-15 years anyway. The whole thing stinks and i have a feeling the outcome wont be good:bash:
Thakral also indicate that if they cant build the BIG ONE they wont refurb station and will erect a mediocre tower atop there george st offices. And Sydney will miss out on a landmark.
jeess?? does any of this make sense??:?

WAKE UP SYDNEY CITY COUNCIL FOR GOD'S SAKE......this development means heaps of opportunity and growth for that area of town.....and I'm not at least suprised that Cityrail are luke warm given their lack of investment over the past 30 years!
As Culwulla says, sounds like YET ANOTHER marvellous opportunity in our city goes begging and we end up with a nothing 130m tower and no station refurbishment :mad:

Well obviously they can't just take space from Wynyard Park. There's no way they will get permission to do that (unless the state government steps in ;)). So I really think they should drop that idea.

But not doing up the station because they can't build the tower, sounds perfectly fair to me. If they can't have what they want, why should they give the council what they want? Fair's fair.

I didn't know there was a problem with them building up to 235m (besides SCC thinking it's 'too big'). Are you now saying Cul, that they never had the floor space ratio to begin with, to build this monster? Sounds like this project is doomed. We really need our stations fixed up too.. Doesn't surprise me at all that City Rail couldn't care about it.

The State Government doesn't have a problem with private funds being injected into projects yet Cityrail which is owned by the State is passing up this offer.

And how could Thrakal include Wynyard Park to increase height. It's strange. I thought the buildings on the site were enough.

Originally posted by Mar
Well obviously they can't just take space from Wynyard Park. There's no way they will get permission to do that (unless the state government steps in ;)). So I really think they should drop that idea.

But not doing up the station because they can't build the tower, sounds perfectly fair to me. If they can't have what they want, why should they give the council what they want? Fair's fair.

I didn't know there was a problem with them building up to 235m (besides SCC thinking it's 'too big'). Are you now saying Cul, that they never had the floor space ratio to begin with, to build this monster? Sounds like this project is doomed. We really need our stations fixed up too.. Doesn't surprise me at all that City Rail couldn't care about it.
Its political! Apparently a "former" planner indicated it was "ok" to include the floor area of Wynyard park if its intergrated into proposal!:bash: silly billy!I think Thakral want a "pardon' from "normal code' to allow this project to go a head. SCC did something similar with the KENS site. It was only allowed up to 80-m high but after a year of negotiating/planning it was approved at 150m+. So sometimes the 'rules" can be breached.
Put it this way, i reckon other citys around the globe would probably let this go through, but SCC seems to go by the book too much!

If SCC were to prevent thakrals vision from becoming reality, it would be C R I M I N A L

For crying out loud, this is a bloody CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT! This is Australias biggest CBD, a major port of call in the Asia Pacific Region, and Sydney City Council can't handle a 235m building?? For gods sake, cities such as Tel Aviv, Dubai, London, San Fran, Melbourne, etc... all have taller buildings!

I was at Wynyard the other day, and its actually quite embarrasing how much this station is in dire need of a transformation. It is reminiscent of a sewer.

SSC- give thakral what they want, they will give you what you want, and EVERYONE is happy- as opposed to sticking to your backward planning rules, and having Wynyard remain in its disgraceful state, and getting some mediocre tower (everyone is a LOOSER in this scenario). Why doesnt SSC see this??


gawd im ANGRY :bleep:

So Culwulla from what i am gathering although the 235m model isnt built on the wynard park site "in theory" Thrakal are going to include the station (which would make sense since they are indeed fixing it up) for the floorspace that is neccesary in building a 235m scraper on the site.
Also you are saying that the Federal gov. seems intersted?? If they like the project can they overpower the council?

Well the KENS site gives me *some* hope for something to work out. I can honestly see this going through.. dont know why tho?? i get the feeling that the council is being 'stuck up' because they feel that Thrakal is trying to bribe them (which i agree Mar its a fair proposal) and it isnt the case. I see the council with power getting to its head. I agree this proposal is simply to good to turn down but we have seen that said b4 now havent we?
If they sit down like adults im sure before too long the council will come around.
Btw what is Thrakal's plans for the station do they have any yet or is it simply a pledge to fix it up?

Originally posted by zulu69
So Culwulla from what i am gathering although the 235m model isnt built on the wynard park site "in theory" Thrakal are going to include the station (which would make sense since they are indeed fixing it up) for the floorspace that is neccesary in building a 235m scraper on the site.
Also you are saying that the Federal gov. seems intersted?? If they like the project can they overpower the council?

Well the KENS site gives me *some* hope for something to work out. I can honestly see this going through.. dont know why tho?? i get the feeling that the council is being 'stuck up' because they feel that Thrakal is trying to bribe them (which i agree Mar its a fair proposal) and it isnt the case. I see the council with power getting to its head. I agree this proposal is simply to good to turn down but we have seen that said b4 now havent we?
If they sit down like adults im sure before too long the council will come around.
Btw what is Thrakal's plans for the station do they have any yet or is it simply a pledge to fix it up?
The site includes Tharal House on George st and Four seasons hotel on carrington st. State Gov like idea of fixing up station! which will including letting them build the tower.The council are upset about the "cosmetic" job Thakral are proposing to do on the station. It wont be much of an improvement. The council want better flow and complete refurb.
The story continues....

Yeah the neverending story continues.....

The project went to an extrordinary meeting tonight in council for more fights!lol:bash:

"Not much of an improvement" - leave it to us guys the public to decide whether or not the station is better. What we definately know is that the whole place is run down and the layout is horrendous along with the arcades leading into it.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
i reckon other citys around the globe would probably let this go through, but SCC seems to go by the book too much!

If they don't watch themselves I will be taking a tour of their offices with a flame thrower... bye, bye planning book.

Sending in McBain with his big gun will really terrorise them, and thse guns actually will rip the book into shreds

"Bye Bye Book"

http://www-atdp.berkeley.edu/1623/students/simon/mcbain.jpg

Originally posted by CULWULLA
The project went to an extrordinary meeting tonight in council for more fights!lol:bash:

Have you been able to check the minutes of that meeting yet?

Hope the Councillors are smart enough to realise the benefits of this grand project! I can't think of any major downside so it must happen! :D If Thakral are determined to build this baby nothing can stop them! :cool:

Originally posted by Fabian
Have you been able to check the minutes of that meeting yet?
these meetings are not public knowledge! or minutes anyway. something will soon be available to public.

CUL
not sure if ive told anyone but CITY ONE is now proposed to have a retail base, bottom half of office and top half -apartments!

Hmm another Mixed tower ! Will this change much of the way it looks ?

And I believe there will be a hotel component.

The mixed used development makes alot of sense given the blend of business and tourism in this area. Probably much easier to sell to Council and prospective tenants.
Only thing is how tall will it go??? Time will tell.

Many of the world's great towers are of a mixed use - eg John Hancock Chicago, Jin Mao Shanghai and future Union Square Hong Kong and Shanghai WFC...;)

the 'current" plan by Thakral is for retail base, office for first part of tower, hotel for mid section and apartments for the top! makes sense.!

CUL,
Is a model for this project going to be made and placed on the Sydney city model plan soon?

Culwulla has already stated that he is currently working on several models.

Originally posted by andad1
CUL,
Is a model for this project going to be made and placed on the Sydney city model plan soon?
hmmmm... ive made models but still not ready for 'stage 1" DA, so its not yet given planning approval.
WHEN this is given, a "block mass model" will be inserted into model.
This will be what the agreement from council/Thakral have decided they want built on the site!
THEN it will go thru "design" process height bulk ect.
THEN when this is finalised a competition will be held.
THEN the winning scheme is lodged as a DA a few months after comp results.
THEN it goes into planning committee with approval taking approx 3 months!
THEN after finally approved it can then be built!
THEN it is up to Thakral to start construction, which could take 3-6 months after approval!
So we are along way from the first sod of soil being turned!lol
I now its a "painful" excercise but hopefully it will come to fruitition next year?

cheers

I like your logic Cul. Be patient guys !

In all practical terms there's NO current 'market barrier' to a 235m mixed use tower with, for example, 50,000 sqm of commercial space and 250-300 apartments on top.
The office market has great short to medium term prospects - particularly given that there's no other 'big' CBD office projects in the pipleline at present ( apart from those u/c) - meaning that someone like the Commonwealth Bank might want to take all the space for a great northern CBD HQ location with shitloads of contiguous space !
Apartments in the northern CBD are much sought after too so that wouldn't be a problem.
The only barrier is the CSPC. The rest is a no brainer !

scaled down ESB! woohoo

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/126bestpic.jpg

LOL! You rock, Culwulla! :guns1:

So Great Cul
you are such a tease :(

Also we were asked to 'shadow test" the 235m version which Thakral have proposed and it doesnt overshadow on Martin Place which the planners thought it would! so this is a major PLUS!! BUT the most sigificant thing about this is when we tested this today ,the "RL" is 235m not height above ground!!
Its actually 222m above ground! DOH!
So the MAXIMUM height City One can attain is 222m by planning law LEP for sun plane!, which is still a bloody big bldg.

222m sounds pretyy cool to me :cool:

Originally posted by CULWULLA
Also we were asked to 'shadow test" the 235m version which Thakral have proposed and it doesnt overshadow on Martin Place which the planners thought it would! so this is a major PLUS!! BUT the most sigificant thing about this is when we tested this today ,the "RL" is 235m not height above ground!!
Its actually 222m above ground! DOH!
So the MAXIMUM height City One can attain is 222m by planning law LEP for sun plane!, which is still a bloody big bldg.

What about the all important Wynyard Park?

222 is not height limit ? What about roof feature ?

there have been some "intensive" talks recently about this project. seems that Thakral wont back off. I feel something will happen this year. if it doesnt it will be shelved. Thakral want to know where they stand with proposed tower.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
there have been some "intensive" talks recently about this project. seems that Thakral wont back off. I feel something will happen this year. if it doesnt it will be shelved. Thakral want to know where they stand with proposed tower.

I don't think any of us want Thakral to 'back off' ;).

This will more than make up for Angel Places downsizing.

Thnx for the update!

I always think about this project and if it goes ahead it would be the best thing for me. We NEED this building in that part of town...cul keep us posted!

Originally posted by CULWULLA
there have been some "intensive" talks recently about this project. seems that Thakral wont back off. I feel something will happen this year. if it doesnt it will be shelved. Thakral want to know where they stand with proposed tower.

It's been proven that there won't be significant problems with overshadowing with Wynyard Park & Martin Place and that the station will be get a well deserved upgrade which should make them along with Cityrail very happy, yet they make excuses as why not to approve this building. There is nothing to lose and alot to gain from letting this proceed. They should wake up to themselves :bash:

I like that kind of attitude - build it to the full potential or shelve it ! :D

Go Thakral!! :guns1:

Thakral sound like smart cookies. They know the SSC 'b.s. game' for sure.

Cityrail dipwits couldn't get Wynyard Station right, although it's an improvement on what it used to be. Time to hand it over to the professionals....NOW!

BTW The park will cope.

Originally posted by Muse


Cityrail dipwits couldn't get Wynyard Station right, although it's an improvement on what it used to be. Time to hand it over to the professionals....NOW!



It's full of narrow walkways which can lead you absolutely nowhere and also quite narrow in some areas. This isn't good for dealing with peak hour crowds. Also they have plonked stand alone shops like the fast food shop and the newsagent in fron't of the station adding to it. I've noticed too how run down the station is particuarly on the western side and also has unoccupied shops. In the end it makes for an uninviting station. The council and state government should compare how good Wynyard would be with the Thrakal funded upgrade and how @$#% the current station would be without it. This is a rare opportunity in which the private sector has offered to do something as part of a condition for doing something

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid92/pf761a3d3e5437d5b6c8c8f49cfb6bb7d/fa547d80.jpg

Check out this $2 job they did with the ticket office

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid35/pd560c9c415fac14833c290e1d38cd46c/fd2f0a5c.jpg

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid35/pdc8d60b5bef0a684967680c84766dcd2/fd2f0a44.jpg

It has also been reported that Wynyard Station is nearing capacity in terms of services and passenger numbers. The station will need to be more open to cope with the increasing numbers of people using the station like KENS which will probably attract thousands more to the staton. At peak times it, can get quite crowded on the platform, to an extent that would make it worse than the even busier Town Hall Station

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid63/p0832439caaf944bc46ad1f5231df7404/fc17ea74.jpg

I can't believe they're not jumping at the chance to have Wynyard Station renovated. The place is such a dump - no one hangs around there after 10pm at night.

No wonder everyone gets off at Town Hall at that time of night, because Wynyard Station is deserted and dangerous. There is barely any security and it has become the choice location for derros to beg for cash.

Originally posted by Vitriol
....the choice location for derros to beg for cash. I've possibly been one of them.

The exterior that sits atop of Wynyard Park looks great....alas, without even thinking about Thakral's plans, they didn't get the links and public spaces in the station right last time around. It's like they added a few bits here and there without really planning for the future (as Fabian has pointed out).

The spaces leading to the gates are like obstacle courses. I've seen many a people in a daze of where to turn next.

The escalators to the North Shore buses are not to be taken seriously - I could briskly walk around the block to George quicker. In fact that's what I have started to do.

Originally posted by CULWULLA
there have been some "intensive" talks recently about this project. seems that Thakral wont back off. I feel something will happen this year. if it doesnt it will be shelved. Thakral want to know where they stand with proposed tower.

What's your gut feel Cul ?

Is it too "out there" ( i.e pushing the boundaries of the sites potential) to get the nod by the CSPC ?

To your knowledge exactly HOW does the current proposal contravene the current planning codes ?

Does the CSPC acknowledge and value Thakral's 'value add' of the upgrade to Wynyard station, which surely must be a bug bear of Council ?

Does the CSPC "bargain" with developers to get trade-off's in return for DA approval ? i.e yes you can surpass the FSR and go to 235m in return for and incremental $800k payment for cursory stuff like the "upgrade of Wynyard Park's drainage / footpaths/ street lighting et al. Hope you know where I'm coming from.

Hmmmmmmm........................thanks for listening. ;)

So whats the new Cul, is there any?

well, my "gut feeling" is Thakral is really fighting for this one. The council simply dont like the use of "illegal" floor space Thakral are using from Wynyard park and other sites to achieve there floor space to get there maximum height.Also there "refub" of the Wynyard station is cosmetic and Cityrail couldnt give a rats if they do it or not.
It could be veeeeery interesting now LucyT has gone. She opposed the developemnt from the start and now a new council and labour LM might have a different point of view and the project actually might see the light of day!
Put it this way, City One is looking better now the councils have merged and change of LM.;)

LucyT has opposed CityOne!! :rant:

I'm so glad she is going to the wilderness then! :D :colgate:

Go Thakral!

:guns1: :guns1: :guns1:

Originally posted by CULWULLA
It could be veeeeery interesting now LucyT has gone. She opposed the developemnt from the start and now a new council and labour LM might have a different point of view and the project actually might see the light of day!
Put it this way, City One is looking better now the councils have merged and change of LM.;)

The other good thing to come out of a Labour run council will be a better level of co-operation with the State Government especially since the upgrade of Wynyard Station is bound to require involvement from the State Government and involve government authorities too particularly from Railcorp & Cityrail along with the department of planning, who may ultimately be the person who approves or rejects the development.

just bumping this thread...any updates?

Ive no news. But i visited Wynyard Station on the weekend, and peee-yeww! Give it a reno' any day of the week! Go City One!!!

Ill give this a bump....

YEEEEEEHHHAAAAA!

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid36/p129243c8fa90decbc26e6b19473259e1/fd1eff13.jpg
http://www.wirednewyork.com/skyscrapers/citigroup/images/citigroup_45th_rd_queens_23feb02.jpg http://www.wirednewyork.com/skyscrapers/citigroup/images/citicorp_east_river.jpg

Citigroup, ya??

I thought something fishy was going on.

I was like, woah thats a good render, hold on, those surrounding ones are not of sydney.. hey!

Heheeh

Originally posted by demanjo
Citigroup, ya??

I thought something fishy was going on.

I was like, woah thats a good render, hold on, those surrounding ones are not of sydney.. hey!

Heheeh

Yep thats my baby citigroup NYC! This scraper is one of my favorites in that kind of style. I would be over the moon if CityOne were to be built like that!

But IMO whats also amazing how Sydneys density compares to that of NY's. Of course NY has taller density, but still, its pretty amazing:

http://www.dsl.uow.edu.au/~sergiy/Sydney,%20Darling%20Harbour/156_r.JPG http://www.traveladdicts.connectfree.co.uk/Australia/Images/Darling_Harbour_skyline_at_night.jpg http://acro.harvard.edu/GEI/images/AUSTRALIA/sydney_sunset_1801x1175.jpg

Sorry to get off track, but its not like much was happenin in this thread anyway. Back to CityOne!:D

Yeah!!!!

Bring on the Manhattanisation of Sydney!

http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/sydney.skyline.02.jpg

A building with a similar shape to the Citycorp building in Manhattan would be a triumph for Sydney's boring, mundane skyline. It brings to our city a shape exuding interest and has a certain futuristic element. This could be the key to modernising our city and pave the way for more keystone developments that may hopefully rid the city of many mediocre 70s developments.

You look at the image of Manhattan from the East River and see a great mix of buildings, both old and very modern, look at Sydney and see a mess of bad and cheaply designed towers from the recent decades, I owuld expect to see a much mored modern appearance for Sydney as compared with this view of new york but it is simply not the case, Sydney IMO is languishing in bad cheap and "processed looking" design.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/city1.02.jpg

...And there have been opportunities to amend this and they weren't taken.

Look at Angel Place - it would have had just such a Citycorp type roof line and it was forced down in height.

Cul's pics from Refern tell the story, that sea of off-white, ivory and bone pieces of crap are adding density, but at what cost to the overall quality of the city skyline?

Brilliant render too Avatar!! Pity you didn't clad the Kent Street phone exchange in glass, but it'll be hidden by KENS soon enough (although come to think of it, not from that angle.... pity).

It's nice to see your CityOne pointing South, and not to the North like everything else.

Originally posted by Avatar
A building with a similar shape to the Citycorp building in Manhattan would be a triumph for Sydney's boring, mundane skyline. It brings to our city a shape exuding interest and has a certain futuristic element. This could be the key to modernising our city and pave the way for more keystone developments that may hopefully rid the city of many mediocre 70s developments.

You look at the image of Manhattan from the East River and see a great mix of buildings, both old and very modern, look at Sydney and see a mess of bad and cheaply designed towers from the recent decades, I owuld expect to see a much mored modern appearance for Sydney as compared with this view of new york but it is simply not the case, Sydney IMO is languishing in bad cheap and "processed looking" design.

Nice Quick Render Love it
If only
I hope I can come back to some thing like that in a few years :)

Originally posted by Avatar
Yeah!!!! Bring on the Manhattanisation of Sydney!Your superimposed moderns look more like the Dallasisation of Sydney ;).

BTW Thakral aren't short of a buck. In the press the other day, I read it made something like 40 or 50 million dollars in net profit....and I think that was just Thakral Australia for the 1st half of the financial year i.e. July - December 2003.

Also Lucy T. is doing more for public spaces than Labor's hopeless Transport Minister M. Costa fucking-well is! She is the one that got the upgrades approved for Oxford Street, Broadway, William Street and the already happening works on Darlo Rd and Macleay Street in Kings X. This all in regard to supporting the Wynyard Station upgrade/refurb as part of the Thakral City One proposal..

Let's not mention Angel Place... it makes me sad. One of the best buildings ever proposed with its gold and brown reflective glass, great shape, interesting design, slender profile, futurism and above all height! It still reminds me of a stargate go'auld building with its recesses and shape. Hmmm I want it bad.

Sydney skyline is actually much prettier than Manhattan one (talkin' about the aesthetic appeal not the size which is beyond comparison).....:D

Originally posted by AltiusAltiusAltius
Sydney skyline is actually much prettier than Manhattan one (talkin' about the aesthetic appeal not the size which is beyond comparison).....:D

I still think Manhattan's skylines have more going for them but I do think the shear size of the skyline has an effect that is hard to subtract from any impression. take either Midtown or the Financial District... there are a better array of more interesting buildings from vastly different eras in design. Some of the world's most famous towers dot the skyline, the eye wanders and captures glimpses of some amazing designs. The area beween the downtown and midtown skylines, is boring to me, but what each cluster (of even part of) brings to the eye ... is amazing. Centainly there are ordinary views of any city, but at least their ESB and the late WTC were dominant forces in each cluster. The view from Weehawken Midtown Manhattan is one of the best the world has to offer. This view from Long Island is behaps not the best but id say certainly on par with what Sydney has to offer. :colgate:

Sydney just needs to grow majorly up and majorly out. BTW can we carve some channels around the arse end of the city and make it a nice skyscraper island also??? Please?

AVATAR FOR LORD MAYOR!! rofl

Be careful what you wish for... you might end up with something far more extreme than you bargained for ... what's above is hardly my vision I can assure you! :colgate:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=51463

lol you never cease to crack me up with your whacky but cool ideas. Just as long as you dont build that giant syringe in Sydney, ill be happy :)

That's ok I will build it somewhere on the north shore like North Sydney or Chatswood instead... :colgate:

*Academy Award-type presentation speech* "I simply adore how this tired production has gone from boring old Thakral to life-time Achievements In Fantasy Hall of Fame induction award, which will be accepted by Avatar."

*Huge screen drops and shows Avatar through the ages from playing with Lego and Mechano as a child to his high-tech conceptual designer days as an adult*

*Avatar jumps up and gleefully grabs award with raptus applause by audience*

____________http://www.skyscrapercity.com/avatar.php?userid=379&dateline=1072822349_http://www.skyscrapercity.com/avatar.php?userid=379&dateline=1072822349_http://www.skyscrapercity.com/avatar.php?userid=379&dateline=1072822349

Thank you, thank you Sydney! :colgate:

Originally posted by Avatar
A building with a similar shape to the Citycorp building in Manhattan would be a triumph for Sydney's boring, mundane skyline. It brings to our city a shape exuding interest and has a certain futuristic element. This could be the key to modernising our city and pave the way for more keystone developments that may hopefully rid the city of many mediocre 70s developments.

You look at the image of Manhattan from the East River and see a great mix of buildings, both old and very modern, look at Sydney and see a mess of bad and cheaply designed towers from the recent decades, I owuld expect to see a much mored modern appearance for Sydney as compared with this view of new york but it is simply not the case, Sydney IMO is languishing in bad cheap and "processed looking" design.

http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/city1.02.jpg

Thats my prefered option as well - to have the tower be in a similar shape to Citicorp Tower in NYC. I'd like to see diagonal and horizontal bracing run along the side of the tower. Culwulla's visonary towers are also quite good and would make a great landmark scraper for the site. It will enhance what is already, one of the world's great skylines, but it's a shame that from most spot's on the harbour, it will be obsecured by the towers at Circular Quay and the eastern end.

Scrapers from the 60's and 70's have been disappearing on masse, whether they have been converted into apartments or a taller tower. The BT site had three ugly towers from that period, knocked down to make way for what will be another great tower.

Citycorp design is ideally suited to the Wynyard site!

Yeah, that would be an absolute triumph for Sydney skyline (provided it is at least 220-230 m tall)....No more Angel Place style downsizing please...

I can imagine the all new Darling Harbour skyline from the Pyrmont Bridge 4-5 years down the track - Thakral super tower on the left with Governor Philip, Aurora, Chifley and new Deutsche Bank in the background as well as massive new KENS rising above the King St Wharf......then a whole bunch of fantastic scrapers clustered around the World Tower on the righ hand side (Regent Place, Meriton, Latitude, Aspect and 720 George)...and finally, Centrepoint in the middle with some new babies around it such as Mid City Centre Tower........

Can't wait! :cool:

Damn Avatar, you really hit the spot on that render! I love it! I like how it points south too... Anything like this would be a triumph for Sydney, of course, if it is over 200m+ as Altius(x3) stated.

Avatars. Best. Render. Ever.

I've just been reading the NYC forum, and want to draw your attention to the One Bryant Park development designed by Cook + Fox

http://cookplusfox.com

Although the bulk of this building isn't appropriate for the City One site, the thing I really like about this building is the way it will reuse waste water and its energy efficiency. We in Oz need this sort of design more than anybody in light of the water restrictions we are experiencing.

Even its aspect, overlooking a park is similar to the City One site overlooking Wynard Park.

Check out the thread yourself at:

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=62926

From the Fox + Cook website:

One Bryant Park

New York City
2000000 sqft.

Early in 2007, an extraordinary crystalline skyscraper of steel, aluminum and glass will rise from the northwest corner of Bryant Park to illuminate Midtown Manhattan. Developed by the Durst Organization to house the New York headquarters of the Bank of America, it promises to reshape the urban skyline of the future as surely as did the famed Crystal Palace, the first glass and steel building in America, when it rose from Bryant Park in 1853.

The design for One Bryant Park is inspired by the building's unique site within its local urban location and its broader urban context. Located at the juncture of Sixth Avenue - a highly trafficked and commercially important artery - and 42nd Street, near Times Square, with its worldwide reputation as a critical center for arts and entertainment, the design strives to respond to these dense urban conditions. Starting from the building's base, which is designed to accomodate the surrounding complex pedestrian and transit circulation, to the overall massing, continuing up to the tip of the antennae, the design responds to the built environment around One Bryant Park, an impressive lineage of iconic skyscrapers, from the Chrysler Building to the east to the old McGraw Hill Building to the west.

One Bryant Park will be noted for its pioneering integration of inspired design with innovative, high-performance environmental technologies. In a city of "firsts," it will be the first high-rise to reach for the U.S. Green Building Council's coveted Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design "Platinum" designation. To help promote the health and productivity of its tenants, reduce waste, and assure environmental sustainability, One Bryant Park will use translucent high-performance glass in floor-to-ceiling windows to permit maximum sunlight in interior spaces, in addition to featuring "floating" floors to facilitate more even, healthful, and efficient heating and cooling. It will also capture and re-use all rainwater and wastewater, saving millions of gallons of precious water each year. A very high percentage of the building's materials will come from recycled and renewable sources within 500 miles of New York City.

The exterior wall of One Bryant Park will be a clear glass curtainwall to complement the building's faceted-crystal design. The form is sculpted to provide a south-facing facet to address its prominent relationship ot Bryant Park. This portion of the building is constructed of a deep double wall, permitting views into and out of the structure while becoming an icon for its environmentally responsible features. The base of the building locks into the urban fabric with elements that befit the human scale of its context. The exterior of the base has subtle markers which address key neighboring buildings, including a horizontally emphasized elevation on 42nd Street which speaks to this major transportation thoroughfare. The crystal rises from its base with sculptural facets that infer movement and varied views amond the neighboring towers.

Not just another tower, One Bryant Park will shine as a beacon of environmental intelligence and sustainability, healthy for people and good for the environment.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/2404boa.jpg

wow, didnt realize how high it is. 366m/1200ft to spire and 293m/960ft to roof.
it will change NYC skyline for sure!
its right next to conde nast bldg which spire reaches-348!!

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/2404boa5.jpg

Yeah, she's a beauty - but it's also got slight Auroa Place look about her.

Notice the sculptured set backs to allow the sun access plane, and the translucent top to again use the sun access plane, in the same way the plant room of Latutide does.

Check out the density in these drawings below - amazing how 293m to roof can get lost in the crowd!

Drawings credited to Rich:

http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa1.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa2.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa3.jpg http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa4.jpg http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa5.jpg http://homepage.mac.com/rigrij/.Pictures/New%20York%20Stuff/bofa6.jpg

Still want a CityCorp Clone now?

http://www.queenswest.com/neighborhood/pictures/rockrose/20040229_rockrose_1.jpg?display=

Originally posted by CULWULLA
wow, didnt realize how high it is. 366m/1200ft to spire and 293m/960ft to roof.
it will change NYC skyline for sure!
its right next to conde nast bldg which spire reaches-348!!

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/500/2404boa5.jpg

Well i really think we are jumping ahead of our selves.. I honestly dont give a f#@$ if the design is 'a la citicorp' or sears. We have to get this baby approved first then the designs will matter more. Its funny tho how (i always said) sun access can be accomodated for while still maintaining the height by careful planning. SCC just use it as the legal grounds to reject everything and seldom care for the max potential of a site. Bligh is a perfect example. Like Fab always says soon we will run out of 235m limit sites and what then?? we pull down 160m buildings or increase the height limit?? I think thats a huge waste. Why not just develop it to the potential via good planning in the first place.? Anyways the simple fact that this building itself has been throu so much resistance already shows why Sydney doesn't get much Height limit scrapers, sad actually... but i dont believe in height is better but i mean look at the site- what could be better in that part of town (esp since there is no probs with the shadowing?)

Bligh was a black day in history. Sun Access is such a crude tool to reject designs - but at least finally, there are designs popping up around the world and are able to work within the limits imposed on them (and as I write that last sentence I wish it had said "..are able to fully use the potential of the site"

It's nice to have a flight of fancy on the design, but you are right, first the approval has be obtained.

One Bryan Park is still a remarkable design, but as I pointed out, the way it reuses it's waste water and collects rain water are appropriate design aspects I think any major new tower should incorporate.

I'm no greeny, but it just makes sense.

Originally posted by zulu69
Well i really think we are jumping ahead of our selves.. I honestly dont give a f#@$ if the design is 'a la citicorp' or sears. We have to get this baby approved first then the designs will matter more. Its funny tho how (i always said) sun access can be accomodated for while still maintaining the height by careful planning. SCC just use it as the legal grounds to reject everything and seldom care for the max potential of a site. Bligh is a perfect example. Like Fab always says soon we will run out of 235m limit sites and what then?? we pull down 160m buildings or increase the height limit?? I think thats a huge waste. Why not just develop it to the potential via good planning in the first place.? Anyways the simple fact that this building itself has been throu so much resistance already shows why Sydney doesn't get much Height limit scrapers, sad actually... but i dont believe in height is better but i mean look at the site- what could be better in that part of town (esp since there is no probs with the shadowing?)

Bligh was a black day in history. Sun Access is such a crude tool to reject designs - but at least finally, there are designs popping up around the world and are able to work within the limits imposed on them (and as I write that last sentence I wish it had said "..are able to fully use the potential of the site"

It's nice to have a flight of fancy on the design, but you are right, first the approval has be obtained.

One Bryan Park is still a remarkable design, but as I pointed out, the way it reuses it's waste water and collects rain water are appropriate design aspects I think any major new tower should incorporate.

I'm no greeny, but it just makes sense.

Originally posted by zulu69
Well i really think we are jumping ahead of our selves.. I honestly dont give a f#@$ if the design is 'a la citicorp' or sears. We have to get this baby approved first then the designs will matter more. Its funny tho how (i always said) sun access can be accomodated for while still maintaining the height by careful planning. SCC just use it as the legal grounds to reject everything and seldom care for the max potential of a site. Bligh is a perfect example. Like Fab always says soon we will run out of 235m limit sites and what then?? we pull down 160m buildings or increase the height limit?? I think thats a huge waste. Why not just develop it to the potential via good planning in the first place.? Anyways the simple fact that this building itself has been throu so much resistance already shows why Sydney doesn't get much Height limit scrapers, sad actually... but i dont believe in height is better but i mean look at the site- what could be better in that part of town (esp since there is no probs with the shadowing?)

That's one nice tower... I like the use of angles, kind of reminds me of the WTC proposal for the other towers in that cluster.

I think Sydney needs something like this. Can you imagine it on our skyline? Then agian, I think we're not as 'liberal' in our planing as New York. I hope Thakral don't get disheartened and keep on pushing the SOC council for a tall tower.

word is that THAKRAL are working on a new "proposal" . not sure about any stats ect but ill definatley keep ya posted.

Argh
I was hoping for a new height limit scraper, not just for the sake of saying it, but i really think it will do alot to "round out" the height levels in the city. It peaks to the left of the city (looking at it from the harbour to the quay). I nice high one in the middle to the right would really kick the whole right side up... would be fantastic to look at from street level too....

Indeed. I thought Sydney would be chafing at the bits to get a height limit scraper.

Crowded city, densely populated (work and live), scarce and expensive CBD land.

It still might be a tall one but I wouldn't be surprised if it becomes another 33 Bligh or scrapped altogether :(

Is this the work of Clover. She should go smoke some weed and watch Harry Pothead.

I emailed the council a few weeks ago, just generally stating my appreciation and approval of the new tall, and dense building patterns going on in the city... i said as a tourist it renders it as a true global city and a metropolis for all to enjoy. :)

Maybe it might get down the vine that people do like tall buildings hahaha.

Oh well i thought it might put a bit on their conscience.

the sad thing about this one IF it doesnt get to 235m+ is that>
1. its a rare PRIME site on George st
2. it doesnt overshadow Wynyard park OR Martin pl
3.a rare chance for Cityrail to "upgrade" a major station in the CBD
So it has EVRYTHING going for it. The only thing against it is that the site Thakral have isnt big enough for floor space to rise to 235m.They can achieve this if they include Wynyard park area which they will upgrade anyhow and intergrate with new station.
how do you think Clover is going to handle this when she goes to the first meeting about City one and is informed about Thakrals plans?? i hope shes gentle? lol

hmm so there is little chance ( I really think we need this one )

I expect it will be converted into a "village", with pseudo-punk details, of course.

Indeed. Dog-collar detailing.

the sad thing about this one IF it doesnt get to 235m+ is that>
1. its a rare PRIME site on George st
2. it doesnt overshadow Wynyard park OR Martin pl
3.a rare chance for Cityrail to "upgrade" a major station in the CBD
So it has EVRYTHING going for it. The only thing against it is that the site Thakral have isnt big enough for floor space to rise to 235m.They can achieve this if they include Wynyard park area which they will upgrade anyhow and intergrate with new station.
how do you think Clover is going to handle this when she goes to the first meeting about City one and is informed about Thakrals plans?? i hope shes gentle? lol

I expect Clover and John to show them the door immediately :bash: :wallbash: but I hope the two is prepared to listen and examine the possible benefits of having the development such as the upgrade of the station, which would be funded by the developer itself. There are not many developers who have voluntarily offered to do such a project in return for being allowed to build something tall. This has been encouraged by those in the transport department.

The SCC have underestimated the development potential for this stretch of George Street. It's in a prime area of town, with easy access to transport plus being in Sydney's financial heart. It's one of the best addresses a firm could boast of. The development controls have been too tight, and it has now been proven this stretch can support 500 ft if not height limit scrapers.

And plus we have our friend, The Land and Environment Court, if things aren't going Thrakal's way. We know who they tend to award in favor of :)

The thing I find crazy about the likely notion that Clover will want to reject this, is the fact that I don't think there would be any of the neighbours or Clover constituents complaining, as it has no real effect on the public parks and the site has no neighbouring residential properties. I mean, who's it gonna hurt? It's only gonna help I think.

All we can do is wait and see what the outcome will be. Whatever the outcome is, it will reveal the kind of government SCC will have under Clover. I'm just hoping she will be reasonable and compromise. This is a big business town and if Clover cannot comprehend that the only way is "up" then perhaps she should leave the job now .....

Why does Clover have the power to reject any single project? It is not a dictatorship or something. Lord Mayors normally don't have any education or experience in architecture and urban planning....Only a panel of experts can decide whether some building is good for the City or not... :wallbash:

Yes thats a good point,
I dont live in Sydney, nor do i understand your way of local government, but it is coming across as her word is the power. Is it really that central to one person????

i think Clover has to "convince" the panel on the CSPC which is approx 10 councillors that a development is inappropriate or needs some alterations be it height or bulk or set back issues.

i think Clover has to "convince" the panel on the CSPC which is approx 10 councillors that a development is inappropriate or needs some alterations be it height or bulk or set back issues.


What will clovers 'ammunition' be? By that I mean what will she say to convince the councillors that it is innapropriate? I for one cannot see ANY reason for it not to go ahead! For fucks sake! SSC has imposed a 235m height limit (which is too short for Sydney as it is) and STILL they give developers an uphill battle to build to this height? Throw me a fricken bone! Just to restate Culwullas reasons WHY it should go ahead:

1. its a rare PRIME site on George st
2. it doesnt overshadow Wynyard park OR Martin pl
3. A rare chance for Cityrail to "upgrade" a major station in the CBD

So many Pros! Yet SSC has managed to knit pick the floor space ratio/height issue! :wallbash: I reckon if the developers deem a project suitable in regard to floor space/height ratio, then SSC should not intefere (within reason of course, which this tower is most definately)


I will be majorly pissed off if this one doesnt get the OK.

The Land and Environment Court
groan why does it has to take that long !

The CSPC does not comprise of the entire council. It consists of expert planners which I believe are appointed by the Government. The Lord Mayor along with a councillor belong to the committee. The CSPC will ultimately decide whether this development gets the green light as the development obviously would be worth more than $50 million.

very quiet.

very quiet.

It looks as thou this one has hit the scrap heap. :(

it not dead yet Correct
I mean there is still hope
Maybe its back building the pressure ?

We're close to the end of the current cycle and I'm pretty pessimistic anything will happen with one. I reckon if the John Boyd Tower gets the green light then we could see another cycle begin, but to me things are starting to wind up as each major project finishes. Especially now with Meriton pissing off for the GC ......

good! as i posted long way back, wasn't a huge fan! we'll get something better... cool!

sincity- yeah i think you maybe right. Sydney has had its boom a few years before other cities.
just think this has what been completed since 2000>
OVER120M/400FT

CITIGROUP TOWER-243M
WORLD TOWER-230M
LATITUDE-222M
AURORA PLACE-219M
COVE-158M
ANGEL PLACE-152M
RIALTO-137M
CIVIC TOWER-132M
nad another 8 more where completed in 1999!!

compare this list to melbournes built since 2000>
BHP GLOBAL HQ-127M
CITY TOWER-122M
MELBOURNE TOWER-122M
REPUBLIC TOWER-120M

so as you can see, Sydney starts its cycle bfore others. Its new cycle will start next year and John Boyd and 33 Bligh st will be first to commence.

What's going on with this one Cul?.....
-------------------------------------

From smh..

Thakral tries again on redeveloping Menzies hotel
By Carolyn Cummins, Commercial Property Editor
October 29, 2004

Page Tools
Email to a friend Printer format
Property developer Thakral Holdings has lodged an updated development application with the City of Sydney to redevelop its Menzies Hotel and head office at Wynyard.

The site, valued at about $50 million, includes Thakral House in George Street, the hotel and the retail component that runs between the Menzies and George Street.

The group has lodged a number of proposals with the council, but the latest one has been modified to include a smaller office tower on the hotel site.

Thakral's chairman, Ted Harris, told investors at yesterday's annual meeting that the group had been looking to update the property for some time to make it a major part of the Sydney CBD.

"In the pipeline, we are working on redevelopment options at the Hilton on the Park, Melbourne, and at Wynyard in Sydney," Mr Harris said. "Thakral is preparing to roll out these quality developments over the next five years.

etc...etc....

havent seen anything yet. will let you know when i do. hope ms moore is gentle with thakral.lol

"the latest one modified...smaller tower..." Uh oh. Sounds ominous.
It looks like Mies van der Rohe got it back to front when he spoke his famous quote that "Less is more", at least in terms of Sydney today, as it seems now that "Moore is less".

Lol, that's a very clever play on words testuser! :okay:

"the latest one modified...smaller tower..." Uh oh. Sounds ominous.
It looks like Mies van der Rohe got it back to front when he spoke his famous quote that "Less is more", at least in terms of Sydney today, as it seems now that "Moore is less".
modified smaller tower? you have to read it again>

[The group has lodged a number of proposals with the council, but the latest one has been modified to include a smaller office tower on the hotel site.]

It says -has been modified to INCLUDE a smaller tower.!
Thakral have two sites above station.. there office tower (facing george st) and hotel (facing carrington st).
I chatted to planner today and she said it looks like there coming back with something BIG again as an official DA! last time it wasnt a DA, just scheme.
watch this space...

remember last year i mentioned Thakral were very tenacious. like if you have two types of dogs. if you start kicking it, its either going to roll over and die or turn around and bite back! well thakral is the 2nd dog! lol

"the latest one modified...smaller tower..." Uh oh. Sounds ominous.
It looks like Mies van der Rohe got it back to front when he spoke his famous quote that "Less is more", at least in terms of Sydney today, as it seems now that "Moore is less".

classic quote.

@cul. i think (hope) you are right. This will be big news indeed, just when i thought it was all going to hell with the 4 storey, bligh and *maybe* city one the tide is turning(?)

remember last year i mentioned Thakral were very tenacious. like if you have two types of dogs. if you start kicking it, its either going to roll over and die or turn around and bite back! well thakral is the 2nd dog! lol

Which type is clover? :D

Thanks for the admonition, Cul. I should follow my own advice and pay attention to detail, because death is in it. And I hope you're bloody right. (brizer)

Thank the lord if this is true! That side of the city needs a height boost the even it out and make it more attractive.... when i say that i mean that if i want to go shopping for any reason i usually stick east of George St up around that end of town because there isn't much on the western side....

yes i agree westonian. this side of CBD really needs a 200m+ scraper to balance the skyline as seen from circ quay. You have 188m AMP on eastern side with 227m GPT behind and on western side you have 193m AAP with nothing behind it, so this will be perfect.
Just on the impending DA, i was told by a "source" that Thakral will lodge a "complying" res tower on george st and office component on carrington st. lets hope its what i think it is. a 200m+ slim tower for george st with 40m office tower for carring ton. There is NO SHADOW analysis required for this site beacuse it falls outside of sun access zone. It can also go up to 235m!!!

This is heating up, i like very much!

Thanks for the info!

Very exciting project

oh yes getting better here with one drips of news so not dead yet !

It's about time that the real fight to get this tower approved begins. It's been nothing but dialogue for the past two or so years which has resulted in things going no where.

When Thrakal lodge their D/A, we should all lodge letters of support in favor of this development and state cases as to why it should get the go ahead. Based on what has been discussed here (no shadowing, station upgrade etc) I think we have enough material that can be used to justify our case for approval. I hope the CSPC sit down, read our letters and take it into consideration.

I will lodge a few letters! :) This one is worth fighting for....I don't want anything under 230 m (excluding spire). Not another Angel Place please! :ohno:

So if the tall tower is apartments on George st how tall can it legally go to roof given the size of the block/height limit etc etc with no arguement from CLover spiky haired lesbian slutface. How tall can the office part on the other side go legally given the block size/nearby park etc etc with no argument from Clover spiky haired lesbian slutface.

oh culwulla just answerd some of my question however can you plse confirm again that 235m IS possible based on the block size and all of that sort of stuff. I cant see a 80 storey apartment tower going up in Sydney at the moment though so if the developer went with a mix of office in it would it still be able to go as high ?

I sent an email to Clover canvassing for the approval of this proposed DA with a height of 235m and Wynyard Station upgrade, making reference to Grand Central Station in New York and how successful it has been with its retail underground redevelopment under huge office towers. Also I made reference to its CityOne's Landmarrk status and huge influx of potential dollars in tourism, interest, commercial and trade.
Haven't heard back yet!!
Send CONSTRUCTIVE emails to her email address:

cmoore@cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au

remember last year i mentioned Thakral were very tenacious. like if you have two types of dogs. if you start kicking it, its either going to roll over and die or turn around and bite back! well thakral is the 2nd dog! lol

you said that about the emerald guys too.... :|

oh culwulla just answerd some of my question however can you plse confirm again that 235m IS possible based on the block size and all of that sort of stuff. I cant see a 80 storey apartment tower going up in Sydney at the moment though so if the developer went with a mix of office in it would it still be able to go as high ?
This George st site has no issues with shadows or height limits.One of the few spots that can go to 235m.The office tower can go to 50m (height of existing menzies) due to Wynyard pak .Im sure they (Thakral) can acquire the sufficient floor space to manage a height limit scraper?
Ms Moore would need to be briefed on the project and its on going design process/.
As for more aprtments in sydney, well i think there going to be serviced apartments and eventually sold off .

Wouldn't it be better off making the george st tower office / mixed office-residential and the wynyard park side residential to maximise usable space in both towers?
( assuming 8m high office floors and 5m high resi floors, this would allow the menzies hotel site to go to 10 floors rather than 6 - hence more apartments and bigger returns on that tower)...

dang with the proper job done on this whole shebang it could be such a stunner and change the whole charector of the wynyard station and enterance to wynyard to such an extent it wouldnt even seem like the same station anymore. On that point alone, it is worthy of instant approval.

Wouldn't it be better off making the george st tower office / mixed office-residential and the wynyard park side residential to maximise usable space in both towers?
( assuming 8m high office floors and 5m high resi floors, this would allow the menzies hotel site to go to 10 floors rather than 6 - hence more apartments and bigger returns on that tower)...

dang with the proper job done on this whole shebang it could be such a stunner and change the whole charector of the wynyard station and enterance to wynyard to such an extent it wouldnt even seem like the same station anymore. On that point alone, it is worthy of instant approval.

A height limit scraper and part of shityrail/sydney CBD actually becoming nice????

Come on clover!

CULWULLA........As Thakral have lodged a DA, when do you anticipate we could get an idea of it's design/form etc? Thanks

CULWULLA........As Thakral have lodged a DA, when do you anticipate we could get an idea of it's design/form etc? Thanks

Now a DA is far better indication that they are serious about this tower(s). :D

Looks like the suspense is rising again on this. This may become the signature tower for this upcoming construction cycle in Sydney, just like World Tower was in this passing cycle.

havent lodged DA yet. apparently soon going by the papers. will let everyone know when they do.

Culwulla, just out of curiosity, are there any other 235m height zones left besides this?

^ i want to know too..matixvola. and is there any news on this one cull?

there a few scattered around the CBD. mainly along the "core' which is between the length of George & Pitt streets.

What is the latest new on this building, Are they going for the design indicated in the 1st page, not the thinner 1. THe design look excetionally good, and hopefully will overshadow the god forsaken world tower.

nothing lodged yet. ill let you all know when something comes in!!

lol. whats the problem cul? are they having problem with council?

or theyre just taking theyre sweet ass time...

dont know. we havent heard anything from Thakral for months. hopefully something sooner rather later.

Cul when can I send thakral my version of their tower? I guess the design of City One as far as we know it has still not been released for public consumption?

I'd like to send in my design to hopefully steer them in a positive manner toward reflective glass. Something big and glassy with slab like walls would be such a boon for Sydney and drag it out of the dull 70s pit which engulfs much of the city.

i like the two massive floor plates...

is there a render????

building over the laneway???? thats a new one ;) tell me more

yes for godsake reflective glass.

i like the two massive floor plates...

is there a render????

building over the laneway???? thats a new one ;) tell me more
the site is 2 sites divided by a laneway. theres no way council will allow building over the laneway, so its now two sites. one is for a 12storey office block facing Carrington st and the other site is above Wynyard station on George Street. this site will hopefully be allowed its full potential of 235m.
It looks like it will be an apartment tower so not much glass walling .who knows? No renders yet because its early days.

Here is another rough pic...
http://home.iprimus.com.au/allicit/Images/City1.02.jpg

can someone say PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I AM PISSED OFF, I THOUGHT IT WAS A PERTH TOWER AND WESTIONIAN WAS WESTRALIA OR SOMETHING

Looks nice tho :)

you mean they cant build over the lane way
thats gotta be a massive set back to this project

Can't they just provide a laneway but build over it after some height, like a tunnel? I don't think they are going to give up, they havent so far and its been ages, so why would they gve up now, they really seem to want this building (and they have said so too). The only question left is at what height/

in NSW who do u appeal to after the city of sydney?

the george st site can still hold a bldg with a 1,000sqm floor plate which the the minimum allowed under new rules.It would be so slender at 235m. The site is in a 235m zone, so height isnt the issue. the issue is thakral getting the floor space ratio into there site to have a bldg up to that height. They wanted to include the Wynyard park and underground railway in its FSR to acquire the needed plot to achieve the height. council werent having anypart of that.The park and railway isnt part of site so only a 150m tower coud be achieved. but Thakral want to "update" the rundown station as part of there DA so it would look like someting like Grand Central in NYC.but its al very political. we will just have to wait and see what thakral have up there sleeve.
plot- yeah if thakral think they have a leg to stand on they will fight out in Land & Environment court.
avatar- yeah they would look superb! a tower that high would really balance out skyline. besides AAP tower theres nothing over 200m on western fringe in comparisson to GPT,Chifley and 126 phillip st on eastern side.
1.The height limit tower wont impead on sun access into martin place.
2. The tower is set way back from Wynyard Park, so no shadowing there either!
3. It would actually improve the street scape on george st.
4. Updating Wynyard Station would be a great + for the public
5.Thakral should even think about this tower being a hotel as Sydney hasnt had a new one in years! would be tallest in Southern hem! what a marketing tool.

The laneway is already a ghetto of no light and looks dingy.

you mean they cant build over the lane way
thats gotta be a massive set back to this project

Yeah this sounds weird. The Menzies arcade is ALREADY built over the laneway, surely the council can look at the current situation.

How about a 'twin towers approach with a shorter one on Barrack St sloping up to a big one on George?

a twin tower could be even hotter, one with a reallt steeply raked roof sloping up to another one with the same continuing roof line... could be quite interesting

Only Citicorp NYC sloped roof style building will suit the site. :) :)

the laneway has got a floor which is a like a bridge from one to another, but this doesnt mean a whole bldg is allowed.the height limit for the Carrington st frontage is current height of 50m or 12-14storeys.

It's about time the SC Council's planning was taken from them IMO.

Who give a stuff about some stupid dark lane... they would be better to get rid of it -It's only used as an entrance for a carpark from what I can remember - it's not like it's a massive traffic route. We could have a grand station and tower and no doubt a little laneway will sink the entire plan into something far more unexciting. The lane could be retained anyway - i dont see any problem. SSC need to get over themselves and their policy. :colgate:

After I had been out all weekend on New Years I found myself a friend's place and spoke to someone with a senior role in town planning. I had one sentence for him - "get rid of our height limits now". LOL and I told him why. I also told him to scrap the conservative reflectivity code.

I don't want any additional residential towers on 235m sites... I don't want more balconies, more fussy architecture and boring concrete everywhere. We are not goign to end up with something as progressive as Eureka or even Prima - we will end up with another messy tower with ugly projecting balconies. We need some sheer walled - powerful commercial towers, or even hotels - something new and dominating for this site.

the laneway has got a floor which is a like a bridge from one to another, but this doesnt mean a whole bldg is allowed.the height limit for the Carrington st frontage is current height of 50m or 12-14storeys.

So we can have the plane of the two towers rising from 50 metres on the West to 235 metres on the East front. I figure that's a bout a 60 degree slope. :)

60 degrees is an awesome angle lol