After wilkiebarkid posted a notice about a proposed 31storey hotel by june Rozario architects .
i decided to contact her about the project.
So far i have the heights. she will send me more info soon.
It will be 2nd tallest bldg in darwin on compeltion or 3rd highest on skyline -AHD.
the slender hotel will rise to 104mAHD from slopping ground of 11mAHD-18mAHD.
so there is a 7m slope on the site.

current 9storey hotel on site to be demolished
http://www.elders.com.au/listing_images/437/thumbnail/287908_1.jpg

current tallest bldgs in darwin
AHD120m-Evolution (99m above grd) uc
AHD115m-Pandanas (91m above grd) completed
AHD104m-Buffalo court hotel (93m above grd) proposed
AHD 91.5m One30 esp (70m above grd) uc
AHD 90m one 30 esp (68m above grd) uc




http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh64/wilkiebarkid/Notices042008.jpg

Culwulla said
So far i have the heights. she will send me more info soon.
It will be 2nd tallest bldg in darwin on compeltion or 3rd highest on skyline -AHD.
the slender hotel will rise to 104mAHD from slopping ground of 11mAHD-18mAHD.
so there is a 7m slope on the site.

This one has a positive buzz to it, however let's hope it doesn't rise from 'slopping' ground or Darwin may get its own Leaning Tower!!

ha. i just thouight i noted that it had a 7m slope on the site. do you know this site? is it steep? what sweeping views of botanical gardens it will have!!

ha. i just thouight i noted that it had a 7m slope on the site. do you know this site? is it steep? what sweeping views of botanical gardens it will have!!

That is right on the northern edge of the CBD - I've noticed it before because it's a very strange looking building! Interestingly this area is zoned for a maximum height of 55m AHD "without demonstrated special merit". They'll have to pull something pretty special out of their hat to exceed the height limits by that much.

ha! is that Raffles Apartment?. I actually have a friend who lives in that building, not surprised if it will be demolished. It would have to be one of the most ugliest buildings in Darwin - inside is not much better. Its all just concrete, however it would be save in a cyclone :lol:

Call me a NIMBY, but I would prefer to see the CBD denser up first with low/mid rises, then look at building more 70m+ towers.

current 9storey hotel on site to be demolished
http://www.elders.com.au/listing_images/437/thumbnail/287908_1.jpg

Culwulla, The Raffles apartment building in this photo is at 1 Buffalo Court and is unlikely to be a part of the proposed development.

The proposed hotel is for 2 & 3 Buffalo Court which means the demolition of the Quality Frontier Hotel. Some pictures here probably before and after renovations.

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh64/wilkiebarkid/intro.jpg

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh64/wilkiebarkid/NT362.jpg

Yes there is a slope as the main CBD peninsular drops down toward the Gardens Golf course and Botanical gardens areas, but this will not affect the views which will be fantastic including sunsets over Mindil Beach.

Sheesh! Darwin's goin off!

thanks wilkiebar. i had limited info, so frontier hotel sounds more likely.
im still awaiting info from architect

That Raffles bldg needs a paint job at the very least.

I agree with crawf, I think it looks like a solid concrete block which would no doubt with stand any cyclone category anyday. I don't think it would be torn down in a hurry.

If it goes as part of that development for 2& 3 Buffalo Court though I guess it would be good. Otherwise some paint would do.

Lol the Raffles Bldg looks more like either a hospital or an office structure than an accomodation block.

I doesn't look like it, it is 100% concrete ;)

I'm actually a bit disappointed that they want to demolish the Frontier motel considering its not a bad looking building however there is a pub 'Frontier Hotel' adjusted the motel, so maybe that could be the site for the tower?

A 90m building would look ridiculous there, Darwin needs alot more low/mid rises in the CBD before more high-rises IMO. Plus I'm not sure if many people would want to live so high up there during a cyclone or a major storm though the views would be amazing during the dry season.

Maybe this is my Adelaide attitude coming out, but I prefer a city with density then just a few tallies. I'm not saying fill the whole CBD up with low/mid rises but just make the CBD a bit more denser then build more 70m+ towers. Because atm quite alot of Darwin is very much like a country town (except its nightlife - love it! :D), but then again parts of Mitchell & Knuckey Streets are starting to become denser.

i dont know. i think 90m will soon be the norm, not 40-70m bldgs. darwin is really booming.
developers are going for broke atm. skies the limit

From the NT News today 5 May.

"THIRTY-storey skyscrapers will be banned on Darwin's Esplanade after the closure of a planning loophole yesterday. But they can still be built just one block away on Mitchell St.

The Urban Design Advisory Committee has recommended changes to the Planning Act that would shrink Darwin's CBD -- to be bordered by Daly St, McMinn St and The Esplanade.

Buildings within that border can be up to 90m -- or 30 storeys.

But buildings constructed on the edge of the CBD would be limited to 36m -- or 13 storeys.

Skyscrapers in the CBD will also be thinner, allowing a "corridor of view'' for neighbouring buildings.

The changes would also remove the special merit provision -- which allows developers to apply to break height restrictions.

Planning Minister Delia Lawrie has signed an interim development control order to immediately block all special merit applications.

The order would block the Halikos Group's planned expansion of the seven-storey Quality Frontier Hotel to 31-storeys in Buffalo Court, on the edge of the CBD.

Developments that exceed the limit but have already started construction, such as Evolution on McMinn St, will not be affected by the change."

I know some of you might think I'm nuts, but this could be a good thing.

bugger. no wonder architect hasnt got back to me

I know some of you might think I'm nuts, but this could be a good thing.

I would second that, however based on the idea that there should be more slimer buildings rather than big wide ones such as Lameroo on the Esplanade,. It would allow a higher range of options and let in the light to flow through the streets. Perhaps it would be more energy efficient and ensure a corridor of views for each building. Too many big ones clummed up against each other, may make it a ghetto in years to come. Alas taller skinner buildings may be worst off to cyclonic winds though????? It would mean the city would be more of a Gold Coast style where bldgs still have big private spaces for pools and gardens.

That is my 2 cents worth anyway....:lol:

:nuts:
I am sure others not just me that this was a very exciting development proposal.

On the downside, this wide range of bldgs of great height in the outer edges of the city cbd area means probulary the end of this thread.

bugger! the cbd is quite small so eventually they will have no choice but to relent and say FU to the nimbys...

Actually majority of the CBD is just full of low-rise buildings (1-3 stories), so it still has a long way of being completely filled up.

damn, nimbys in darwin now. bloody hell, where next.

Planning Minister Delia Lawrie has signed an interim development control order to immediately block all special merit applications.

The order would block the Halikos Group's planned expansion of the seven-storey Quality Frontier Hotel to 31-storeys in Buffalo Court, on the edge of the CBD

With all due respect to some of these people who manage to get voted into these positions of power and influence,.. who the hell are they and what qualifications do they have?

Delia Lawrie's biography is as follows:

Born in Darwin in 1966
Ended schooling at Nightcliff High School
Cadet journalist
Journalist
Disability and Carers advocate
Local newspaper editor

She is now Minister for Planning and Lands!

No tertiary qualifications relating to urban planning or the like.

Yet now has the power to push some personal views on Darwin's development and possibly influence the city's future growth and appearance.

I find it absurd.

Its the Territory!, not surprised in alot of ways.

I seriously reckon I could get a job as a Journalist for the NT news, considering what kind of paper it is (makes the tiser look professional).

Yeah I reckon that is possibly a similar reason behind why the some people who work in Darwin city council were originally working for the Gold Coast City council.

bugger. no wonder architect hasnt got back to me

With respect to June D'Rozario, she is not an architect. She is a highly regarded consultant urban planner. The buiding's architect is Jackman Gooden Architects (NT); the same ones who designed the Mitchell Centre, NAB house (Chinatown Office Building), Elements Bayview, and the One30 project.

There are a lot of property owners in Darwin at the moment who are in a state of disbelief; particularly over the cavalier way the Minister made the announcement that was based on recommendations from a group led by a Melbourne consultant who had originally, in public forums here, stated that the whole of Darwin should be limited to 8 storeys!!!

The proposed 36m limit is in effect 8 storeys because the height includes structures such as antenna, lightening rods and any machinery-cranes used to construct a building. 36m-12m(lightening rod)=24m divide by 3m = 8 Storeys.

I expect that there is much, much more to this story than can be told in public as yet.

Yeah I reckon that is possibly a similar reason behind why the some people who work in Darwin city council were originally working for the Gold Coast City council.

Darwin City Council, like all councils in the NT have no planning powers. All planning powers are vested in the Northern Territory Government. It has given Northern Territory the fastest (and enviable) planning process in Australia.

thanks. that 36m is ridiculous if it includes structures on roof?
they have significance to skyline impact.

Newspaper story on this project

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh64/wilkiebarkid/darwin5js4.png

The boxing gloves are well and truly on for this one!

that's a behemoth! there seems merit to me in that article. good luck to them!

that's a behemoth! there seems merit to me in that article. good luck to them!

The newspaper article above refers to the the building for which this thread is about! It was the first to be knocked on the head by the Planning Minister's Interim Development Control Order that now limits height to 36m to the top of any building structure in this part of Darwin.

looks ok. i hope it gets through. but dont like chances.

looks ok. i hope it gets through. but dont like chances.

This one has been chopped in two! Recent planning notice has it at 14 storeys.

A shame because this part of the CBD is one of the closest to sea level, so the height would not have been as imposing as Pandanus and Evo.

so two 14storeys? or just one?

so two 14storeys? or just one?

Sorry, I meant in half!!

No definately only one building of 14 storeys, but I think it will replace the existing hotel building.

what a damn shame.

The original 31 storey proposal was killed by the Planning Minister.

The revised proposal comes before Council 6th August.

It complies with height restrictions that have been enforced by the Interim Development Control Order!... 55m AHD.

What a shame. It would appear that the developers are keen to get this one happening. I mean, to come from 31 down to 14 storeys in such a short space of time and seek approval!

The reduced height should also satisfy the objections from the residents of the Raffles apartment building next door.

This is the new proposal...sadly butchered!!

http://i253.photobucket.com/albums/hh64/wilkiebarkid/Buffalo.jpg

im sure Darwin people aren't complaining, they've already got a pretty good skyline considering the size of the city. Think about us Canberran's, our population is over 3 times the size of Darwin's yet our skyline is non existant

im sure Darwin people aren't complaining, they've already got a pretty good skyline considering the size of the city. Think about us Canberran's, our population is over 3 times the size of Darwin's yet our skyline is non existant

You're probably right. In view of its location it will be a reasonable addition to the CBD landscape, being that it really is 'fringe CBD' and abutts the Gardens parkland area.

doesnt look to bad. shame its only half the height but i suppose it now suit its location opposite the parklands.

Not bad, will this still include apartments, restaurant, tavern/hotel, hotel suites and a 5 level carpark?

Just need the info for the NT guide, cheers

Not bad, will this still include apartments, restaurant, tavern/hotel, hotel suites and a 5 level carpark?

Just need the info for the NT guide, cheers


Crawf

220 Hotel suites
28 serviced apartments
56 multiple dwellings
Restaurant
Hotel/Tavern
Drive thru bottle shop
3 levels of parking

Cheers

From the NT News today. Coming up for consideration soon.


Darwin boom continues

MATT CUNNINGHAM

August 30th, 2008


DARWIN'S Frontier Hotel is set to be demolished and replaced with a flash new hotel and apartment complex.

If approved, the development on the corner of Buffalo Ct and Gardens Rd, will see the old hotel flattened and replaced with a new building that will include a deck, bar, bottleshop, hotel and private apartments.

June D'Rozario, who is handling the application on behalf of developer the Halikos Group, said the new development would include a "more contemporary hotel" than the existing business.

The 14-level building will include 220 hotel suites, 28 serviced apartments, and 56 private apartments consisting of one, two and three bedrooms.

The developers had to redesign the building after the Territory Government scrapped the special merit provision that allowed developers to apply to exceed height restrictions. Halikos had to wipe 17 storeys off its original design because of the rule change.

The hotel development is one of three high-rise building applications to be considered by the Development Consent Authority next week.

The other developments, both in Wood St, are a 24-storey apartment, office and retail complex and a 20-storey residential and office development. Territory Construction Association general manager Graham Kemp said building work in Darwin was continuing to boom.

"Darwin often works in reverse to the rest of the country," he said.

"We are seeing signs in the rest of Australia where the construction industry is coming off the boil, but we seem to be firing hot in NT."

But Nelson MLA Gerry Wood said too many high-rise buildings were going up in the CBD without enough planning consideration.

He said Darwin needed to hold on to its "tropical identity" and not build a concrete jungle in the CBD.

But Nelson MLA Gerry Wood said too many high-rise buildings were going up in the CBD without enough planning consideration.

He said Darwin needed to hold on to its "tropical identity" and not build a concrete jungle in the CBD.

Read - "Darwin needs to remain a backwater forever and never progress"

Read - "Darwin needs to remain a backwater forever and never progress"

Once again we have an NT politician with no qualifications in any related industry (e.g. urban planning, building, architecture, infrastructure, etc etc)making comments about the development of a fast growing CBD. Gerry Wood is a chicken farmer!!!

Delia Lawrie (Interim planning control order, restricting height) finished high school, but her biography does not mention any other advanced education or degrees etc.

Politicians should have a minimum tertiary education standard and should be made to do courses to educate and qualify them for certain portfolios!!!!

Delia Lawrie (Interim planning control order, restricting height) finished high school, but her biography does not mention any other advanced education or degrees etc.

Politicians should have a minimum tertiary education standard and should be made to do courses to educate and qualify them for certain portfolios!!!!

The following link will take you to the version of the Urban Design Advisory Panel's report that was released to the public without any fanfare (it just appeared on a website). It is from this report that Minister Delia Lawrie, Batchelor of ???? (she's a journalist by the cadet method) issued the Interim Development Control Order No.18.

http://www.nt.gov.au/lands/planning/documents/Urban%20Design%20Advisory%20Panel.pdf

The report is supposed to be tested by a public comment period. This has not happened yet. I hope it is tested because you don't get to see, unless you can work it out yourself from the report, that the intention is to restrict the whole of Darwin CBD to a maximum of 8 storeys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The buzz in the knowledgeable streets of Darwin is that the Government will proceed with the report recommendations (because it was what they wanted to hear); no matter what the public and property owners say and that they have an ulterior motive for doing so. I can think of what the ulterior motive might be but I can't say it in public and possibly because there are some members here that know the reason.

Politicians in the NT know that if it came to a fight between CBD property owners and the anachronistic "lets keep Darwin looking like a tropical town" view of the general public, the public would win because they constitute more voters than there are CBD property owners. Property owners haven't made a public fuss but they are seething with rage but they know that they cannot win a public fight with an ignorant public and politicians. I wish some rich developer would sue the pants off the Minister for loss of property value.

Thanks for the link SPQRSPQR.

Just read through the document and,having absolutely no qualification myself, it seems to make a fair bit of sense. That Darwin was possibly facing a donut around the edge of the CBD as tall building around the edge would limit development in the centre because of the "value" of harbour views.

Also interesting was the tiering system:
The table and diagram promote a model with the following tiers:
• Tier 1: up to100% site coverage from ground level to 13 metres AGL, allowing for
approximately three levels.
• Tier 2: up to 80% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 24 metres AGL, allowing for about three levels.
• Tier 3: up to 70% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 36 metres AGL.
• Tier 4: up to 50% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 90 metres AGL (maximum height). The overall floor plate should be
no greater than 1100 m2 for residential or for commercial offices.
Need to let some sunlight into the streets.

And having a pyramid shape from Knuckey out, seems to makes sense. However, I'd suggest doubling the numbers from the current 90m AGL to 36m AGL- i.e. 180m Above ground level in the CBD, dropping to 72m AGL on the periphery. Upgrading the road into the city is crucial too, as is a monorail from the City to Palmerston to Weddell also. But I know nothing.


Anyone know if this was approved and is going ahead at 14st?

Although I agree with the need for tertiary education to enable critical thinking, I think its the role of the politicians to look out for and be the voice for their constituents first and foremost.

They don't necessarily need to have a qualification in their portfolio, but MUST draw on a range of views from experts, developers and users in a transparent fashion and be open to scrutiny on the decisions they make.

The minister in this case should be the bridge between the experts, developers and the people so perhaps a qualification in communication is more important than technical knowledge of planning? lol

Just read through the document and,having absolutely no qualification myself, it seems to make a fair bit of sense. That Darwin was possibly facing a donut around the edge of the CBD as tall building around the edge would limit development in the centre because of the "value" of harbour views.

Also interesting was the tiering system:
The table and diagram promote a model with the following tiers:
• Tier 1: up to100% site coverage from ground level to 13 metres AGL, allowing for
approximately three levels.
• Tier 2: up to 80% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 24 metres AGL, allowing for about three levels.
• Tier 3: up to 70% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 36 metres AGL.
• Tier 4: up to 50% of the sites cross section in any direction for the building
footprint to 90 metres AGL (maximum height). The overall floor plate should be
no greater than 1100 m2 for residential or for commercial offices.
Need to let some sunlight into the streets.


Sorry Holy Frog, but you said it all in the first 11 words of your first sentence. The effect of the UDAP proposals is 1. to make the general public think that the government is being clever; 2. to reduce building heights in all of the Darwin CBD to 29 metres above ground (about 8 storeys); and 3. to take private competition away from the Waterfront development.

Most blocks in the CBD are about 700-1000 square metres. Once you setback from the boundaries as proposed you get as far as Tier 2 and then you can go no higher. The minimum just-viable floor plate size for residential is 800 square metres and for commercial/office it is 1100 square metres. As you might be able to understand, UDAP's proposals are all about limiting height to 8 storeys everywhere. Prof Adams has actually said this.

The supposed 90 metres limit is achievable on exactly one privately owned block in Darwin: The old Mirrambeena site; which, coincidently, is owned by the TOGA Group who are developing the Waterfront.

As for the so called previous donut effect, not all properties would be developed. And the market has spoken and said that people in residential buildings want to live on the CBD periphery and not in the centre: Which should be for office/commercial.

There was nothing wrong with the previous planning scheme with it's gradation in heights from Larrakeyah to the "spine" created by Knuckey Street and with room for expansion down to Frances Bay.

UDAP proposals will result in 8 storey buildings everywhere but actually mostly in Larrakeyah where the land is cheaper. Why would a developer pay full price for CBD land and be only able to build to 8 storeys when he can get Larrakeyah land for less and still build to 8 storeys?

A lack of qualifications in the general populace makes it easy for the NTG to pull the wool over peoples' eyes. This is no direct criticism of you: Just an observation. Does the general populace stop to think what size the blocks are in the CBD? No, they don't because if they did then they'd realise they've been conned.

Property owners are not in the least happy with UDAP. In fact there is a revolt brewing. People who own blocks in the CBD are the real stakeholders: Not the voters in the northern suburbs. (PS I don't own any property in the NT).

Property owners are not in the least happy with UDAP. In fact there is a revolt brewing. People who own blocks in the CBD are the real stakeholders: Not the voters in the northern suburbs. (PS I don't own any property in the NT).

And neither are the chicken farmers either further out.


So the net result of the tiering is that you can really only have a 90m tower that has a 350-500m max floor space per level. I get it now.

Does the planning in the CBD allow for building across multiple lots e.g. Developer buys two lots of approx 800m each, allowing 800m floor plan on tier 3?

So the net result of the tiering is that you can really only have a 90m tower that has a 350-500m max floor space per level. I get it now.

Yes! You win the prize. Now we just have to convince the rest of the uncaring populace that UDAP is a con on a grand scale. The covert aim of UDAP is to reduce all of the Darwin CBD to 8 storeys.

Does the planning in the CBD allow for building across multiple lots e.g. Developer buys two lots of approx 800m each, allowing 800m floor plan on tier 3?

Yes you do that if you can convince the Darwin property owners to sell to their neighbours. You can even build over separate blocks by agreement (like the Mitchell Centre. Evolution was made up of 5 blocks of land: 3 of which were owned by the one person who just happened to be in the mood to sell. Once he sold, the other 2 adjoining owners probably thought; bugger this, I don't want my tiny building next to a 33 storey tower. And so they sold out as well.

But here I can expose the con of the 3rd tier. No developer would ever build the third tier: Because, under the Building Code of Australia applicable in the NT, if a building has a floor level higher than 25 metres above ground level (about 8 storeys - there's that magic number again!), then they must install a fully complying fire sprinkler system. This is not cheap and in fact it is not economically viable to install such a system unless a building approaches at least 17 storeys (about 50 metres), which is well above the 36 metre limit of the third tier.

Can you see the picture now? UDAP is a con. It is about reducing Darwin CBD to 8 storeys everywhere. Except......

As I said before: There is exactly one privately owned block in Darwin CBD which could build to 90 metres: The TOGA owned Mirrambeena Travelodge. Oh, BTW, the Waterfront Project includes 3 x 30 storey towers for the old power station site. So much for UDAP wanting to reduce the height of the periphery of the CBD: One rule for private property owners and another for properties in which the NTG has a stake.

Thanks for the insight SPQRSPQR.

Speaking of which, is there a thread for the proposed 3x 30 on the Waterfront? I've seen it on the plans and a distant image, but not much about the buildings themselves.

Thanks for the insight SPQRSPQR.

Speaking of which, is there a thread for the proposed 3x 30 on the Waterfront? I've seen it on the plans and a distant image, but not much about the buildings themselves.

Any info or pics for further stages of the Waterfront should be posted in the Darwin Waterfront thread.