# Proposed | SKY PLAZA (Tower 1 / 150m / Office) (Tower 2 / 88m / Office)

[Australiasia]

Old Thread: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=489495


This was meant to be the second stage of the Capital Square development but has now been sold off with new proposals, the old thread is here (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=720764):

http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/documentdb/1017.pdf

this is in reference to the sky plaza development

98 (PT LOT 200) MOUNTS BAY ROAD, PERTH - REVISED
DEVELOPMENT FOR STAGE TWO (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE
SITE) COMPRISING TWO OFFICE TOWERS, LOW RISE
COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, A PUBLIC PLAZA AND 519 BASEMENT
CAR BAYS
RECOMMENDATION: (APPROVAL)

That:-

1. in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning
Scheme No. 2 and Town Planning Scheme No. 21, the
Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the
application for the revised stage two development
comprising two office towers, low rise commercial
buildings, a public plaza and 519 basement car bays at 98
(Pt Lot 200) Mounts Bay Road, Perth, as detailed on the
Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One dated 22 August
2008, and as shown on the plans received on
8 October 2008, subject to:-

1.1 the development not exceeding a maximum plot ratio
of 4.8:1 or a total of 88,958m2 of plot ratio floor space,
representing 20% (or 14,826m2) bonus plot ratio
which is being granted to the development on the
basis of:-

1.5 the rooftops of the buildings being designed to add
visual interest to the city skyline, particularly as
viewed from the south-west (Kings Park), as required
under the City Development Design Guidelines with
final details being submitted and approved prior to
the issue of the relevant building licence;

1.8 signs erected on the buildings being an integral part
of the design and scale of the development and
exhibiting a high level of design quality, with any
proposed roof signs being illuminated to enhance the
city skyline at night and details of all proposed
signage being the subject of a separate
application(s);

1.18 in the event of Pt Lot 200 being subdivided and
ownership of any of the newly created Lots changing,
easements being registered over the Lots ensuring
rights of carriageway and access to all shared and
common basement parking areas;


2. the application be referred to the Western Australian
Planning Commission for determination under the
Metropolitan Region Scheme as the tower elements of the
proposed development exceed the height limits applicable
to Pt Lot 200 under the Parliament House Precinct Policy.


BACKGROUND:
FILE REFERENCE: 2008/2247
REPORTING OFFICER: Dewald Gericke
RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Peter Monks, Director Planning and Development
DATE: 9 October 2008
MAP / SCHEDULE: Map and coloured perspectives for 98 Mounts Bay
Road, Perth

LANDOWNER: Turnstone Nominees Pty Ltd
APPLICANT: Greg Rowe and Associates
APPROXIMATE COST: In excess of $21.5 million


SITE HISTORY:
The Stage one forward works on the southern part of the Lot have commenced and a
building licence application for the southern 41 level residential tower has been
submitted to the City.

The WAPC granted approval to subdivide Pt Lot 200 into two freehold lots on
29 August 2008. The boundary between the two new lots reflects the proposed
staging of the development of the site.


DETAILS:
Approval is sought to develop the northern portion of the former Emu Brewery site for
two multi-storey office buildings, low rise commercial buildings, a public plaza and
519 basement car bays.

The two office towers will be located on the north-eastern portion of the site to
preserve the view corridor from Parliament House, as established by previous
applications for this site. The eastern office building is proposed to be the taller of
the two towers, with 28 floors (excluding three plant levels). This building rises above
the western office building, which comprises 15 floors (excluding two plant levels).
The eastern building has a central core to maximise external light and views of the
city, Swan River and Kings Park. An offset core is proposed for the western building
to take advantage of its western and south western aspect. An atrium with elevated
walkways will connect the buildings from the plaza level to level eight.

At ground level, pedestrians gain access to the lobbies and central atrium via Mount
Street, the upper end of Spring Street and the surrounding public plaza that connects
through to Mounts Bay Road via the ‘grand stair’ within the approved Stage One. A
secondary stair at the southern end of the office building allows pedestrian access
from mid-way along Spring Street.

A low rise pavilion-style building with retail tenancies is proposed at the base of the
western-most office tower. The building will ‘activate’ the public domain and act as a
podium to the office buildings, in order to mitigate against adverse wind conditions.
The pavilion building is aligned on the key pedestrian axis between the Mount Street
footbridge and the ‘grand stair’ in Stage One, allowing views toward Kings Park and
the Swan River.

A smaller (secondary) podium building is proposed toward the south west corner of
Stage Two linking the development to the Stage One public plaza and commercial
podium building.

A basement retail tenancy is proposed below under the plaza, adjacent to Mount
Street. Pedestrian access to the tenancy will be via escalators and a lift from the
pedestrian plaza area linking the office lobby and the low rise pavilion building. The
entry to the tenancy is designed to enhance access for existing residents living in the
Mount Street / West Perth localities to the west of the site.

The focus of the development at pedestrian level is the landscaped public plaza
which occupies approximately 50% of the site area and is accessible from all three
street frontages. The plaza will incorporate water features, street furniture and public
art relating to the site’s heritage.

The applicant seeks a plot ratio bonus of 20% (14,826m2 of plot ratio floor area) on
the basis of the provision of public plazas, pedestrian access and links and public
views.

It is anticipated that this (second) stage of the total development of the site may be
implemented over two sub stages:-

1. Completion of the basement car park, public plaza and eastern office tower as
well as footings for the remaining tower (temporary landscaped to form part of
the public plaza).

2. Completion of the western office tower and completion of the total development.


Development Requirements:

The continuation of large-scale development in the St Georges Precinct (P6) will
reflect its high profile, its image as a group of landmark buildings and the
predominance of the Precinct as the State’s business heart. The design of buildings
will be such that they minimize overshadowing of nearby parklands and be of a high
architectural standard to reflect the status of the Precinct. Building heights should
step down in the western part of the Precinct to maintain views from Parliament
House toward the River and to protect the identity and prominence of the Mt Eliza
escarpment and Kings Park.

Building designs will contribute to an interesting and comfortable pedestrian
environment, minimizing strong wind conditions, glare and sun reflection in the street.
New development should provide protective podia with other elements, such as
street furniture, planting and public art.

The Building Heights Plan does not stipulate any height control for development on
the site, but identifies the site as being within the Parliament House Precinct. The
Council is to have regard for these building height requirements, but is not bound by
the policy and may consider the proposed building heights on their merit.

The proposal’s compliance with the relevant Scheme and Policy requirements is
summarised below:-
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/5317/plagenda081021ea9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


COMMENTS:

Public Consultation:

Due to the extent of variations to the City Planning Scheme plot ratio standards and
to the height limits under the Parliament House Precinct Policy, the application was
advertised to the owners of the nearby properties in Mount Street, St Georges
Terrace and Spring Street. One submission was received, raising objections to the
development. The objection raised the following issues and concerns:-

• The 20% plot ratio bonus should not be supported as the facilities provided do
not meet the essential criteria and performance guidelines under the relevant
policy.
• The three large buildings with minimal separation and the impact of the building
on significant postcard views of the city from Kings Park and South Perth.
• The development is an overdevelopment of the site with little amenity and
services.
• The building height exceeding the planning provisions more than six times.
• The wind impact needs to be assessed in terms of surrounding pedestrian
areas and streets.

These issues and concerns are addressed in the following sections of the report.


Conclusion:

The application for the revised stage two development of the site containing two
office towers, low-rise buildings including dining uses, recreation facilities and
basement car parking will add commercial, dining and recreation facilities to the west
end of the central city area. It will make for a more balanced development on the site
(adding to the residential component) and provide more daytime activity and
opportunity for use of the significant public spaces and pedestrian walkways. The
development will have a significant impact on the city skyline as the proposed
development greatly exceeds the height limits imposed under the Parliament House
Precinct Policy. The commercial buildings, however, will be significantly lower
compared to the recent previous approvals for the site and both the Council and the
WAPC have previously supported taller buildings in these locations.

The applicant is seeking 20% bonus plot ratio to provide the development with
14,826m2 of additional floor space. In exchange for this bonus the applicant is
offering to provide a range of public facilities and amenities including the public plaza,
pedestrian facilities and preservation of public view corridors. As such, it is
considered that the proposal warrants the awarding of the 20% plot ratio bonus.

It is considered that the design, quality and function of the public plaza spaces and
pedestrian links, the design of the tower facades and the podium level, the massing
and form of the development and the pallet of materials and finishes meet the
Scheme provisions and objectives.

It is considered that the proposed development provides a balanced outcome for the
site with significant community facilities and therefore can be supported subject to
conditions.


http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

From The West online

Leighton to build offices on Emu site
29th October 2008, 6:00 WST

Perth City Council was expected last night to approve a two-tower office development on the seemingly jinxed old Emu Brewery site on Spring Street.

Leighton Properties wants to build a 28-storey office tower, linked to another 15-storey tower of similar appearance on the same site.

The catch is the company does not yet own the land, which Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown have on the market for between $50 million and $80 million.

Selling agent Nick Stanisis, of Jones Lang LaSalle, has confirmed Leighton is one of several companies to have expressed an interest in buying the site and Leighton Properties WA regional manager Michael Barr confirmed last week the company remained open to developing the site either solely or in a joint venture.

The council is set to approve a 20 per cent plot ratio bonus to allow a total of 88,958sqm of floor space between the two towers and an adjoining low rise commercial building. The lower buildings will preserve the views from Parliament House to the river.

Leighton had been in negotiations with Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown to take a stake in stage two of their Capital Square development but the deal fell over and the site went on the market earlier this month.

Saville is building a 41-storey residential tower on the adjoining block, which was meant to be the first of three such towers before the company ditched the remaining stages in March in favour of building an office tower.

The revised project was dropped earlier this month and the vacant 1ha site was put up for sale.

DAN HATCH



Old Proposals
http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/796/20414232jv8.jpg

http://img253.imageshack.us/img253/5531/31003331ag9.jpg

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/4053/perthviewcapitalsquareqy9.jpg


Original Post

:dance2::wtf: is going on?

[Laing]

The office component has officially fallen over. Today's business pages in the West said the lot was back on the market for $80,000.000.


the old development:


DA105/08 98 MOUNTS BAY ROAD (EMU BREWERY)
A presentation was given by Alan Stewart from Greg Rowe and Associates and
others in relation to the revised development proposal for the 98 Mounts Bay Road
(Emu Brewery) site where it is proposed to replace two of the approved residential
towers with a commercial development.

Members of the Design Advisory Committee thanked the applicant for their
presentation on prospective changes to the approved plans for development of the
former Emu Brewery site. As no formal proposal has been submitted, the Design
Advisory Committee informally advises:-

1. its general support for the amended proposal and the introduction of office and
retail components into the development;

2. its support for the significant gap (approximately 33m) now proposed between
the stage 1 residential building and the new proposed commercial building; and

3. that it supports the applicant approaching the Parliamentary Precinct Committee
to ascertain whether it would be prepared to support a slight intrusion into the
view corridor to allow for a widening of the eight metre gap between the two
new office buildings on Mount Street given that this would benefit the project
and the presentation of the project when viewed from Parliament House.

[crave]

i have $70m...

: |

anyone wanna chip in.

[Blindfold]

Tower gone, city site for sale
CATHY SAUNDERS The West Australian 7 Oct

The ill-fated second stage of the high-profile Capital Square property project in central Perth has finally fallen over, with Saville and Babcock & Brown ditching plans for an office tower and instead placing the one-hectare site on the market for an estimated $50 million to $80 million.
The project has had a bumpy history, with original plans for three residential towers to the value of $1.2 billion being axed in March in favour of one apartment skyscraper and one commercial office tower. But given the financial woes engulfing Babcock & Brown, the partners have struggled to keep the venture alive.
As reported in IVestBusiness on Friday, the partners have failed to sign up a builder for the 41-storey residential building and yesterday they confirmed they were selling the site on the corner of Spring and Mount streets through Jones Lang LaSalle, having been unable to convince a joint venturer to come in on the plan for a 60,000sgm office.

JLL joint managing director Nick Stanisis said office development was not the strong suit of Saville and Babcock & Brown, who were more experienced in residential developments. "Whilst they have postured about going forward with an office development, I think they have
convinced themselves it is such a big ticket item it is really not what they should be doing," he said. Mr Stanisis said it was his gut feelingthat an office tower would eventually go up on the site, given the low vacancy rate of 0.3 per cent in the rather than a residential project. "But stranger things have happened. Like the ABC site, where a residential developer (Finbar) has picked it up," he said. "So I wouldn't discount it (another residential project for Capital Square) but we know several large office developers have shown some interest in the site over a period of time."
Although it has a 4:1 plot ratio there is an existing development application which provides for up to 58,193sgm of built floor space and a
potential bonus of about 18,000sgm on the existing prescribed ratio. Analysts say the site is likely to reap up to $80 million because of its location and potential plot ratio. Recent sales pointing to this price include the ComputerCorp site by JLL in nearby Murray Street for $19.2 million on a site area of 4134 sqm, or about $4644/sgm, and the acquisition of the 1.28ha site formerly occupied by ABC Studios in Adelaide Terrace for $37.5 million, or about $2930/sqm.

[Scraperfan]

Wow. Im glad all the speculation is gone though.

What i dont get is how they build River Plaza with the existing approved podium and ground level areas - as thats all been planned with the entire site in mind.

How can you build River Plaza without splitting and redesigning the ground levels.

The council put huge covenants on the public access to the ground level and other design features.

[docker]

SWAN WINS!!

45 entries for the height of Sky Plaza

Swan......................0m
WCG...................140m (floor level)
GAbE27...............155m
Sanj....................178m
acc521.................180m
RocCity................189m
stadiumdesigner....190m
scotdaliney...........193m
matt_sbs.............195m
Urbania...............195m
Homeroids...........198m
alvse...................199m
tayls84................200m
Hossen27.............201m
citystyle...............202m
nazor...................203m
KamikazeTaxi.......204m
P4L.....................205m
NailZ...................206m
chrisaus..............206m
PD......................207m
A r c h i...............208m
PerthCity..............209m
NZer...................209m
Bullswool.............210m
jackso.................211m
perthgazer...........212m
AndyGM...............213m
dallastexjr............214m
Lowie101.............215m
CULWULLA............215m
BIG MAN..............216m
Dilaz89................217m
Docker................218m
Scraperfan...........219m
BartBart..............220m
Auxodium............221m
waustralia............222m
Direwolf...............223m
Johnvb.................224m
ryan79.................225m
crave...................226m
basics..................228m
Ari Gold...............230m
WAuzzie...............248m

[crave]

Wow. Im glad all the speculation is gone though.

What i dont get is how they build River Plaza with the existing approved podium and ground level areas - as thats all been planned with the entire site in mind.

How can you build River Plaza without splitting and redesigning the ground levels.

The council put huge covenants on the public access to the ground level and other design features.

maybe stage 2 podium won't be built... or maybe tha structural foundation points in tha podium will match tha configuration of structural supports even with a new floor plate design...

[Scraperfan]

yeh but have a look at the stage 1 tower plaza level.

its totally integrated with the rest of the site - as well as where the tenant facilities are.

you cant just draw a line through the site and build the plaza on one side, its not designed for that to be possible,

[NailZ]

Leighton's are here to save us... maybe.

From WABN:
Leighton's new tack on Capital Square
7-October-08 by Rebecca Lawson

Leighton Properties Pty Ltd said it expects to lodge a bid for the Capital Square site after confirming that negotiations with the property's joint venture partners, Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown, have been terminated.

More to come...

[desperaterobots]

Please build the glass thing pleaaaase.

[Sanj]

well at least we know leighton wont have issues getting finance. they are majorly cashed up

[acc521]

Makes sense with John Holland being owned by Leightons.

[Homeroids]

LOL - yet the same paper puts a mocker on a site that is actually got 2 cranes, piling all done and concrete poors going ahead? Oh and the same paper quotes the site as a 1 billion dollar project when it is actually substantially less.

So hyberbole in the one article (BHP), to sensationalise and another article on a site that actually does have quite a lot of evidence for doubt where WABN seems to think the credit crunch has no effect.

[acc521]

Nobody knows what the full effect of this will be or when it will turn around. All that is certain is that things will eventually turn around. Good times and bad times - that's the way the economy and everthing else in life works.

[jackso]

Saville boasts that it is a 1 billion dollar project so i dotn think the paper should be expected not to say it.

[samboy]

saville wouldn't know if there arses were on fire. I certainly won't take anything at face value if WABN wants to maintain a little credibility. Then again anything with the letters WA is kinda doomed not to be taken seriously.

[Dilaz89]

Leighton's new tack on Capital Square
7-October-08 by Rebecca Lawson




Leighton Properties Pty Ltd said it expects to lodge a bid for the Capital Square site after confirming that negotiations with the property's joint venture partners, Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown, have been terminated.

In a statement, Leighton said negotiations had ceased after the parties were unable to finalise terms.

Last month, WA Business News reported that Leighton would take a stake in the $1.3 billion project after submitting a development application with the City of Perth.

The application was for a three commercial buildings of 31, 18 and two storeys in height which would sit alongside a tower of 274 apartments.

Today Leighton Properties managing director Michael Barr said the terminated discussions related to taking a stake in a revised stage two of the project for 59,000 square metres of office space across two buildings.

However he said Leighton is expected to retain an interest in developing the site and is expected to lodge a bid for the site through the sale process.

"Unfortunately the owner of the site does not wish to progress Stage 2 of the project and has advised us that they will be putting that site to the open market," Mr Barr said.

"We remain open to the possibility of developing the site either solely or with a joint venture partner but are also pursuing several other opportunities in Perth and across the Australia."

[chrisaus]

http://www.realestate.com.au/objects/props/2249/5452249ml1223426936.jpg
http://www.realestate.com.au/objects/props/2249/5452249al1223426938.jpg

Massive Development Scale with Expansive Views - In the world's tightest leasing market.

CAPITAL SQUARE - STAGE 2
Elevated CBD site in the favoured West End.
Prime 1.0 ha (approx) with extensive frontage to Spring and Mount Streets.
Neighbouring Landmark developments QV1, Woodside Tower, Bishops See.
Multiple Development Options - Hotel, Office, Residential.
Potential floor space of up to 58,193 sqm which is above the prescribed plot ratio.

http://www.realcommercial.com.au/cgi-bin/rsearch?a=o&id=5452249&f=0&p=30&t=com&ty=&fmt=&header=&cc=&c=77533421&s=wa&snf=as&tm=1223457765

[WAuzzie]

so its already divided in 2 lots?

[Auxodium]

PART of it as shown will be sold

[AndyGM]

I thought all of what is shown there will be sold. The front triangle section on mounts bay road is the location of River Plaza

[WCG]

LOL look how small our city is!

By what is stated above then- leighton wanted to go ahead with the glass thing but saville didnt.

So the aartments remain.

and the rest will probably sit there for ages

and then eventually another crap building to match the crappy resi tower

[samboy]

Stop it!! On this forum it's my job to be the realist.

[Scraperfan]

I thought all of what is shown there will be sold. The front triangle section on mounts bay road is the location of River Plaza

Thats what he meant I think. Everything within the dashed line will be sold.

[Direwolf]

The low rise buildings should be built the DA only came up a couple of weeks ago so most of the site will be covered not sure how they are planning to allow for the other towers

[Dilaz89]

http://perth.wa.gov.au/documentdb/1008.pdf

Tower 1- 28 floors (excluding plant), 149m AHD
Tower 2- 15 stories, 88m AHD

DETAILS:
Two multi-level office buildings are proposed on the north east corner of the site,
near the corner of Mount Street and Spring Street.
The eastern building is the taller of the two, with 28 floors (excluding plant levels).
This building rises above the lower western building, which comprises 15 floors
(excluding plant levels). The eastern building has a central core to maximise external
light and views of the City, Swan River and Kings Park. An offset core is proposed
for the lower western building, to take advantage of its western and south-western
aspect. An atrium with elevated walkways will connect the buildings at the lower
levels.
At ground level, pedestrians gain access to the lobbies and central atrium via Mount
Street, the upper-end of Spring Street and the surrounding public plaza that connects
through to Mounts Bay Road via the ‘grand stair’ within Stage one. A secondary
‘grand-stair’ at the southern end of the office building allows pedestrian access from
mid-way along Spring Street.
A low rise pavilion style building with retail tenancies is proposed at the base of the
western-most office tower. The building will ‘activate’ the public domain and act as a
canopy to the office buildings, in order to mitigate against adverse wind conditions.
The pavilion building is aligned on the key pedestrian axis between the Mount Street
footbridge and the ‘grand stair’ in Stage one, allowing views toward Kings Park and
the Swan River.
A smaller (secondary) podium building is proposed toward the south-west corner of
Stage linking the development to the Stage one public plaza and commercial podium
building.
A convenience retail tenancy is proposed below the plaza, adjacent to Mount Street.
Pedestrian access to the tenancy will be obtained via escalators and a lift from the
pedestrian arcade running between the office lobby and the low rise pavilion-building.
The entry to the tenancy is designed to enhance access for existing residents living
in the Mount Street / West Perth localities to the west of the site.
The focus of the development at pedestrian level is the landscaped public plaza
which occupies over 50% of the site area and is accessible from all three street
frontages. The plaza will incorporate water features, street furniture and public art
relating to the site’s heritage.

[WAuzzie]

ah im horrible at this, what is that in simple language .. is that two new towers on the site where sky plaza was meant to be? proposal?

[docker]

ah im horrible at this, what is that in simple language .. is that two new towers on the site where sky plaza was meant to be? proposal?

i just went through the document, and it is the new proposal for sky plaza.

So river plaza which is the residential part from capital square will still happen. Then two office towers of heights atleast 149.7m and 88.3m tall will be built instead of Sky Plaza, and this is being proposed by Leighton...

[Scraperfan]

No No No.

Guys, jesus. This is the plan that was submitted just before the negociations collapsed and Saville dediced to sell the site.

The above DA will not be getting built unless Leighton win the bidding and then decide to proceed with this plan.

[Blindfold]

Leighton to bid for Capital Square
13th October 2008, The West Australian

Leighton Properties is planning to put in an offer on the Capital Square site that went on the market this week.

The company had been in discussions with the site owners, Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown, about taking a stake in a revised stage two of the mixed-use project but these fell through.

Leighton’s regional manager, Michael Barr, said the company expected to retain an interest in developing the site and would probably lodge a bid for it.

“We remain open to the possibility of developing the site either solely or with a joint venture partner but are also pursuing several other opportunities in Perth and across Australia,” he said.

Leighton’s projects total about $5 billion and include the $700 million Kens Project of 77,000sqm in Sydney’s CBD, the $280 million Green Square mixed-use office complex totalling 40,000sqm in Brisbane and the $420 million George Street office tower in the Brisbane CBD.

In Canberra, its projects include the $117 million London Circuit development and the $152 million Marcus Clarke Centre.

[WAuzzie]

aha ... so these two office towers were meant to go ahead if all went well instead of sky plaza? and we didnt know ..?

[CULWULLA]

so i take it the 149m.7m and 88.3m are RLS?
i forget what the site is there. its only low?
2-15m height dif? so this would reduce heights ,depending on where the towers are located?
i think main tower is highest part of site mount/spring st
so 150m-15m= 135m?
where is lower bldg located?

[samboy]

I think it's safe to say that you can scrap the above DA details. If Leighton wins the bid I'm sure the plans will be revised based on the market at the time.

[Scraperfan]

no kidding, cul why are you even trying to work it out, its not going ahead.

[CULWULLA]

why not going ahead? i thought it was latest proposal?

[jackso]

The part of the site that was for Sky Plaza has been put on the market by Saville. Thefirm that purchases the site will then most likely present plans according to their needs and the current market.
If leighton win the bid for the site then they may build the above proposal.

[BartBart]

The ad from today's West.
http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/6650/capital0001zb6.jpg

[Auxodium]

i have a few spare couple of million kiicking about... lol


means that the site can be used for those purposes skyline... ie be used for residential, commercial, hotel etc etc

[Skyline Art]

I know this may sound like another stupid question, but when the above ad mentions:

^^ Multiple development options? Does this mean there are plans already such as the ones presented in the forum? Or options where the buyer can choose what to do i.e. build hotel, office, resi etc?

I would have guessed the first;

[Scraperfan]

It means that a DA has been previously approved for certain options.

Any developer has the right to propose the same amount of floor space as previously approved by council from any previous application on the site.

[docker]

why would they continue on with the approvals? unless Leighton are going to build this proposal of they buy the site,

http://www.perth.wa.gov.au/documentdb/1017.pdf

this is in reference to the sky plaza development

98 (PT LOT 200) MOUNTS BAY ROAD, PERTH - REVISED
DEVELOPMENT FOR STAGE TWO (NORTHERN PORTION OF THE
SITE) COMPRISING TWO OFFICE TOWERS, LOW RISE
COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, A PUBLIC PLAZA AND 519 BASEMENT
CAR BAYS
RECOMMENDATION: (APPROVAL)

That:-

1. in accordance with the provisions of the City Planning
Scheme No. 2 and Town Planning Scheme No. 21, the
Council APPROVES BY AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY the
application for the revised stage two development
comprising two office towers, low rise commercial
buildings, a public plaza and 519 basement car bays at 98
(Pt Lot 200) Mounts Bay Road, Perth, as detailed on the
Metropolitan Region Scheme Form One dated 22 August
2008, and as shown on the plans received on
8 October 2008, subject to:-

1.1 the development not exceeding a maximum plot ratio
of 4.8:1 or a total of 88,958m2 of plot ratio floor space,
representing 20% (or 14,826m2) bonus plot ratio
which is being granted to the development on the
basis of:-

1.5 the rooftops of the buildings being designed to add
visual interest to the city skyline, particularly as
viewed from the south-west (Kings Park), as required
under the City Development Design Guidelines with
final details being submitted and approved prior to
the issue of the relevant building licence;

1.8 signs erected on the buildings being an integral part
of the design and scale of the development and
exhibiting a high level of design quality, with any
proposed roof signs being illuminated to enhance the
city skyline at night and details of all proposed
signage being the subject of a separate
application(s);

1.18 in the event of Pt Lot 200 being subdivided and
ownership of any of the newly created Lots changing,
easements being registered over the Lots ensuring
rights of carriageway and access to all shared and
common basement parking areas;


2. the application be referred to the Western Australian
Planning Commission for determination under the
Metropolitan Region Scheme as the tower elements of the
proposed development exceed the height limits applicable
to Pt Lot 200 under the Parliament House Precinct Policy.


BACKGROUND:
FILE REFERENCE: 2008/2247
REPORTING OFFICER: Dewald Gericke
RESPONSIBLE DIRECTOR: Peter Monks, Director Planning and Development
DATE: 9 October 2008
MAP / SCHEDULE: Map and coloured perspectives for 98 Mounts Bay
Road, Perth

LANDOWNER: Turnstone Nominees Pty Ltd
APPLICANT: Greg Rowe and Associates
APPROXIMATE COST: In excess of $21.5 million


SITE HISTORY:
The Stage one forward works on the southern part of the Lot have commenced and a
building licence application for the southern 41 level residential tower has been
submitted to the City.

The WAPC granted approval to subdivide Pt Lot 200 into two freehold lots on
29 August 2008. The boundary between the two new lots reflects the proposed
staging of the development of the site.


DETAILS:
Approval is sought to develop the northern portion of the former Emu Brewery site for
two multi-storey office buildings, low rise commercial buildings, a public plaza and
519 basement car bays.

The two office towers will be located on the north-eastern portion of the site to
preserve the view corridor from Parliament House, as established by previous
applications for this site. The eastern office building is proposed to be the taller of
the two towers, with 28 floors (excluding three plant levels). This building rises above
the western office building, which comprises 15 floors (excluding two plant levels).
The eastern building has a central core to maximise external light and views of the
city, Swan River and Kings Park. An offset core is proposed for the western building
to take advantage of its western and south western aspect. An atrium with elevated
walkways will connect the buildings from the plaza level to level eight.

At ground level, pedestrians gain access to the lobbies and central atrium via Mount
Street, the upper end of Spring Street and the surrounding public plaza that connects
through to Mounts Bay Road via the ‘grand stair’ within the approved Stage One. A
secondary stair at the southern end of the office building allows pedestrian access
from mid-way along Spring Street.

A low rise pavilion-style building with retail tenancies is proposed at the base of the
western-most office tower. The building will ‘activate’ the public domain and act as a
podium to the office buildings, in order to mitigate against adverse wind conditions.
The pavilion building is aligned on the key pedestrian axis between the Mount Street
footbridge and the ‘grand stair’ in Stage One, allowing views toward Kings Park and
the Swan River.

A smaller (secondary) podium building is proposed toward the south west corner of
Stage Two linking the development to the Stage One public plaza and commercial
podium building.

A basement retail tenancy is proposed below under the plaza, adjacent to Mount
Street. Pedestrian access to the tenancy will be via escalators and a lift from the
pedestrian plaza area linking the office lobby and the low rise pavilion building. The
entry to the tenancy is designed to enhance access for existing residents living in the
Mount Street / West Perth localities to the west of the site.

The focus of the development at pedestrian level is the landscaped public plaza
which occupies approximately 50% of the site area and is accessible from all three
street frontages. The plaza will incorporate water features, street furniture and public
art relating to the site’s heritage.

The applicant seeks a plot ratio bonus of 20% (14,826m2 of plot ratio floor area) on
the basis of the provision of public plazas, pedestrian access and links and public
views.

It is anticipated that this (second) stage of the total development of the site may be
implemented over two sub stages:-

1. Completion of the basement car park, public plaza and eastern office tower as
well as footings for the remaining tower (temporary landscaped to form part of
the public plaza).

2. Completion of the western office tower and completion of the total development.


Development Requirements:

The continuation of large-scale development in the St Georges Precinct (P6) will
reflect its high profile, its image as a group of landmark buildings and the
predominance of the Precinct as the State’s business heart. The design of buildings
will be such that they minimize overshadowing of nearby parklands and be of a high
architectural standard to reflect the status of the Precinct. Building heights should
step down in the western part of the Precinct to maintain views from Parliament
House toward the River and to protect the identity and prominence of the Mt Eliza
escarpment and Kings Park.

Building designs will contribute to an interesting and comfortable pedestrian
environment, minimizing strong wind conditions, glare and sun reflection in the street.
New development should provide protective podia with other elements, such as
street furniture, planting and public art.

The Building Heights Plan does not stipulate any height control for development on
the site, but identifies the site as being within the Parliament House Precinct. The
Council is to have regard for these building height requirements, but is not bound by
the policy and may consider the proposed building heights on their merit.

The proposal’s compliance with the relevant Scheme and Policy requirements is
summarised below:-
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/5317/plagenda081021ea9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


COMMENTS:

Public Consultation:

Due to the extent of variations to the City Planning Scheme plot ratio standards and
to the height limits under the Parliament House Precinct Policy, the application was
advertised to the owners of the nearby properties in Mount Street, St Georges
Terrace and Spring Street. One submission was received, raising objections to the
development. The objection raised the following issues and concerns:-

• The 20% plot ratio bonus should not be supported as the facilities provided do
not meet the essential criteria and performance guidelines under the relevant
policy.
• The three large buildings with minimal separation and the impact of the building
on significant postcard views of the city from Kings Park and South Perth.
• The development is an overdevelopment of the site with little amenity and
services.
• The building height exceeding the planning provisions more than six times.
• The wind impact needs to be assessed in terms of surrounding pedestrian
areas and streets.

These issues and concerns are addressed in the following sections of the report.


Conclusion:

The application for the revised stage two development of the site containing two
office towers, low-rise buildings including dining uses, recreation facilities and
basement car parking will add commercial, dining and recreation facilities to the west
end of the central city area. It will make for a more balanced development on the site
(adding to the residential component) and provide more daytime activity and
opportunity for use of the significant public spaces and pedestrian walkways. The
development will have a significant impact on the city skyline as the proposed
development greatly exceeds the height limits imposed under the Parliament House
Precinct Policy. The commercial buildings, however, will be significantly lower
compared to the recent previous approvals for the site and both the Council and the
WAPC have previously supported taller buildings in these locations.

The applicant is seeking 20% bonus plot ratio to provide the development with
14,826m2 of additional floor space. In exchange for this bonus the applicant is
offering to provide a range of public facilities and amenities including the public plaza,
pedestrian facilities and preservation of public view corridors. As such, it is
considered that the proposal warrants the awarding of the 20% plot ratio bonus.

It is considered that the design, quality and function of the public plaza spaces and
pedestrian links, the design of the tower facades and the podium level, the massing
and form of the development and the pallet of materials and finishes meet the
Scheme provisions and objectives.

It is considered that the proposed development provides a balanced outcome for the
site with significant community facilities and therefore can be supported subject to
conditions.

[samboy]

I'm no expert but probably just going thru the motions. Having an approved DA might give some indication to potential developers.

Bishops 2 submitted a DA a day before it was officially canned and I'm guessing the govt didn't tell multiplex on the same day as it hit the papers which leads me to believe it's standard practice.

[Scraperfan]

I too find it strange that the dates referenced are the 8th and 9th October... only 10 days ago.

[gotime]

One submission was received, raising objections to the
development. The objection raised the following issues and concerns:-

• the impact of the building on significant postcard views of the city from Kings Park and South Perth.

haha!

[samboy]

^^^ you have to be kidding me. It'll be hilarious if it was submitted as a joke but sadly there is one person in Perth (at least) that should not be contributing to the gene pool

[Blindfold]

Leighton tipped for two towers on old Emu site
The West Australian, 23 Oct 08

Leighton Properties is set to receive planning approval for a two-tower
office redevelopment at the old Emu Brewery site, despite the company not having bought the site. Perth City Council's planning committee this week recommended the company's proposal for linked 28 and 15-storey office buildings be approved, awarding a 20 per cent plot ratio bonus which would allow 88,958sqm of floor space. The plan includes a plaza and
low-rise commercial buildings to preserve views to the Swan River
from Parliament House. Leighton had been in negotiations with site owners Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown to take a stake in stage two of their Capital Square development but the deal fell over and the site went on the market this month for an estimated $50 million to $80 million. Leighton Properties WA regional manager Michael Barr confirmed yesterday the company remained open to the possibility of proceeding either solely or in a joint venture. "However, any such decision is naturally very much subject to price and terms, especially in the current economic climate, and needs to be weighed against other available potential development opportunities both in Perth and across Australia," he said. Jones Lang LaSalle selling agent Nick Stanisis confirmed yesterday there had been interest in the site.

[alvse]

I seriously think that site has bad karma.... so many projects over the years proposed, and so many cancelled.... maybe there is a burial ground on the site somewhere :nuts:

[dazzyd]

what does 28 storey and 15 storey amount to in terms of RL.

[Scraperfan]

its already been posted in the da 1 or 2 pages back.

roughly 150m and 88m.

im not liking the fact river plaza and office tower 1 will be almost the exact same height. now thats not good for the skyline form.

[acc521]

Agreed, CoP should give them more plot ratio bonus and encourage them to build a bit higher to take into account the overall effect on the skyline. When are the plot ratios due to be reviewed? Has that been put on the backburner as well?

[LilCub]

Any money says the whole project collapses and the site will be wasted with a 9 storey box like Bishops See.

[Dilaz89]

The site isn't running away and the office market will remain tight for some time.

[Scrawny]

Any money says the whole project collapses and the site will be wasted with a 9 storey box like Bishops See.

Argggh that would be horrible. we've earned a Calatrava masterpiece on this site with all the waiting and false starts.

[acc521]

Anyone who builds here will be richly rewarded in the future. Office vacancies are still ridiculously low and will continue to be so. It will be rent that drops in the short term (1-2 years), not vacancy levels. If anyone is going to be able to take advantage of the current situation and build now and save some costs it will be a heavily cashed up company like Leightons. This could be a legacy building for Wal King.

[Swan]

Anyone who builds here will be richly rewarded in the future. Office vacancies are still ridiculously low and will continue to be so. It will be rent that drops in the short term (1-2 years), not vacancy levels. If anyone is going to be able to take advantage of the current situation and build now and save some costs it will be a heavily cashed up company like Leightons. This could be a legacy building for Wal King.

true except when companies go bankrupt like we had the last major recession in the early 1990's. just as overnight companies are born, overnight they disappear and that because the perth economy is largely mining/oil and mining/oil related services. and soon as that collapses, companies cut back or are taken over by overseas and local operations are rationalised. seen it all before.

though one thing that i am surprised with is that given wesfarmers is a huge conglomerate these days, why is that they dont build/support a 40/50 storey tower. i am sure they could anchor a major HQ development given they are a major company in australia now.

[ryan79]

true except when companies go bankrupt like we had the last major recession in the early 1990's. just as overnight companies are born, overnight they disappear and that because the perth economy is largely mining/oil and mining/oil related services. and soon as that collapses, companies cut back or are taken over by overseas and local operations are rationalised. seen it all before.

though one thing that i am surprised with is that given wesfarmers is a huge conglomerate these days, why is that they dont build/support a 40/50 storey tower. i am sure they could anchor a major HQ development given they are a major company in australia now.

This is because most of Wesfarmers is broken up into smaller companies and run as separate companies. They also don't lease office space they tend to own it.

I used to work at Wesfarmers Insurance division and their whol headquarters was in Bassendean. Other headquarters are the same such as Kleanheat gas, Coal, CSBP being in other areas. The actual Wesfarmers corporate is rather small and located at Wesfarmers house on the Esplanade.

[Scraperfan]

Argggh that would be horrible. we've earned a Calatrava masterpiece on this site with all the waiting and false starts.

its a serious anti-climax. all we can hope for is striking designs.

[crave]

well i'd like to see wesfarmers own a 20-25 level tower on wellington st...

[desperaterobots]

Just build something with curves and colour please. Is that so fucking hard?

[city_thing]

So is the apartment tower not even going ahead now? I've not really been following the thread since it's so up and down. Can someone summarise for me?

[WAuzzie]

the resi is going ahead.

the site is now devided in two. the 2nd half where sky was has been sold, and the new guys are looking at building two office buildings 150 and 88m. thats that.

[Ari Gold]

Has it been sold?


I thought Babcock were submitting plans believing they will buy the site in the future.

[docker]

that was leighton.

but this article explains it all perfectly.


Leighton tipped for two towers on old Emu site
The West Australian, 23 Oct 08

Leighton Properties is set to receive planning approval for a two-tower
office redevelopment at the old Emu Brewery site, despite the company not having bought the site. Perth City Council's planning committee this week recommended the company's proposal for linked 28 and 15-storey office buildings be approved, awarding a 20 per cent plot ratio bonus which would allow 88,958sqm of floor space. The plan includes a plaza and
low-rise commercial buildings to preserve views to the Swan River
from Parliament House. Leighton had been in negotiations with site owners Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown to take a stake in stage two of their Capital Square development but the deal fell over and the site went on the market this month for an estimated $50 million to $80 million. Leighton Properties WA regional manager Michael Barr confirmed yesterday the company remained open to the possibility of proceeding either solely or in a joint venture. "However, any such decision is naturally very much subject to price and terms, especially in the current economic climate, and needs to be weighed against other available potential development opportunities both in Perth and across Australia," he said. Jones Lang LaSalle selling agent Nick Stanisis confirmed yesterday there had been interest in the site.

[Scraperfan]

the site is only on the market and no formal bids have been accepted.

[urbanwriter]

that was leighton.

but this article explains it all perfectly.

I shall take that as a compliment. lol

[dallastexjr]

Somebody kill me if this is the final design...

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

From The West online

Leighton to build offices on Emu site

29th October 2008, 6:00 WST

Perth City Council was expected last night to approve a two-tower office development on the seemingly jinxed old Emu Brewery site on Spring Street.

Leighton Properties wants to build a 28-storey office tower, linked to another 15-storey tower of similar appearance on the same site.

The catch is the company does not yet own the land, which Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown have on the market for between $50 million and $80 million.

Selling agent Nick Stanisis, of Jones Lang LaSalle, has confirmed Leighton is one of several companies to have expressed an interest in buying the site and Leighton Properties WA regional manager Michael Barr confirmed last week the company remained open to developing the site either solely or in a joint venture.

The council is set to approve a 20 per cent plot ratio bonus to allow a total of 88,958sqm of floor space between the two towers and an adjoining low rise commercial building. The lower buildings will preserve the views from Parliament House to the river.

Leighton had been in negotiations with Saville Australia and Babcock & Brown to take a stake in stage two of their Capital Square development but the deal fell over and the site went on the market earlier this month.

Saville is building a 41-storey residential tower on the adjoining block, which was meant to be the first of three such towers before the company ditched the remaining stages in March in favour of building an office tower.

The revised project was dropped earlier this month and the vacant 1ha site was put up for sale.

DAN HATCH

[acc521]

Well the design certainly ticks off all the "Perth" requirements.

Box - check.
Bland - check.
Uninspiring - check.
Devoid of character - check.

[Sanj]

Well the design certainly ticks off all the "Perth" requirements.

Box - check.
Bland - check.
Uninspiring - check.
Devoid of character - check.

originally a much better plan then turned to shit - check

[dallastexjr]

Brown - check.

[samboy]

let's face it, by Perth standards it's ok and considering the site (and generally perth) is cursed I'm guessing anything than a hole in the ground is a good outcome.

2 months from now when it all turns to shit and there's talk of scrapping it altogether we'll be happy to settle for this ;)

[Sanj]

2 months from now when it all turns to shit and there's talk of scrapping it altogether we'll be happy to settle for this ;)


u referring to the patented Barnett "depress them so much they'll settle for less" move
:lol:

[crave]

i am without thought and speech.

i think my heart just sunk.

* usually resilient and optismistic perth boy with big dreams and hope for his beloved perth turned into jaded and disenchanted soul - check. check.

[dazzyd]

SNAFU - Check
FUBAR - Check

[jackso]

At least give us something wth a slightly interesting design!!
And then put the two towers a little further apart and then link them with multiple glass bridges with glass floors every 10 stories.

Is that too much to ask for?

[crave]

it hurts too much to even talk about it.

[samboy]

guys seriously aren't you being a tad dramatic? The render isn't even that clear and it's not that bad. on par with bishops

[crave]

guys seriously aren't you being a tad dramatic? The render isn't even that clear and it's not that bad. on par with bishops

i felt that way about that render but i expected curves. :p

but yes you're right... tha finish on a tower like this is striking. however, it does little for imagination.

it actually reminds me of this crazy turd called an office tower that's in syd.

[dallastexjr]

Why couldn't they just go with the hot curvey design? Why did they have to get a 1980s obsessed student to whip up a new design?

[Dilaz89]

awwwww :(

Crap renders, I know but its very boxy all the same.

[desperaterobots]

And it's going to block the artful QV1 from view. Wow. What a fucking awful outcome.

Hoping a better render will give us something to latch on to.

[urbanwriter]

They don't own the site yet. It may never get built. There is only a slight suggestion they're even going to buy the site. I'm not convinced about this one yet. That is my personal opinion.

[izza]

its better than the initial 2 ugly barsted preposed, and was the oval one every really a possibility?

[perthgazer]

meh, it will probably never get built anyway

[chrisaus]

looks to me as if they have quicky sketch up a design to see what the council will allow while bidding for the site obviously the site hasnt been on the market long so detailed plans could hardly have been done up, i would expect a much more enhanced design if it was to go ahead.

[Scraperfan]

fucking horrible.

i feel ill.

[hayds]

language...Lisa might be reading this.

[tbor]

Meh, i was expecting nothing special. I'm still confident that NOTHING will be on this site in the next ten years anyway ;)

[samboy]

Some people never learn

Some facts

1. Credit crunch
2. Global recession
3. No precommitment
4. Site cursed (ok pseudo fact)
5. Leighton doesn't own the land
6. Approx 50% of pipeline projects in Perth have been scrapped/delayed

and we are worried about design?

[BeeJAy]

Considering that's a horrible photo of a render and that it's not 100% a box, I'm feeling optimistic that this isn't quite what it looks like, the colours at least look wrong because of the picture's quality.

[desperaterobots]

Some people never learn

Some facts

1. Credit crunch
2. Global recession
3. No precommitment
4. Site cursed (ok pseudo fact)
5. Leighton doesn't own the land
6. Approx 50% of pipeline projects in Perth have been scrapped/delayed

and we are worried about design?

Uh, whining and bitching about designs on here even prior to the crunch, recession, pre-commitment problems, sites without a "curse" etc still doesn't change what we finally wind up with.

Surely you're not suggesting that we all shut up until what we say makes a difference? ;)

[samboy]

Uh, whining and bitching about designs on here even prior to the crunch, recession, pre-commitment problems, sites without a "curse" etc still doesn't change what we finally wind up with.

Surely you're not suggesting that we all shut up until what we say makes a difference? ;)

naaah I'm with you, we can whine and whinge all we want (heck I do it all the time). My only concern is by doing that we inadvertently take it for granted that something is going ahead and when it doesn't we're bitterly disappointed.

[crave]

samboy i insist you desist!

your tolerance for acceptance in bland has been pushed to tha brink!!!

tha price of architecture is TOO HIGH!!!

:p

[samboy]

hahahah shudup you melbournite there is no price for achitecture in perth

[stadiumdesigner]

way better than that ugly resi piece of shit

[gotime]

eh! they don't even own the site yet. i think they've just drawn up these mock renders to attract some attention. IF this gets the go ahead i'd expect to see a redesign...

i think we don't have to worry too much about this one.

[Citystyle]

This > previous proposal.

That oval monster was a pipe dream.

[chrisaus]

looks to me as if they have quicky sketch up a design to see what the council will allow while bidding for the site obviously the site hasnt been on the market long so detailed plans could hardly have been done up, i would expect a much more enhanced design if it was to go ahead.

Ill repost this because no one seem to have read it, thought it was a pretty valid post

[perthgazer]

it was a proper development application to the City of Perth, you wouldnt waste money hiring consultants to prepare and lodge a DA for a major office development.

[chrisaus]

realise that, but detailed design drawings takes a long long time, they are obviously just a quick draw up thrown together to rush through council.

[Australiasia]

[QUOTE=dallastexjr;27284198]Somebody kill me if this is the final design...

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

:dance2:Wow look @ these great renders, two brown turds.....

[perthgazer]

well you may be right, just so it can show potential buyers of the lot there is support from council for a big development.

But it still takes a lot of time and money to prepare these sorts of things.

[Macorules94]

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

:dance2:Wow look @ these great renders, two brown turds.....



whats bad about them?

[Scraperfan]

well maybe you can answer your own question, by trying to list whats good about them.

then when you cant write a single thing, it will be more obvious to you.

[A r c h i]

I highly doubt that they will be brown. They'll most likely have the same glass as Bishop's. The bits that look brown are a result of reflections of other buildings/scene lighting.

[urbanwriter]

There's another render floating around and they look kind of golden. Can't really say what they are.
That image isn't a great one... I won't tell you how it was obtained but let's just say it was practically espionage.

[Sanj]

ooooh - in the spirit of The West headline writers:

"SAVILLE & LEIGHTON DECLARE WAR! ESPIONAGE ALLEGED!"

subheadline - "The curse of the Swan Brewery site strikes again"

The article could then make reference to whatever it is that Packer said about doing business in WA

Yes i realise it isnt the swan brewery but i had to allow for the expected factual error. Or perhaps a photo of a different site?

:lol:

Sorry Dan, i normally defend you but couldnt help the dig at the west today.

EDIT - any other headline ideas?

[crave]

lol.

[urbanwriter]

Geez Sanj, way harsh! lol.

PS the espionage was mine. I felt very James Bond obtaining that render... which i took a photo of using a miniature camera disguised as a pen.
Then I fired a grappling hook out the window and scarpered to a roof-top across the terrace on a rope...

[desperaterobots]

Such a liar. He's lying everyone.

It was more of a wire than a rope.

[Scraperfan]

all while wearing a pink leotard.

headline: urban panther strikes again
subheadline: war on photo theft continues.

[CULWULLA]

remember guys, those heights- 150m & 88m are AHD.thats above sea level.
someone will have to view plans to see actual heights above grd. im guessing 10-15m.
thus 135m & 75m?

[crave]

wonder if that basement podium will reduce tha height reduction.

[Auxodium]

Trump Tower in Vegas was gold like... i want a building like that!

[docker]

remember guys, those heights- 150m & 88m are AHD.thats above sea level.
someone will have to view plans to see actual heights above grd. im guessing 10-15m.
thus 135m & 75m?

actually it is ATLEAST that height so it might still be taller.

[docker]

i have to say i am seeing three towers here

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)

but i still don't think these look too bad. just imagine all the hype which went up after people saw the original Bishops See proposal, everyone was so happy here.


but think of it more like this, these are way better than tower two and three from the original capital square proposal.

and also if UW is correct and these are actually gold that could look pretty awesome.

[nazor]

i dont mind them. not something epic like the oval tower but still will add to density. will hold off full judgment till new better renders come out! :)

[ryan79]

I can't see anything wrong with them. Just need better renders.

[Auxodium]

dont mind the towers but ina different location in the city... maybe somewhere between woodside and CP to dense the place up... or in east perth :)

[Ari Gold]

They are going to be midget mothers. So its nothing special.

[Auxodium]

better elsewhere than on this site

[crave]

council will knock it back.

or else.

:D

[Homeroids]

Geez Sanj, way harsh! lol.

PS the espionage was mine. I felt very James Bond obtaining that render... which i took a photo of using a miniature camera disguised as a pen.
Then I fired a grappling hook out the window and scarpered to a roof-top across the terrace on a rope...

More like our Jason Bourne?

[tayls84]

i have to say i am seeing three towers here

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/1406/emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg (http://img338.imageshack.us/my.php?image=emubreweryproposaloct20aa7.jpg)http://img338.imageshack.us/images/thpix.gif (http://g.imageshack.us/thpix.php)



The third tower you see is River Plaza

[samboy]

I'm not sure what you guys are seeing. I can't even see 1 tower in the pic let alone 3. My be I'm psychic :lol:

[BIG MAN]

^^ nice :D

[Citystyle]

Some people never learn

Some facts

1. Credit crunch
2. Global recession
3. No precommitment
4. Site cursed (ok pseudo fact)
5. Leighton doesn't own the land
6. Approx 50% of pipeline projects in Perth have been scrapped/delayed

and we are worried about design?

Firstly i dont care for the shape of the tower but i do like the look of the facade in that render.

But i would go to say all those reasons plus more is what helps contribute to poor design.

[samboy]

I guess what i was trying to say was that all those reasons contribute to NO bldg.