search the site
 daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > OZScrapers > Local Projects & Discussions > New South Wales > Sydney CBD

Sydney CBD and surrounding inner-city areas



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 5th, 2003, 11:06 AM   #41
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 62,604
Likes (Received): 9979

great render Finn!!! the planner was spewing when this one was shelved! heres a pic i took today of 140m scheme. It goes to CSPC for talks tommorrow!



Fabian, the 12;1 ratio is set in concrete! it cant be increased -period! Its a planning rule brought in by CSPC back in 1990's.
the reason why the Bligh Apartments got approval at 235m is this--
-the tower has a 60m high stilts
-the floor plates are very narrow
-the top 50m is plant and concrete blade!
So really its only 125m/40storeys of residential use!
This is how it got to its extreme height!
Its 235m above Oconnel or 229m above Bligh street!
__________________
Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2020.. https://www.buildsydney.com/forum
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 5th, 2003, 09:54 PM   #42
Fabian
Sydney: World's best city
 
Fabian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 40,756

Great one Finn. It's one of the most realistic renderings I've ever seen. Looks very impressive.

They should also buy out the buildings on Hunter St to provide even more space for a tall tower.

And that last scheme. It's the worst so far. Don't you agree?
__________________
Find out why Sydney has become the city that it is today:

Fab Sydney Flashbacks
Fabian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2003, 04:02 AM   #43
finn
Moderator
 
finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,507
Likes (Received): 2193

<table cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0 width=98% class="quoteBox">
<td align=left valign=center> <smallfont> <b>Quote</B> <I>originally posted by Fabian </i></b> </smallfont> </td>
<tr><td align=left valign=top>Great one Finn. It's one of the most realistic renderings I've ever seen. Looks very impressive.

They should also buy out the buildings on Hunter St to provide even more space for a tall tower.

And that last scheme. It's the worst so far. Don't you agree?</td></tr>
</table>

Actually, the current 140m proposal kinda represents the designs for the site coming around full circle.

I remember seeing renderings for the site of very similar proposals (both in height/proportion/design) way back in 1997/98, for a similar office tower scheme.

Culwulla showed this when he was displaying the progression of proposals for the site in model-form, in the little glass case to the side, next to the Town Hall model.

After these initial proposals, the scheme suddenly rocketed to a 235m residential tower! Then back to office, at heights of around 180m (with spires to 235m), and now we're back at the beginning with this lame proposal.

We can only hope that the proposal cycle starts again, and this time stops on a full-height tower (residential if that's what it takes), and it actually gets built!
finn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 6th, 2003, 09:10 PM   #44
Fabian
Sydney: World's best city
 
Fabian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 40,756

Here is a picture showing the evolution of the proposal from a tower about 130 metres to a slender 235m tower.



Were either now going to see it shrink further and further, or it will be a merry ground where it will go up or down.
__________________
Find out why Sydney has become the city that it is today:

Fab Sydney Flashbacks
Fabian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 02:27 AM   #45
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 62,604
Likes (Received): 9979

Well it has to be a first! the council rejected the latest proposal for kindersley house in saying it was 'too short"! They want the winning scheme to be altered slightly to at least 170m high

winning scheme-




Also just on the potential developers, MERITON are enquiring about the site!

If they want to build the approved 60storey/235m BLIGH APARTMENTS they have until May to express interest or that DA is gone forever!! But they are also interested in developing the site as office use!!
So it will be interesting over next few moths.

Finns render- 235m Bligh Apartments- "it might make a comeback"??

__________________
Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2020.. https://www.buildsydney.com/forum
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 03:43 AM   #46
SinCity
Streetwalker
 
SinCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sodom & Gomorrah
Posts: 7,024
Likes (Received): 101

Wow that last render is fantastic. I really hope for its return, so lets hope Harry T can pull a swifty ....
__________________
“The definition of insanity is ... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” - Albert Einstein
SinCity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 03:55 AM   #47
fro
Registered User
 
fro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 788
Likes (Received): 58

Fabian, that render is bloody fantasticI wonder where u got that from? Anyway, let's hope meriton get's in on the act and can finance this tower. Imagine if it goes ahead...

*sigh* I better settle down... no use dreaming is there...?

But, DAMN!
fro no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 04:59 AM   #48
SinCity
Streetwalker
 
SinCity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sodom & Gomorrah
Posts: 7,024
Likes (Received): 101

I always wondered as to why World Tower never went to the max of 235m but stayed at 230m. Surely they could have whacked on some 5m high rubbish on the roof to get that maximum.

I have always suspected that HarryT wanted to keep that gap so as to develop a next Sydney Tallest, even they it would only be by a few metres.

I hope they by up the site, it would be a great site for the city's next tallest, even if it is by a few shitty metres
__________________
“The definition of insanity is ... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results” - Albert Einstein
SinCity no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 06:09 AM   #49
Mar
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

<table cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0 width=98% class="quoteBox">
<td align=left valign=center> <smallfont> <b>Quote</B> <I>originally posted by CULWULLA </i></b> </smallfont> </td>
<tr><td align=left valign=top>Well it has to be a first! the council rejected the latest proposal for kindersley house in saying it was 'too short"! They want the winning scheme to be altered slightly to at least 170m high</td></tr>
</table>

LIES! I can't believe it! It can't be true! SCC is meant to be evil remember?

Seriously though, this is fantastic news. I also hope that the 235m tower gets built. It looks amazing.
  Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 06:48 AM   #50
Fabian
Sydney: World's best city
 
Fabian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 40,756

A dramatic turn in events. Why a change of heart?

Also great to hear that the 235 metre proposal may be considered as well.
__________________
Find out why Sydney has become the city that it is today:

Fab Sydney Flashbacks
Fabian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 07:28 AM   #51
Noonos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

WOW! so much has happened when you dont veiw a thread. I never realised that Bligh Apts was so thin! almost like (Pangas?) House!

I really hope trigaboff gets his wanker act together and builds sydneys 2 tallest!
  Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 08:32 AM   #52
MrTall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 563
Likes (Received): 1

The 235m proposal for Bligh Apartments is pure goodness. But this would have to be an expensive tower and I'm not sure whether Meriton can pull off a Mirvac.
MrTall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 09:19 AM   #53
finn
Moderator
 
finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,507
Likes (Received): 2193

<table cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0 width=98% class="quoteBox">
<td align=left valign=center> <smallfont> <b>Quote</B> <I>originally posted by fro </i></b> </smallfont> </td>
<tr><td align=left valign=top>Fabian, that render is bloody fantasticI wonder where u got that from? Anyway, let's hope meriton get's in on the act and can finance this tower. Imagine if it goes ahead...

*sigh* I better settle down... no use dreaming is there...?

But, DAMN!</td></tr>
</table>

Actually, I (being finn ) got the render out of an Annual Report brochure from Sydney City Council. As the picture says, the scheme was listed under "Approved" at the time the report was released.

The tower proposal was called "Bligh Apartments" and as Noonos mentioned, was really thin from the angle shown there!

Previously, I would never have pinned any hope on Meriton picking this one up and building it to the quality it is - but now that they've been doing such a beautiful job with World Tower, I think it is a possibility!

The current design has about 250 apartments in it, so if Meriton screw around with the internal layout a bit they can probably bring the apartment count up to 350-400 apartments, and make it a viable project (by their definition of "viable" )!

Here is a picture of the tower in Sydney's northern CBD - back in the day when it was the current DA for the site and was expected to be built:



You can also note Foster's original design for 126 Phillip St in the picture, and Aurora Place still under construction!
finn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2003, 10:17 AM   #54
Noonos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

WOWSERS! BT's been around for ages! and approved for ages! it looks as the the cage was encloded by glass? im glad we wainted till now!
  Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2003, 02:00 AM   #55
hk-star
H shitai ka?
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Sydney/Tokyo
Posts: 36
Likes (Received): 0

Oh. Oh yes. re that 235m proposal. And what a great sign that the planner rejected the little midget building! Culwulla does this signal some kind of internal shift at the council? Politics? Does the outgoing Sartor administration want to go out with a bang or something?

God I love the "stilts" on that 235m tower. Gives it this real unique and quite high tech look. And makes the land look real valuable for them to be jamming everything possible onto it. I know this corner well and would just love to see that building!

Culwulla use your influence! Tell the planner the "word on the street" is that if the 235m resi tower isn't built there is likely to be civil upheaval, riots etc..

And the best thing is, that tower is about as far as you can get from that awful, omnipresent beach sand colour "fat girl" tower you see everywhere around here

hkstar
__________________
I say we nuke the site from orbit
hk-star no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2003, 07:04 AM   #56
Fabian
Sydney: World's best city
 
Fabian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 40,756

More model pictures. I took these myself





It's impact on the skyline

__________________
Find out why Sydney has become the city that it is today:

Fab Sydney Flashbacks
Fabian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2003, 08:05 AM   #57
Noonos
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

notice, you cant see centerpoint behind it, so maybe a 225m option would be considered? but im happy with 235!
  Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2003, 11:14 AM   #58
Fabian
Sydney: World's best city
 
Fabian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 40,756

Thats the only downside to building a 235metre tower on the site. The loss of Centrepoint and MLC.

Read Culwulla's post from earlier, Meriton could build Bligh Apartments, but the clock is ticking

tick..tick...tick...
__________________
Find out why Sydney has become the city that it is today:

Fab Sydney Flashbacks
Fabian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2003, 02:57 AM   #59
Grollo
Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: melbourne
Posts: 7,116
Likes (Received): 1012

Sounds like the Sydney City Council took my advice hehe. 140 metres is a ridiculous waste of such a rare prime site in the middle of the CBD.

How large are the floorplates for each of the office proposals? Maybe the developer doesn't want to build the winning office scheme because the floorplates are too small?

I know floorplates under 1500 square metres are very unpopular at the moment with most new towers having floorplates around 2000 square metres.

So if they can't have a fat office tower, maybe (hopefully) a tall apartment tower would be a more economically viable use of the site.
Grollo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2003, 08:15 AM   #60
finn
Moderator
 
finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 4,507
Likes (Received): 2193

<table cellpadding=4 cellspacing=0 width=98% class="quoteBox">
<td align=left valign=center> <smallfont> <b>Quote</B> <I>originally posted by Grollo </i></b> </smallfont> </td>
<tr><td align=left valign=top>Sounds like the Sydney City Council took my advice hehe. 140 metres is a ridiculous waste of such a rare prime site in the middle of the CBD.

How large are the floorplates for each of the office proposals? Maybe the developer doesn't want to build the winning office scheme because the floorplates are too small?

I know floorplates under 1500 square metres are very unpopular at the moment with most new towers having floorplates around 2000 square metres.

So if they can't have a fat office tower, maybe (hopefully) a tall apartment tower would be a more economically viable use of the site.</td></tr>
</table>

Yeah, I am of the same thought pattern as you on that one Grollo!

The total floor space for the tower was sitting at only 23,000sq.m I think! The current shorter office tower proposal (140m) and the previous taller one (170m) had the same floor space, its just that the taller one was on stilts, creating an amazing lobby space at its base.
finn no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu