# Sydney OFFICE/resi markets

[CULWULLA]

positive news guys!!!


no wonder JB tower is going to be office. we need big office towers asap!

[below-0]

Thanks for the scan CULWULLA! have you got slightly larger version? -- that print is super small

I've been thinking a lot lately about the skrapers in the cbd recently being mainly residential. I think a balance is good. However what will happen in the future when the height restrictions are lifted due to space concerns (already an issue) and they can't demolish the residential blocks that are regarded low-medium height.

So much more reason to continue building tall commercial towers like the City One project!

[MILIUX]

Prepare for a new golden age!

This should concrete Sydney as the global city.

[Muse]

Hope you don't mind CULWULLA. I took the liberty @ below-0's request.

BTW It is from today's The Australian's Primespace lift-out ie Nov. 11, 2004.



The caption under the pic reads....

"Parra matters: Space equivalent to four Parramatta CBDs might just sate Sydney's hunger for office space in the next seven years"

[finn]

I agree with the problems where important regional centres are split between councils. this is a big issue in Hurstville where the railway line divides the CBD and is controlled by Hurstville City Council on the north side, and the more conservative Kogarah Council on the south side.

This is particularly pertinent when the proposal for the Supercentre redevelopment is considered, as it sits over the railway, meaning that both Hurstville and Kogarah councils have to agree on the proposal! Supercentre scheme model photo courtesy of Fabian:

[dynamoultraclean]

Now if there wasn't that stupid height limit...

[CULWULLA]

Originally Posted by dynamoultraclean

Now if there wasn't that stupid height limit...

im not sure if height limit has anything to do with it? if height limit was 300m, Sydney would still wouldnt have a DA ready to go. 235m is still a massive skyscraper! just until this year, Australia only had 1 235m+ skyscraper which is Rialto. And we still dont have any office towers planned to surpass Rialto any time soon. The only towers higher will be resi towers- ie- Eureka, Q1,.
The only 235m+ towers (to roof) currently planned in Australia is 240m Soul, 246m Vision.
So a 60storey office tower is a rarity.
Sydney might end up being leanient with areas for 235m., ie-outside of CBD. surry hills and south. That would be cool.
I know ms Moore wants CBD to extend to eventually Green Square! and this means taller bldgs at this end and slowly reducing to 20storeys.

[James Saito]

Great news! It's about time to densify the regional centres!
Especially Parra, it needs more tallies.

[below-0]

cheers muse! :]

I still have my hopes and sights for City One tower which would look superb from pyrmont or darling harbour, giving a good height impression towards Wynard. My concern is towards the height limit is if there's no more room as they're predicting the only logical way to increase space is vertically.

Perhaps if they built CBD-1 then the height limit would have to be on par with that. Skytower proposed was also a nice 400m tops.

[James Saito]

The PCA will release its "Initiatives for the Hunter" in February 2005 and then begin work on an Illawarra strategy.

What is "Illawarra strategy"??

However I bet that bitch Clover Moore will fuck it all up nicely ......

[below-0]

send her an email or phone - and tell her you want to live in a penthouse in a commercial skraper above 400m

[christarrant]

235m is just the maximum height limit isnt it ???? just think how much office space COULD be built in the SYD CBD if there wasnt those stupid silly little height limits all around the place eg the western side of the city and down near chinatown where its like 60m , 80m, 100m etc. Im sure there could be another million sqm built if it these were lifted.

[MILIUX]

I won't want another Hong Kong style planning where the city is just a wind tunnel overshadowing parks. Parks will become dead. Imagine, ya having ya lunch break in a park and all of a sudden it's just dark and miserable.

[AG]

Originally Posted by Matixvolta

I won't want another Hong Kong style planning where the city is just a wind tunnel overshadowing parks. Parks will become dead. Imagine, ya having ya lunch break in a park and all of a sudden it's just dark and miserable.

It felt all dark and miserable in some parts of Hyde Park when I was there in January, particularly the southern end. Whether this has anything to do with overshadowing of neighbouring buildings or not I do not know. Maybe it's just me.

[below-0]

How about having supreme public parks on the top of skrapers. That would have to be serviced by very fast large lifts.

[Avatar]

Originally Posted by Matixvolta

I won't want another Hong Kong style planning where the city is just a wind tunnel overshadowing parks. Parks will become dead. Imagine, ya having ya lunch break in a park and all of a sudden it's just dark and miserable.

I think I'd actually like that... Anyway Hong Kong for all its volume still has some nice parks and areas in Wanchai to eat your lunch. There is always the waterfront too. The city isn't about parks, it's about business - I couldn't give a plop if it was shadowed and wind-tunnelled, maybe if it was we would start to feel like we actually had a real city in this country. Sydney can be so much better, so much more dense and tall and still be well-planned.

I wish we could achieve the hustle and bustle of some of the world's largest cities, now that would be truely awesome. I don't see too much wrong with desecrating the natural environment in one small setion of our country, its better than sprawling the city on for hundreds of kilometres IMO. We have no Piccadilly Circus, Times Square or Nathan Road... it is about time planners and our city fathers took it upon themselves to make our city internationally moded with decent amenity - the creation of these areas and the fostering of the larger parks that already exist like the Botanic Gardens have far more worth than a few tiny parks dotted around the CBD IMO. Anyway it really doesn't take too long to escape the downtown area even for lunch if you really want it - although most people eat in the underground eateries anyway.

[James Saito]

Originally Posted by Matixvolta

I won't want another Hong Kong style planning where the city is just a wind tunnel overshadowing parks. Parks will become dead. Imagine, ya having ya lunch break in a park and all of a sudden it's just dark and miserable.

So you prefer Adelaid over Sydney?

[CULWULLA]

i asked a city planner today that if Sydney's height limit was lifted would we see more 235m+ towers, and he said of course not. Tp get a large office tower of resi tower of 200m+, its needs to be economically viable.This is what i thought.Sydney has recenty acquired a height limit scraper (WT) and its been many years for melbourne to get one also, the last 200m+ scraper was the 1991 boom.If it wasnt for Grollo, and his money melb would still be waiting for a scraper higher then rialto.Just think only FWP is over 200m and then thats basically it. the rest are 150-160m towers.
So height issue isnt a factor. its the economy!
Our next BIG ONE will be John Boyd tower at 50st/188m. thats after completion of KENS and 126 Phillip street next year. thats pretty good going i reckon.

[below-0]

Nice to see some optimism CULWULLA and you're on the money and Sydney has had quite a good number of decent projects. As I see it there's many new scrapers of increadible architecture being introduced into China's cities as their population, high density urban structure, large population and a rising economy is a cocktail is showing signs of Skyscraper fertilizer.

I am however sadened that Sydney is slowly lagging behind in tallest buildings, I remember when centrepoint was still in tallest books and posters. By 2009 there will be quite a few 400+ towers and a couple of 600+ scrapers around different parts of the world. We do however have some great new ones which are still respectively tall and I'm already a fan of the World Tower