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

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments

General Urban Developments Discussions of projects shorter than 100m/300ft. Also, please post all other threads not specified in other Development News subforums here.



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 June 3rd, 2005, 08:06 AM   #41
Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: United States... Not For Long :-)
Posts: 579
Likes (Received): 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline
The cultural district doesn't require any more reclamation. Environmentalists are more concerned with reclamation on the other side - Hong Kong Island.
Right, so why are people happy the WKCD isn't being handed over to a single developer? What does that mean in terms of using reclaimed land efficiently?
Cheese Mmmmmmmmmmmm no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 3rd, 2005, 07:42 PM   #42
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

The people are unhappy because of the lack of transparency using the single developer approach. The cultural district is not a property development, but it seems the bids contain significant residential content and perhaps pooling several developers together can help bring many good ideas together.

A lot of the anger relates to how the government is handling the issue. Transparency and accountability are very important after what happened with the backroom dealing for Cyberport.

The cultural district will get built eventually, but not until these points get sorted out first, albeit very political in nature.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2005, 06:49 AM   #43
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

Harbour protection policy goal reaffirmed by Government
Government Press Release

In response to media enquiries on harbour activities organised by some individual groups today (November 13), a spokesman for the Government gives the following reply:

"The Government fully appreciates and shares the community's aspirations to protect and preserve Victoria Harbour. As reasserted by the Chief Executive in the Policy Address delivered last month, the Government is committed to the protection and beautification of the harbour. The continued protection, preservation and enhancement of the harbour have been our policy goals.

The harbour, a symbol of the city of Hong Kong, is one of the most valuable public assets and a vital part of Hong Kong's natural heritage. The Government is committed to working closely with the community to enhance the waterfront areas of Victoria Harbour with a view not only to creating an enjoyable harbour-front, but also to facilitating other economic activities for the community and celebrating the harbour which embodies our collective memories and achievements.

The Hong Kong Harbour Day, with the Secretary for Home Affairs being the Patron of the event and various government departments taking part and rendering logistics support, is a good example of community-driven effort to promote the harbour for the enjoyment of all, and we are thankful for the community's initiatives.

The Government has repeatedly pledged that apart from the existing Central Reclamation Phase III (CRIII), Wan Chai Development Phase II and Kai Tak (Southeast Kowloon) Development, we will not consider any reclamations within the harbour.

It is also the Government's pledge to adhere strictly to the Protection of the Harbour Ordinance and comply with the 'overriding public need' test stipulated by the Court of Final Appeal in taking forward all remaining reclamation projects.

The Government's determination to protect the harbour and to involve the public in achieving our policy goals is also exemplified by the setting up of the Harbour-front Enhancement Committee (HEC) in May 2004.

With broad-based community representation, the HEC is tasked with advising the Government on planning, land use, development and enhancement of the existing and new waterfront areas. The HEC has already launched a number of public engagement programmes for the review of the Wan Chai Development Phase II and the Kai Tak development, as well as other harbourfront enhancement projects. It is encouraging to see the community participating and responding actively in the process.

Early this year, the HEC developed a set of Harbour Planning Principles, which has served as guidelines for the Government, all individuals and organisations in the sustainable planning, development and management of Victoria Harbour.

The Government will continue to work with HEC and to engage the community in enhancing Victoria Harbour and its waterfront areas.

Members of the public can learn more about the Government's vision by making reference to a leaflet entitled "Our Living Harbour", which is available for distribution at a number of venues, including District Offices and public libraries, and at the website link http://www.hplb.gov.hk/reclamation/i...Habour_eng.pdf.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2005, 01:27 PM   #44
Rachmaninov
Registered User
 
Rachmaninov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hong Kong Special Administrative Region
Posts: 3,188
Likes (Received): 24


Reliable?
Rachmaninov no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 14th, 2005, 05:58 PM   #45
Skyscrapercitizen
TIMBY
 
Skyscrapercitizen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 33,034
Likes (Received): 5432

Hmmm, not a very good idea all those reclamations in the center... Would be better to make a new island somewehre north of the western part of HK Island maybe...

What about a HK Palm...
__________________
Tower In My BackYard!
Skyscrapercitizen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 12:26 AM   #46
spicytimothy
...::HK.:.:.:.LA::...
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hong Kong / Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Likes (Received): 7

Never heard of the brown ones and the orange one is already scraped.

A lot of those pamphlets from the harbor protection groups have their statistics/info wrong... so beware :-/
spicytimothy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 01:18 AM   #47
superchan7
EOS 40D
 
superchan7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: San Jose, CA, USA / Hong Kong, China
Posts: 2,098
Likes (Received): 23

Throwing away the rest of Kowloon Bay would have been terrible. Good thing the orange one didn't pass. I have not heard of any plans like those brown ones. Causeway Bay typhoon shelter would have nowhere to go, and the Kowloon side brown areas would block the WKCD.
__________________
I speak English / 我講中文 / Ich spreche deutsch / 3y3 5p34k L337
superchan7 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 15th, 2005, 01:30 AM   #48
raymond_tung88
Registered User
 
raymond_tung88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,273
Likes (Received): 14

I hope they don't do the Green Island Reclamation... That would just be terrible!

BTW, last time I heard Causeway Bay was not being reclaimed... is this still true? Also about that missing "gap" joining Wanchai and Central, is that going to be filled in or no?
raymond_tung88 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 17th, 2005, 03:06 AM   #49
bs_lover_boy
POUND THE ALARM!!!
 
bs_lover_boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Hong Kong / Vancouver
Posts: 385
Likes (Received): 12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachmaninov

Reliable?

The one that Rachmaninov posted was the British Proposal before HK was handed back to China.

This one (below) is the one that the Government is currently thinking about, but that size will be further reduced from what I am hearing from different articles and visions from the government.

__________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NIMBY – Not In My Back Yard
YIMBY - Yes In My Back Yard
LULU – Locally Unwanted Land Use.
NOPE – Not On Planet Earth
BANANA – Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anything

Anymore????
bs_lover_boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 17th, 2005, 05:46 AM   #50
spicytimothy
...::HK.:.:.:.LA::...
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hong Kong / Los Angeles
Posts: 1,527
Likes (Received): 7

Thanks bs_lover_boy...

To clarify the above picture, the blue line is what some of the harbor-protection groups claim as the extent of proposed reclamation, and the yellow shows the areas of discrepencies from what the gov't actually proposed.

the green parts were what the gov't proposed, but it's still gonna be significantly less than that, e.g. the area around Kai Tak
spicytimothy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2005, 05:18 AM   #51
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

Fears raised over harbor plan's commercial features

Although harbor protection groups generally welcome new government plans to redevelop the Central ferry pier area, commercial development continues to remain a point of contention.

Leslie Kwoh
Hong Kong Standard
Friday, November 18, 2005



Although harbor protection groups generally welcome new government plans to redevelop the Central ferry pier area, commercial development continues to remain a point of contention.

"Commercial development should not be placed at the harborfront, because Hong Kong is never short of space for this kind of development," said independent lawmaker and Action Group on Protection of the Harbour activist Kwok Ka-ki.

Following a 10-month public consultation, the government-appointed committee Thursday unveiled four visions for the area bordering the Central- Wan Chai bypass reclamation project. The plans emphasize different themes: commerce, leisure, tourism and transportation.

Public consultation revealed about 63 percent of 651 subjects contacted in the central ferry piers area said leisure functions should be a priority. About 48 percent said tourism functions should be a priority, with an equal number saying transportation should take precedence.

In the next phase of consultation, the public will be invited to comment on the four plans and to choose from a list of proposed features, which include a new transport link to Central, shopping facilities and an observation lookout.

But Kwok warned that the options may have been designed to mislead the public into choosing a more commercialized design. "If you ask the public whether they want commercial activities, people will tend to say they don't mind a little bit," Kwok said.

But once a person checks the box for a commercial feature, he will not be able to control the quantity or size of that feature, Kwok explained.

"Then at the end of the day the government will say, `Look, you wanted to have commercial activities, so we put them up for you,"' he said.

Kwok said he is concerned continued commercialization in Central will add to traffic congestion and lead to further reclamation. He pointed out the objective of the Central-Wan Chai bypass reclamation project is to reduce traffic congestion.

However, a committee spokesman stressed that the draft concept plans are not development options but are intended to provide a basis for public discussion on development proposals.

Committee business sector representative Paul Zimmerman said the project's main objective is to create connectivity between all modes of transport. Possible transportation developments include a monorail, a remodeled bus terminus and elevated pedestrian walkways.

"We want to enhance the area to make it better for current users," he said, "and the second objective is to make it more attractive, so it will be a place where people will want to be."

Projected costs have not been disclosed. However, Zimmerman said the pedestrian deck will cost between HK$500 million and HK$600 million.

The committee is scheduled to deliver a full report of its findings to the administration in February. No timetable has been set for construction.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2005, 04:13 PM   #52
Aboveday
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Unidentified
Posts: 1,177
Likes (Received): 11

Quote:
Originally Posted by spicytimothy
Thanks bs_lover_boy...

To clarify the above picture, the blue line is what some of the harbor-protection groups claim as the extent of proposed reclamation, and the yellow shows the areas of discrepencies from what the gov't actually proposed.

the green parts were what the gov't proposed, but it's still gonna be significantly less than that, e.g. the area around Kai Tak
correct.
and now who is misleading the public?
Aboveday no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2005, 05:14 PM   #53
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

Tamar pollution prediction 'far too low'
Official environmental report 'pretends Central has a flat surface' with no tall buildings, say experts

20 November 2005
South China Morning Post

Official figures seriously underestimate the pollution levels people will face in Central once the new government offices are built at the Tamar site and the surrounding district developed, it has been claimed.

The Sunday Morning Post has learned that air pollution could be three times higher than predicted by the Environmental Protection Department's 2001 environmental impact assessment (EIA) report, due to miscalculations.

Annelise Connell, vice-chairwoman of Clear the Air, says pollution predictions on the Tamar site and the Central Reclamation Phase III were based on 1999 data plugged into a prediction model that assumes Central has no buildings.

"The entire air pollution assessment is useless," she said. "There is not a chance in the world that the real numbers are within objective. The CRP III and Tamar site project would not have been approved if the real figures had been used."

In the assessment, suspended particles (RSP) at the Central roadside station were not expected to exceed an average concentration of 80 micrograms per cubic metre and the Air Pollution Index was expected to remain below 100. In reality, the RSP figure has been as high as 257 micrograms and the API has reached 100 some 97 times.

The discrepancy may have to do with the fact that the department used air pollution figures taken at a station near SoHo instead of at the roadside station in Central. The station, on the upper level of the police station in High Street, is 18 metres above ground, while the roadside station at the junction of Chater Road and Des Voeux Road Central is 4.5 metres above ground.

"The air up there is obviously relatively cleaner," said Ms Connell, who is calling for the Tamar project to be postponed pending new assessments.

Meanwhile, air-quality-modelling expert Jimmy Fung Chi-hung says the government's pollution model "pretends Central is a flat surface" and ignores the fact that pollution gets trapped.

The University of Science and Technology associate professor said a "deep canyon" of pollution was created when buildings by the road were twice as high as the width of the road. "Pollution is three times higher than in places where air can flow freely. If you have doubts, just think of how bad the air is in Causeway Bay," he said.

"For a two- to three-lane road, a three-storey commercial building is high enough to create a deep canyon. Cars release exhaust very close to the ground. Central's canyon would be very deep."

He suggested the government produce another report using a newer model that considers the buildings. This would take about three months and cost $300,000.

However, the department is standing by its methods and findings. Asked by the Post for comment, a spokeswoman said the study had been conducted in line with EIA procedures and the public and the Advisory Council on the Environment had been consulted before the report was approved.

The Constitutional Affairs Bureau felt there was no need to delay the Tamar project, which a spokesman said would have "no significant impact on the air pollution in the Central Business District".
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2005, 03:31 PM   #54
Aboveday
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Unidentified
Posts: 1,177
Likes (Received): 11

Aboveday no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2005, 03:34 PM   #55
Aboveday
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Unidentified
Posts: 1,177
Likes (Received): 11

Aboveday no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 22nd, 2005, 03:04 AM   #56
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

Public being kept in the dark over Tamar site, say activists
22 November 2005
South China Morning Post

Three anti-reclamation groups yesterday accused the government of plotting to keep the public and the Legislative Council in the dark over the future of the harbourfront Tamar site in Admiralty.

The Society for Protection of the Harbour, the Action Group on Protection of the Harbour, and Friends of the Harbour said the planning process for the site would be worse than that for the West Kowloon Cultural District development.

They demanded an immediate suspension of preparations for building a new government headquarters at Tamar.

Independent legislator Kwok Ka-ki said: "Tamar planning is going to be a black-box operation."

He was referring to the decision not to consult the public on the design of the government headquarters in order to speed up its construction.

The groups accused the government of cheating the public and the High Court, given that it had promised that commercial properties would not be built on the land currently being reclaimed in Central.

A speech at a dinner for the Australian Business Awards three years ago by then-chief executive Tung Chee-hwa was cited as evidence. Mr Tung said: "There would be sort of a park or promenade for the public to enjoy the harbour from the Central area. There will be no commercial buildings on top of it."

They also cited an extract from a government lawyer's argument in the High Court in a 2003 case over the Central reclamation. The three groups said the counsel only mentioned building a promenade in Central and not commercial properties.

A spokeswoman for the Housing, Planning and Lands Bureau denied the allegation. She stressed the statutory outline zoning plan for the future of Central, including Tamar, had been adopted in February 2000 and nothing had changed since then.

The Administration Wing, which is in charge of the Tamar project, said tendering for the work had not started. "We haven't issued the prequalification exercise and haven't gone to the Legco Finance Committee for money. We have nothing to suspend."
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 23rd, 2005, 01:34 AM   #57
InitialD18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 414
Likes (Received): 0


I found this on a hkg website
Star Ferry
InitialD18 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 23rd, 2005, 03:34 AM   #58
vincent
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,380
Likes (Received): 7

Quote:
Originally Posted by hkskyline
Tamar pollution prediction 'far too low'
Official environmental report 'pretends Central has a flat surface' with no tall buildings, say experts

20 November 2005
South China Morning Post

Official figures seriously underestimate the pollution levels people will face in Central once the new government offices are built at the Tamar site and the surrounding district developed, it has been claimed.

The Sunday Morning Post has learned that air pollution could be three times higher than predicted by the Environmental Protection Department's 2001 environmental impact assessment (EIA) report, due to miscalculations.

Annelise Connell, vice-chairwoman of Clear the Air, says pollution predictions on the Tamar site and the Central Reclamation Phase III were based on 1999 data plugged into a prediction model that assumes Central has no buildings.

"The entire air pollution assessment is useless," she said. "There is not a chance in the world that the real numbers are within objective. The CRP III and Tamar site project would not have been approved if the real figures had been used."

In the assessment, suspended particles (RSP) at the Central roadside station were not expected to exceed an average concentration of 80 micrograms per cubic metre and the Air Pollution Index was expected to remain below 100. In reality, the RSP figure has been as high as 257 micrograms and the API has reached 100 some 97 times.

The discrepancy may have to do with the fact that the department used air pollution figures taken at a station near SoHo instead of at the roadside station in Central. The station, on the upper level of the police station in High Street, is 18 metres above ground, while the roadside station at the junction of Chater Road and Des Voeux Road Central is 4.5 metres above ground.

"The air up there is obviously relatively cleaner," said Ms Connell, who is calling for the Tamar project to be postponed pending new assessments.

Meanwhile, air-quality-modelling expert Jimmy Fung Chi-hung says the government's pollution model "pretends Central is a flat surface" and ignores the fact that pollution gets trapped.

The University of Science and Technology associate professor said a "deep canyon" of pollution was created when buildings by the road were twice as high as the width of the road. "Pollution is three times higher than in places where air can flow freely. If you have doubts, just think of how bad the air is in Causeway Bay," he said.

"For a two- to three-lane road, a three-storey commercial building is high enough to create a deep canyon. Cars release exhaust very close to the ground. Central's canyon would be very deep."

He suggested the government produce another report using a newer model that considers the buildings. This would take about three months and cost $300,000.

However, the department is standing by its methods and findings. Asked by the Post for comment, a spokeswoman said the study had been conducted in line with EIA procedures and the public and the Advisory Council on the Environment had been consulted before the report was approved.

The Constitutional Affairs Bureau felt there was no need to delay the Tamar project, which a spokesman said would have "no significant impact on the air pollution in the Central Business District".
Tamar site is Central Reclamation phase 2. NOT phase 3.
vincent no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2005, 04:05 AM   #59
hkskyline
Hong Kong
 
hkskyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 86,495
Likes (Received): 17807

Tamar HQ to be half the density of surrounding sites
Shortlisted designs may be made public to allay concerns

23 November 2005
South China Morning Post

The density of the Tamar development will be only half that of sites surrounding it, officials revealed at a Legislative Council panel meeting yesterday.

In an attempt to allay public concerns that the new government headquarters would create a wall-effect on the Admiralty waterfront, Director of Administration Chang King-yiu said the plot ratio would be about seven, while surrounding sites had a plot ratio of between 13 and 15.

She said the estimated $4.9 billion construction cost of the new headquarters and Legco complex was based on the latest information on building top-grade offices in Central.

Speaking at the planning, lands and works panel, officials softened their previously firm stance that shortlisted designs on the new headquarters would not be made public.

The government had earlier cited World Trade Organisation procurement rules that demand all commercial information in a tender be kept confidential.

Ms Chang said: "We will consult legal opinion and try to balance the interests of the bidders and those of the public to see if we can make public the shortlisted designs."

The government's plans for the Tamar site drew strong criticism from legislators.

Daniel Lam Wai-keung, of the Heung Yee Kuk, was the only one to voice support.

"The land has been left vacant for a decade. The government should start construction as soon as possible," he said.

But most legislators at yesterday's panel meeting had strong reservations about the project.

Alan Leong Kah-kit, of the Article 45 Concern Group, was sceptical of the government's design-and-build tender. "You want to build a landmark. But on design-and-build, the emphasis is always on cost savings. I doubt you can have a landmark structure through design-and-build," he said.

Democratic Party chairman Lee Wing-tat questioned why the government wanted to rush the project through.

Ms Chang defended the design-and-build approach, saying: "Design will carry as much weight as technology and cost efficiencies. Construction will be smoother if the whole project is done by one company. It will avoid unnecessary conflict."

She also revealed the government had plans for 500 parking spaces, with more than 100 allocated to Legco.

She stressed the headquarters would generate only 4 per cent of the traffic in Central by 2016. "The amount is very small in the context of Central, so it will not worsen traffic," she said.

Officials believed most people working at Tamar would use public transport, and there would be two footbridges: one connecting with the Admiralty MTR station and the other linking Citic Tower.

The panel will organise a public hearing on the project next month.
__________________
Hong Kong Photo Gallery - Click Here for the Hong Kong Galleries

World Photo Gallery - | St. Petersburg, Russia | Pyongyang | Tokyo | Istanbul | Dubai | Shanghai | Mumbai | Bangkok | Sydney

New York, London, Prague, Iceland, Rocky Mountains, Angkor Wat, Sri Lanka, Poland, Myanmar, and much more!
hkskyline no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 24th, 2005, 05:20 AM   #60
Effer
E Pluribus Unum
 
Effer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vanderbilt
Posts: 3,741
Likes (Received): 226

Another huge project in Hong Kong!
Effer 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 09:53 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