CBD NORTH - #COMPLETED: 8 Chifley Square (Goodsell Tower) - 33st/145m/office - Page 8

SYDNEYAHOLIC · May 5th, 2007, 09:12 AM

It still acts like an oven though.

Lord_Bertrum · May 6th, 2007, 03:15 AM

It certainly does, Personally I don't understand why there is this need to keep the sun shining on every bit of public space when most people will seek the shade.

CULWULLA · May 6th, 2007, 04:00 AM

its just to ensure some preservation of sunlight into public areas for the future

Brizer · May 6th, 2007, 04:26 AM

And, without a certain number of hours of sunlight per day, the trees die, ergo, no shade to get under. Trees are also quite handy in 'cleaning' the air and helping to maintain oxygen levels; sadly, neither concrete nor eternal shade fulfill either of these quite useful activities.

Joelby · May 6th, 2007, 11:23 AM

For the future? My god what are they, planning on building a bloody man made beach in Martin Place or something? It's supposed to be a city, not a god damn national park! Sydney is going to be eaten alive by Brisbane and Melbourne, not to mention all the Asian cities just booming like mad.

CULWULLA · May 6th, 2007, 11:26 AM

^ but they will be ugly and dark windswept caverns whist sydney will be equally tall and dense with lots of sunlit areas for people ;-)

SYDNEYAHOLIC · May 6th, 2007, 10:48 PM

Equally tall?

Our max height limit is only 235metres!

Alternatively, Sydney will be an ugly and baking and windswept city.

And we seriously will not be able to keep our lead in the long term as the economic "powerhouse" of Australia and with all our very restricting restrictions Sydney won't be able to compete in the long term - in the Asian Pacific arena.

rob_ · May 7th, 2007, 12:16 AM

I would love to see taller buildings, but I don’t see how these taller buildings will grab Sydney growth.
With barangaroo, there will be quite a bit of useable office space to be built, along with some other future building sites
.

LanceDriver · May 7th, 2007, 01:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord_Bertrum

It certainly does, Personally I don't understand why there is this need to keep the sun shining on every bit of public space when most people will seek the shade.

the sun access planes are usually designed to allow the winter sun through to try and warm up the area. this then has the affect of making it hotter in summer but that's where the "plane" trees come in. they are deciduous so they provide shade in summer and let light through in winter.

CULWULLA · May 7th, 2007, 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SYDNEYAHOLIC

Equally tall?

Our max height limit is only 235metres!

Alternatively, Sydney will be an ugly and baking and windswept city.

And we seriously will not be able to keep our lead in the long term as the economic "powerhouse" of Australia and with all our very restricting restrictions Sydney won't be able to compete in the long term - in the Asian Pacific arena.

only? World tower in 2004 was the 2nd bldg in australia to get close to this height. only Q1 and E have gone higher.
not like very city is being inundated with 235m+ skyscrapers?

show me the next 235m+ all office tower for Australia?
show me any over 200m?
show me any over 150m to roof?
Sydney's is going well. we will still get large/tall office towers especially in EDH.

zulu69 · May 7th, 2007, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rob_

I would love to see taller buildings, but I don’t see how these taller buildings will grab Sydney growth.
With barangaroo, there will be quite a bit of useable office space to be built, along with some other future building sites
.

Exactly. To simply equate tall buildings with economic importance is simplistic. Like i said in the other thread. Sydney has not decreased in importance and actually could very well have increased in importance. It constantly year in year out wins multiple awards and is as it stands the 7th most important financial centre in the world even beating Chicago (8th). This is an incredible achievement given Sydney isolation and small relative population.
EDH, will in the meantime provide the breathing space that Sydney needs for the next 10yrs. The planned review of FSR and height restrictions at Redfern and the CBD could then allow more office space. There is a slight over regulation when it comes to office devs and hopefully they can rectify it; but i'll stress (as cul does) that if the height restrictions were dropped tomoro there still wont be a 300m monster. Simply there is no need for it..yet. I think the restrictions in Sydney has allowed it to have such a large, dense and tall CBD. It really has forced developers to fully utilise the sites' potenial. Every new Sydney dev increases the height of what is already there, hence why Sydney on average is so damn tall and impressive. For comparison, NYC hasn't had the tallest since the late 70's yet it has done anything but degraded.
Also the 'global arch' policy will provide even more office space for companies that really don't want to be in the CBD (I.T. companies). It is often neglected that Nth Syd + Nth Ryde is the silicon valley of Oz.

I still don't understand why there is so much negatives against Sydney. This constant doom gloom is getting tiresome.

CULWULLA · May 7th, 2007, 03:17 AM

^so much negatives against sydney?lol
tall poppy syndrome?maybe/
everyone always attacks the ones at the top. everyone wants to be number one. everyone wants to kick number one while its down.
Sydney will always be the biggest/largest city in oz. if it cant go high, it will go wide or long. its a global city.

Ipggi · May 7th, 2007, 11:39 AM

Yes height doesn't always mean economic growth. Most of the huge buildings are nothing more then 'look at me' statements. Usually by cities that are desperate to present themselves on the world stage. The USA did in in the 1970's and earlier decades, Asia did it in the 1990's and now it seems to be the Middle East and Europe.

A good example is Sears Tower. That was designed in the 1960's for Sears (the retailer), the intention was for the company to eventually grow into the whole tower. They were the largest retailer in the world at the time and hugely rich. Unfortunately the expected growth never came to be due to competition in the retail market. So the building remained half vacant for well over a decade mainly due to office space over supply.

SYDNEYAHOLIC · May 7th, 2007, 12:58 PM

Hmmmm...very good points - maybe I'm just too worried about all this...maybe a little too gloom and doom so too speak.

But what's happening in some other cities around the world really is very mind boggling - though maybe quite ugly in most cases (large portion of development in Dubai). Oh well...

Now, very off topic, but what about new cultural buildings? THe city could really be spiced up with some lovely new galleries or museums. Frank Gehry or Libeskind or some new spicy cultural buildings designed in a very early 21st century style would go down well at the moment, right?

Melbourne is racing ahead culturally in Australia and seems to be busily establishing itself on the world stage whilst we in Sydney remain somewhat of a cultural backwater (world standards wise). Any thoughts?

Fabian · May 7th, 2007, 01:47 PM

At the end of the day its attracting business. If Sydney has the infrastructure to support a business, then they will set up shop.

Skyscrapers only provide space for a business to operate and for some businesses, tall skyscrapers simply don't provide the space or the facilities that the business may need for operation, and the cost of leasing space in the CBD may deter business too. Why pay $10000 a year per square metre when you can pay $1000 a year per square metre in a suburban office park. What would you pick?

zulu69 · May 7th, 2007, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SYDNEYAHOLIC

Hmmmm...very good points - maybe I'm just too worried about all this...maybe a little too gloom and doom so too speak.

But what's happening in some other cities around the world really is very mind boggling - though maybe quite ugly in most cases (large portion of development in Dubai). Oh well...

Now, very off topic, but what about new cultural buildings? THe city could really be spiced up with some lovely new galleries or museums. Frank Gehry or Libeskind or some new spicy cultural buildings designed in a very early 21st century style would go down well at the moment, right?

Melbourne is racing ahead culturally in Australia and seems to be busily establishing itself on the world stage whilst we in Sydney remain somewhat of a cultural backwater (world standards wise). Any thoughts?

That i will agree with you. I think Sydney needs more museums and cultural stuff. Whilst there is a lot going on in Sydney (i go to the Spanish and French movie festivals), Sydney Festival, Tropfest, night markets, plays, theatre productions and events all year round, there isn't a great emphasis and at times and most of the things i mentioned remain very low key. So maybe some more events, promotions and institutions are needed. I would love for the Gov to spend some money and say bring Van Gogh or Manet (no not Monet). Pizzaro was hear last yr and still spewing that i didn't get a chance to go.

Brizer · May 7th, 2007, 03:53 PM

Considering Sydney's distance from the key centres of London, Paris & New York, it is a thriving cultural and development centre. It is too easy to be sanguine and weary about our town and to always think other places have it so much better. Apart from the 3 above, few other cities have as busy a scene for so many strands of the arts. Have you checked out how much theatre is taking place here? Sydney is on the world circuit for ballet and opera aficionados - the only city in the southern hemisphere that is.
If you want Van Gogh, you got to Amsterdam; for Manet, Paris; and, if we don't get top historical (which Van Gogh, Manet & Pissarro are) shows, it's b/c the insurance costs are prohibitive. If the cost of insurance prevents Seurat's "Sunday Afternoon on the Grand Jatte" from being sent from Chicago to New York, what hope has Sydney? Besides, travelling to different places to see their treasures is one of the joys of life!!
Last Nov/Dec I was in Houston (& San Antonio and New Orleans) which has a slightly larger population than Sydney, and even though it has a well reputed ballet company and orchestra (all that oil money), there was bugger all on in theatre, opera, ballet, symphony or jazz concerts. There wasn't even a worthwhile local - now that the Dixie Chicks are persona non grata! - performer on show! It was a relief to get back to Sydney for its smorgasbord of shows and events - though Houston's Museum of Fine Arts & Menil Museum are worth a visit.
In Houston, there has only been a couple of fair sized towers built since 1990 so those bemoaning the lack of action here, try looking around with less jaundiced eyes and realize we've got it pretty good here.
This, of course, will mean nothing to professional whingers who would whine about the lack of whatever wherever as it is a genetic imperative for them.
I've had to leave out lots of examples as I was trying to keep it brief.

CULWULLA · May 7th, 2007, 04:23 PM

the design comp was held tonight. havent seen anything yet. il see if i can see something tommorrow.

CULWULLA · May 8th, 2007, 01:45 AM

saw the 5 designs. must say im very impressed.
lots of curves and atriums, skygardens etc. The tallest design was height of DB place! think --a 200m tall Pompidou centre!
not sure what judges are leaning towards. will find out this week or next.

Tony P · May 8th, 2007, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CULWULLA

saw the 5 designs. must say im very impressed.
lots of curves and atriums, skygardens etc. The tallest design was height of DB place! think --a 200m tall Pompidou centre!
not sure what judges are leaning towards. will find out this week or next.

Who were the architects involved in the designs?

May 6th, 2007, 03:15 AM	#142
Lord_Bertrum Be the Love Generation Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Sheffield, Sydney Posts: 590 Likes (Received): 1	It certainly does, Personally I don't understand why there is this need to keep the sun shining on every bit of public space when most people will seek the shade. __________________ Why do people bother with signatures?

May 7th, 2007, 11:39 AM	#153
Ipggi Here Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Woolloomooloo Hill, Albion Posts: 5,805 Likes (Received): 35	Yes height doesn't always mean economic growth. Most of the huge buildings are nothing more then 'look at me' statements. Usually by cities that are desperate to present themselves on the world stage. The USA did in in the 1970's and earlier decades, Asia did it in the 1990's and now it seems to be the Middle East and Europe. A good example is Sears Tower. That was designed in the 1960's for Sears (the retailer), the intention was for the company to eventually grow into the whole tower. They were the largest retailer in the world at the time and hugely rich. Unfortunately the expected growth never came to be due to competition in the retail market. So the building remained half vacant for well over a decade mainly due to office space over supply. __________________ Click... Last edited by Ipggi; May 7th, 2007 at 01:59 PM.

May 7th, 2007, 01:47 PM	#155
Fabian Sydney: World's best city Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Sydney Posts: 29,588 Likes (Received): 105	At the end of the day its attracting business. If Sydney has the infrastructure to support a business, then they will set up shop. Skyscrapers only provide space for a business to operate and for some businesses, tall skyscrapers simply don't provide the space or the facilities that the business may need for operation, and the cost of leasing space in the CBD may deter business too. Why pay $10000 a year per square metre when you can pay $1000 a year per square metre in a suburban office park. What would you pick? __________________ 'Cityrail recommends that you and your family travel by bus' - Cityrail

May 7th, 2007, 03:53 PM	#157
Brizer Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 7,893 Likes (Received): 136	Considering Sydney's distance from the key centres of London, Paris & New York, it is a thriving cultural and development centre. It is too easy to be sanguine and weary about our town and to always think other places have it so much better. Apart from the 3 above, few other cities have as busy a scene for so many strands of the arts. Have you checked out how much theatre is taking place here? Sydney is on the world circuit for ballet and opera aficionados - the only city in the southern hemisphere that is. If you want Van Gogh, you got to Amsterdam; for Manet, Paris; and, if we don't get top historical (which Van Gogh, Manet & Pissarro are) shows, it's b/c the insurance costs are prohibitive. If the cost of insurance prevents Seurat's "Sunday Afternoon on the Grand Jatte" from being sent from Chicago to New York, what hope has Sydney? Besides, travelling to different places to see their treasures is one of the joys of life!! Last Nov/Dec I was in Houston (& San Antonio and New Orleans) which has a slightly larger population than Sydney, and even though it has a well reputed ballet company and orchestra (all that oil money), there was bugger all on in theatre, opera, ballet, symphony or jazz concerts. There wasn't even a worthwhile local - now that the Dixie Chicks are persona non grata! - performer on show! It was a relief to get back to Sydney for its smorgasbord of shows and events - though Houston's Museum of Fine Arts & Menil Museum are worth a visit. In Houston, there has only been a couple of fair sized towers built since 1990 so those bemoaning the lack of action here, try looking around with less jaundiced eyes and realize we've got it pretty good here. This, of course, will mean nothing to professional whingers who would whine about the lack of whatever wherever as it is a genetic imperative for them. I've had to leave out lots of examples as I was trying to keep it brief. Last edited by Brizer; May 7th, 2007 at 03:55 PM. Reason: typo

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

May 5th, 2007, 09:12 AM	#141
SYDNEYAHOLIC Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 986 Likes (Received): 0	It still acts like an oven though.

May 6th, 2007, 04:00 AM	#143
CULWULLA Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 46,864 Likes (Received): 32	its just to ensure some preservation of sunlight into public areas for the future

May 6th, 2007, 04:26 AM	#144
Brizer Registered User Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 7,893 Likes (Received): 136	And, without a certain number of hours of sunlight per day, the trees die, ergo, no shade to get under. Trees are also quite handy in 'cleaning' the air and helping to maintain oxygen levels; sadly, neither concrete nor eternal shade fulfill either of these quite useful activities.

May 6th, 2007, 11:23 AM	#145
Joelby dink! Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,806 Likes (Received): 143	For the future? My god what are they, planning on building a bloody man made beach in Martin Place or something? It's supposed to be a city, not a god damn national park! Sydney is going to be eaten alive by Brisbane and Melbourne, not to mention all the Asian cities just booming like mad.

May 6th, 2007, 11:26 AM	#146
CULWULLA Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 46,864 Likes (Received): 32	^ but they will be ugly and dark windswept caverns whist sydney will be equally tall and dense with lots of sunlit areas for people ;-)

May 6th, 2007, 10:48 PM	#147
SYDNEYAHOLIC Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 986 Likes (Received): 0	Equally tall? Our max height limit is only 235metres! Alternatively, Sydney will be an ugly and baking and windswept city. And we seriously will not be able to keep our lead in the long term as the economic "powerhouse" of Australia and with all our very restricting restrictions Sydney won't be able to compete in the long term - in the Asian Pacific arena.

May 7th, 2007, 12:16 AM	#148
rob_ . Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: sydney Posts: 328 Likes (Received): 0	I would love to see taller buildings, but I don’t see how these taller buildings will grab Sydney growth. With barangaroo, there will be quite a bit of useable office space to be built, along with some other future building sites .

May 7th, 2007, 03:17 AM	#152
CULWULLA Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 46,864 Likes (Received): 32	^so much negatives against sydney?lol tall poppy syndrome?maybe/ everyone always attacks the ones at the top. everyone wants to be number one. everyone wants to kick number one while its down. Sydney will always be the biggest/largest city in oz. if it cant go high, it will go wide or long. its a global city.

May 7th, 2007, 12:58 PM	#154
SYDNEYAHOLIC Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Sydney Posts: 986 Likes (Received): 0	Hmmmm...very good points - maybe I'm just too worried about all this...maybe a little too gloom and doom so too speak. But what's happening in some other cities around the world really is very mind boggling - though maybe quite ugly in most cases (large portion of development in Dubai). Oh well... Now, very off topic, but what about new cultural buildings? THe city could really be spiced up with some lovely new galleries or museums. Frank Gehry or Libeskind or some new spicy cultural buildings designed in a very early 21st century style would go down well at the moment, right? Melbourne is racing ahead culturally in Australia and seems to be busily establishing itself on the world stage whilst we in Sydney remain somewhat of a cultural backwater (world standards wise). Any thoughts?

May 7th, 2007, 04:23 PM	#158
CULWULLA Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 46,864 Likes (Received): 32	the design comp was held tonight. havent seen anything yet. il see if i can see something tommorrow.

May 8th, 2007, 01:45 AM	#159
CULWULLA Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 46,864 Likes (Received): 32	saw the 5 designs. must say im very impressed. lots of curves and atriums, skygardens etc. The tallest design was height of DB place! think --a 200m tall Pompidou centre! not sure what judges are leaning towards. will find out this week or next.