DARWIN - #COMPLETED: City Heights - 10st / resi - SkyscraperCity
 

forums map | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Continental Forums > OZScrapers > Urban Spaces > Archives


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old March 7th, 2009, 04:59 PM   #1
Holy Frog
Registered User
 
Holy Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 116

DARWIN - #COMPLETED: City Heights - 10st / resi

Not sure if this warrants a thread, but its underway anyway.

This is the City Heights Building, that if nothing else, will at least wake up the darkness of Daly Street. It looked horrible on the impression, but might look good in the flesh.







Might make a good addition to this street.


Holy Frog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 7th, 2009, 05:30 PM   #2
ross_the_man
Registered User
 
ross_the_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Canberra
Posts: 3,756
Likes (Received): 89

Yeah it looks gross. Hopefully in the flesh it will be a lot better coz there looks like theres some really nice apartments in that street.
ross_the_man no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 7th, 2009, 10:37 PM   #3
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 70,798
Likes (Received): 20962

yeah 10storeys is good enough for thread. lkooks cool
__________________
Church Hill tower- 1797, Macquarie Tower-1818, St James Church -1822, Garden Palace- 1879, Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2021, twin towers- 2024, supertall 2025 https://www.buildsydney.com/forum
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old March 8th, 2009, 04:30 AM   #4
Holy Frog
Registered User
 
Holy Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 116

The zoning for this area is Central Business but I'm sure the people living in the new blocks wouldn't want those mechanical repairs shops in there.

Does anyone find it amazing that the power is not yet underground on Dashwood Place? Surely any new development of this size can include undergrounding the power for minimal cost.
Holy Frog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 10th, 2009, 06:09 PM   #5
seanoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 238
Likes (Received): 64

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
The zoning for this area is Central Business but I'm sure the people living in the new blocks wouldn't want those mechanical repairs shops in there.

Does anyone find it amazing that the power is not yet underground on Dashwood Place? Surely any new development of this size can include undergrounding the power for minimal cost.
city autos has been there as long as i can remember. if you don't like having it near you, don't live there. same as moving next door to a pub and complaining about the noise.


as for the power, the govt are trumpeting the undergrounding of the power in the northern suburbs, but not a peep about Fannie Bay, Parap, Stuart Park Larrakeyah. wonder why?

i'll give you a hint. when i was small they upgraded the sewerage in stuart park. at 10am every morning they put a blast mat over the hole and then used explosives to blast thru the rock. then the rest of the day removing the rubble and jack hammering new holes for the explosives. lol i suspect the inner suburbs will be really difficult and expensive because of the rock.
seanoff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2009, 03:04 PM   #6
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
The zoning for this area is Central Business but I'm sure the people living in the new blocks wouldn't want those mechanical repairs shops in there.
They'll be replaced eventually if the planning minister gets her act together and revokes the height restrictions. It will restore the value of the land.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
Does anyone find it amazing that the power is not yet underground on Dashwood Place? Surely any new development of this size can include undergrounding the power for minimal cost.
Lol...It's not minimal.
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2009, 01:30 PM   #7
Holy Frog
Registered User
 
Holy Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 116

You're both right - I don't know how "minimal" a cost it could be. I was thinking that if you're digging holes on an open block of land, surely you can just underground the power while you're at it. Two beers and my logic is gone....

As for the height restrictions, I love seeing Evolution & Pandanus and the smaller one on woods street. The next thing required is a lookout & kiosk out the back of Darwin Honda to take it all in.
Holy Frog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2009, 03:20 PM   #8
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
....As for the height restrictions, I love seeing Evolution & Pandanus and the smaller one on woods street. The next thing required is a lookout & kiosk out the back of Darwin Honda to take it all in.
Go along Duke Street and look over the top of "Frances Park" (where BP used to be). Also, go to Gunbar street in Bayview and look across the empty blocks (Fraser Henry's blocks) on the crest of the hill. Then do the same at night.

Darwin needs more tall buildings. If Professor Rob Adams of the Melbourne City Council has his way, Darwin CBD will be shackled to an 8 storey limit. If you live in Darwin, you should rise up against the dark forces of evil whom, as I write, are scheming right now to nobble Darwin. All planning forums held in Darwin to date have excluded height as an issue in the community. They've identified the streetscape as the issue. And yet Prof Adams and some of his Urban Design Advisory Panel sycophants persist in their evil endeavours.

Last edited by SPQRSPQR; March 14th, 2009 at 07:23 PM.
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2009, 04:28 PM   #9
Holy Frog
Registered User
 
Holy Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 116

Well I consider 8 storeys perfect outside the CBD. Can I have 10 of them around Casuarina Square?
But yes you're right SPQRSPQR, gotta fight against the darkness. Darwin looks alive with the newies.

Heres something about Prof Adams:
http://www.darwinplanningforum.nt.go...sentations.htm

I want 3x 45+ in CBD now!
Or maybe Just one Bank Of China Tower for now. In Cavenagh Street.

Last edited by Holy Frog; March 14th, 2009 at 04:51 PM. Reason: Edit
Holy Frog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2009, 04:58 PM   #10
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

http://www.darwinplanningforum.nt.go..._factsheet.pdf

Quote: "The Forum considered a range of views on the issue of building heights. A strong view is that height is less of an issue than good building design, particularly at ground level."
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 05:18 AM   #11
Holy Frog
Registered User
 
Holy Frog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Darwin
Posts: 289
Likes (Received): 116

I have to agree with that line. I interpret that to mean they don't rule out big heights which is great, as long as there are good amenities at ground level.

There is a section, I cant remember where exactly in Singapore that had plenty of 25-40 fl buildings, with not much useable on the bottom floors. The area felt distinctly dead, and feeling like a ghost town at ground level. I think the intention is to make sure there is plenty of public "stuff" available on the ground level, to encourage going into the CBD.


I can see is that we can go higher than 30 with Special Merit in the CBD. Has the special merit been voted down?

The The Northern Territory Government is cracking down on building height restrictions in Darwin's CBD.
The height limit currently stands at 30 storeys, but developers can build taller buildings through the special merit provision.
The Government is proposing to abolish the merit system and the public has a month to object.
Developer Ross Finocchiaro is on the Urban Design Advisory Panel and says it's one of several changes the panel is recommending to the Government.
"Most tall buildings will be thinner and this will mean that corridors will be preserved. It will also mean that growth can happen in the core of the city, whereas if we don't introduce those volume controls on the edges of the city or throughout the city, we will get the edges developed and the core will remain a sort of canyon."
Planning Minister Delia Lawrie says the changes would stop the redevelopment of the Frontier Hotel.

From: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...tm?site=darwin

Last edited by Holy Frog; March 15th, 2009 at 05:42 AM.
Holy Frog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 02:44 PM   #12
seanoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 238
Likes (Received): 64

if i had my way there'd be a special merit condition on all developments in Darwin.

there are some seriously ugly buildings, esp Synergy Square and the other buildings in that area. foul.

I'd like to see more nods in the direction of tropical design, esp nods in the direction of Burnett and his use of shutters, louvres, wooden floors. the street level design of Pandanas complex of buildings is lets get HUGE slabs of glass and make that the wall, yep lots of thought in that. Why not some shutters, some columns that look like pillars on a tropical house, some use of corrugated iron etc. give the building some character, play off the environment etc (see darwin central street level, im not a a huge fan of the rest of the building).

Evolution is a nice design, but not overtly tropical and the architect was obviously off his face one night. it has GREEN NEON up the central core on both sides, 3 dark purple neon squares on the top 2 floors, 2 orange neon Es at about level 28 and bright purple neon slim arches on the 4 floor podium. It looks like a bad 33 floor Xmas tree at night

seriously i can design half of the buildings in Darwin. lets get some squares, put on a balcony and aluminum sliding doors and windows, paint it a strange colour and off you go.
seanoff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 04:04 PM   #13
finn
Moderator
 
finn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,868
Likes (Received): 2880

I submitted a DA with a very nice 'tropical' design by Bates Smart for next stage of Darwin Waterfront back in November, but I have no idea of the DA status or if it will end up getting built in the current economic climate. I'll post a rendering if I come across one.
finn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 04:06 PM   #14
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
.....there are some seriously ugly buildings, esp Synergy Square and the other buildings in that area. foul.
I agree with that. Synergy Square is the reason that the NT Government felt compelled to act.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
I'd like to see more nods in the direction of tropical design, esp nods in the direction of Burnett and his use of shutters, louvres, wooden floors. the street level design of Pandanas complex of buildings is lets get HUGE slabs of glass and make that the wall, yep lots of thought in that. Why not some shutters, some columns that look like pillars on a tropical house, some use of corrugated iron etc. give the building some character, play off the environment etc (see darwin central street level, im not a a huge fan of the rest of the building).
Is that it? The meaning of tropical architecture? I'm not fan of cutesy "applied" architecture. A tall building is just that: They cannot be held up/down by tropical house pillars or embellished with irrelevancies of a bygone era. Openable areas are, mostly, impractical in an airconditioned building in the tropics. And with the emphasis on green buildings coming, they'll probably be outlawed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
Evolution is a nice design, but not overtly tropical and the architect was obviously off his face one night. it has GREEN NEON up the central core on both sides, 3 dark purple neon squares on the top 2 floors, 2 orange neon Es at about level 28 and bright purple neon slim arches on the 4 floor podium. It looks like a bad 33 floor Xmas tree at night
Behold, I think the neon looks great. The architect was a company named "Burling and Brown" of Queensland.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
seriously i can design half of the buildings in Darwin. lets get some squares, put on a balcony and aluminum sliding doors and windows, paint it a strange colour and off you go.
Most of the buildings in Darwin were not designed by architects. That's why they look a bit "bitsy": You know, a bit of this and that.

Blades are a fashionable element plagiarised from the Mitchell Centre. The non-designers out there just throw them in to give that "architecturally designed look" that numb-nut real estate agents (that wear suits and ties in Darwin(!!!) and drive Benz's and BMW's) say sell buildings. Unfortunately, that fake "architecturally designed look" is exactly the basket I dump calls from the public for so called tropical buildings: You know, the ones that apparently should have "some shutters, some columns that look like pillars on a tropical house, some use of corrugated iron etc". The world has moved on from these old-tech materials.
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 04:09 PM   #15
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by finn View Post
I submitted a DA with a very nice 'tropical' design by Bates Smart for next stage of Darwin Waterfront back in November, but I have no idea of the DA status or if it will end up getting built in the current economic climate. I'll post a rendering if I come across one.
Everything on the Waterfront just gets rubber-stamped by the NTG. They have to as they have a major stake in the success of the project (at the expense of private property owners on the CBD plateau).
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 15th, 2009, 04:28 PM   #16
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
I can see is that we can go higher than 30 with Special Merit in the CBD. Has the special merit been voted down?
Defence controls heights in Darwin. It's not likely that the 33 storeys of Evolution will be breached any time soon. The Special Merit clause will be removed because the planning department has had such a high turnover of staff that they have lost corporate knowledge and they have forgotten what the very strict special merit clause was about. They have practically misplaced the check-list.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
The The Northern Territory Government is cracking down on building height restrictions in Darwin's CBD.
The height limit currently stands at 30 storeys, but developers can build taller buildings through the special merit provision.
The Government is proposing to abolish the merit system and the public has a month to object.
Developer Ross Finocchiaro is on the Urban Design Advisory Panel and says it's one of several changes the panel is recommending to the Government.
"Most tall buildings will be thinner and this will mean that corridors will be preserved. It will also mean that growth can happen in the core of the city, whereas if we don't introduce those volume controls on the edges of the city or throughout the city, we will get the edges developed and the core will remain a sort of canyon."

It's not over yet. The property owners have been (rightly) up in arms over the crassly bombastic changes wrought by the Interim Development Control Order No.18 (IDCO18) and the unviable proposals put forward by Professor Rob Adams of Melbourne City Council and his Urban Design Advisory Panel sycophants. Fresh proposals were made by a rival NTG group that mostly went down well with the property owners but Prof Adams is not finished wreaking havoc with private property yet. Stay tuned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holy Frog View Post
Planning Minister Delia Lawrie says the changes would stop the redevelopment of the Frontier Hotel.

From: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...tm?site=darwin
Dead right they did and others as well: The minister's IDCO18 delivered directly face-to-face on Sunday morning, 4th of May 2008, to the owner of the Frontier Hotel killed the proposed Frontier Development and others that were on the drawing boards.
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2009, 04:13 PM   #17
seanoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 238
Likes (Received): 64

Quote:
Originally Posted by SPQRSPQR View Post
I agree with that. Synergy Square is the reason that the NT Government felt compelled to act.



Is that it? The meaning of tropical architecture? I'm not fan of cutesy "applied" architecture. A tall building is just that: They cannot be held up/down by tropical house pillars or embellished with irrelevancies of a bygone era. Openable areas are, mostly, impractical in an airconditioned building in the tropics. And with the emphasis on green buildings coming, they'll probably be outlawed.

but the balconies could be used as in Burnett with sliding shutters allowing a dual use as a closed but airy area or with the shutters open as a traditional balcony. they also serve a purpose in cyclones by protecting the glass inside the shutters from flying debris.

(this applies mostly to residential) I find it strange that Green buildings need to be air conditioned. surely it is greener to build to the environment and forgo the need for so much aircon. I know what has a lower carbon footprint and it sure isn't aircon. the tall buildings have the height to take advantage of the breezes. it the same with houses, everything now here is besser block with bugger all roof overhangs and smallish windows. great in cooler climates, but all it serves here is for the heat to be stored thru the day and then reradiated into the house at night. all in the name of keeping the aircon in, which has to work like all hell to compete with the heat coming out of the walls.



Behold, I think the neon looks great. The architect was a company named "Burling and Brown" of Queensland.

one colour of neon would be ok, one clash (green/purple) would work but all of that just doesn't work.


Most of the buildings in Darwin were not designed by architects. That's why they look a bit "bitsy": You know, a bit of this and that.

Blades are a fashionable element plagiarised from the Mitchell Centre. The non-designers out there just throw them in to give that "architecturally designed look" that numb-nut real estate agents (that wear suits and ties in Darwin(!!!) and drive Benz's and BMW's) say sell buildings. Unfortunately, that fake "architecturally designed look" is exactly the basket I dump calls from the public for so called tropical buildings: You know, the ones that apparently should have "some shutters, some columns that look like pillars on a tropical house, some use of corrugated iron etc". The world has moved on from these old-tech materials.
but the Mitchell Centre is pretty well done and at the street level and actually has a number of the design elements you so detest. it has a balcony, with pillars etc.

The new NAB building in Chinatown has some of those elements, as do the Post Office, the Minter Ellison (old TIO) building, Darwin Central, the new TIO building, Parliament House (as ugly as it is), the airport, the airport resort, Marrakai. all of these places make some nod to their environment and try to lessen the effect of the sun on the walls and at street level the pedestrians rather than solving heat thru horsepower.

The world has moved (in Darwin anyway) to square precast concrete. and buildings are "designed" to fit what can be done with straight lines. i currently live in litchfield and the units are nice enough in a bland way but the building won't be winning any design awards anytime soon except maybe from the AIE for ease of certification.

I'm all for new materials, but all that's happened here is that very old materials (concrete) are being used in the cheapest possible way while charging premium prices. show me some new materials (eg polymers), use them imaginatively do something with them, make the buildings green by lessening the load on the aircon by working with rather than against the environment. don't build tall boxes out of old materials with little regard to their environment, and claim that as good architecture.
seanoff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 16th, 2009, 05:50 PM   #18
SPQRSPQR
Registered User
 
SPQRSPQR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 201
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
but the balconies could be used as in Burnett with sliding shutters allowing a dual use as a closed but airy area or with the shutters open as a traditional balcony. they also serve a purpose in cyclones by protecting the glass inside the shutters from flying debris.
You're talking some mighty heavy duty shutters and fixings to do that on a tall building! Otherwise they potentially become flying debris in a cyclone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
(this applies mostly to residential) I find it strange that Green buildings need to be air conditioned. surely it is greener to build to the environment and forgo the need for so much aircon. I know what has a lower carbon footprint and it sure isn't aircon. the tall buildings have the height to take advantage of the breezes.
It's true that buildings without airconditioning are "greener" but the market still demands airconditioning. And office buildings don't work very well without it in the tropics: Especially with modern electronic office equipment sensitive to humidity and public servants that mostly come from elsewhere and are accustomed to freezing temperatures inside.....lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
it the same with houses, everything now here is besser block with bugger all roof overhangs and smallish windows. great in cooler climates, but all it serves here is for the heat to be stored thru the day and then reradiated into the house at night. all in the name of keeping the aircon in, which has to work like all hell to compete with the heat coming out of the walls.
I did not think this was a house forum but you can thank the wives of defence personnel for this fad. When Defence Housing did their first houses within Darwin's military bases some 20 years ago, they engaged local architects, including Troppo Architects to design houses. Well, they did not go down well with the defence wives. There were several problems: No airconditioning; creaky timber floors; open slatted floors (in the Troppo houses) with interesting views for voyeurs standing underneath the bathrooms and, their shape: They just did not look anything like what they, who mostly come from south, thought a house should look like. So now Darwin gets airconditoned blockwork houses because that's what 95% of the market wants. Interestingly, using the house energy rating software developed by the CSIRO ("Accurate"); if this were introduced unammended for Darwin, houses that have no airconditioning and rely on openings for breezes would actually score zero stars!!! Gerry Wood should be careful for what he wishes for as he might just be outlawing the tropical house. BTW, blockwork houses perform well under the rating system when airconditioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
but the Mitchell Centre is pretty well done and at the street level and actually has a number of the design elements you so detest. it has a balcony, with pillars etc.
I don't detest balconies, I just think that they are far too big and a waste of space that could otherwise be better utilised within an apartment. The Mitchell Centres balconies are the domain of filthy smokers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
The new NAB building in Chinatown has some of those elements, as do the Post Office, the Minter Ellison (old TIO) building, Darwin Central, the new TIO building, Parliament House (as ugly as it is), the airport, the airport resort, Marrakai. all of these places make some nod to their environment and try to lessen the effect of the sun on the walls and at street level the pedestrians rather than solving heat thru horsepower.
I'm all for external shading. It's the best way to reduce heat load on a building. You might be surprised to know that reducing window area has just as much an important effect on reducing heat gain for tall buildings.

Tall buildings provide shade by virtue of their height and promote down-drafts to street level. Apparently two things Melbournian Professor Rob Adams of UDAP wants to eliminate in his mistaken belief that, just because it is desirable to increase sunshine at street level and reduce down drafts in Melbourne, then the same should hold true in the tropics. Go figure!

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
The world has moved (in Darwin anyway) to square precast concrete. and buildings are "designed" to fit what can be done with straight lines. i currently live in litchfield and the units are nice enough in a bland way but the building won't be winning any design awards anytime soon except maybe from the AIE for ease of certification.
A matter of taste. Lines are just as valid as curves. And precast concrete is an economical way of building and meet wind loading design criteria.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seanoff View Post
I'm all for new materials, but all that's happened here is that very old materials (concrete) are being used in the cheapest possible way while charging premium prices. show me some new materials (eg polymers), use them imaginatively do something with them, make the buildings green by lessening the load on the aircon by working with rather than against the environment. don't build tall boxes out of old materials with little regard to their environment, and claim that as good architecture.
Modern concrete is not like old Roman concrete. Their concrete will outlast modern concrete. However, moves are afoot to introduce fly ash in concrete and thereby getting back to the more environmentally friendly concrete of the Romans.

SenatusPopulesQueRomanus!
SPQRSPQR no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2009, 01:00 AM   #19
CULWULLA
Registered User
 
CULWULLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 70,798
Likes (Received): 20962

hows this one going?
__________________
Church Hill tower- 1797, Macquarie Tower-1818, St James Church -1822, Garden Palace- 1879, Sydney Harbour Bridge -1932, Sydney Opera House- 1973, Sydney Tower- 1981, Crown Sydney- 2021, twin towers- 2024, supertall 2025 https://www.buildsydney.com/forum
CULWULLA no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 31st, 2009, 01:15 AM   #20
wilkiebarkid
Beautiful Mountain
 
wilkiebarkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 933
Likes (Received): 355

Quote:
Originally Posted by CULWULLA View Post
hows this one going?
Obviously very slowly!!!

Here's a pic from Realestate.com showing construction of City Heights with 'The Riveen' to the right.

wilkiebarkid no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 


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



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:24 AM. • styleid: 14


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us