#Proposed: Brisbane Square Tower 2 - 37st / 171m / Office

^^Just beat me to it.

Remember there is currently a building where this is proposed, it's not completely open space. Looking at how the ground floor has been designed I actually don't think it will differ too much to what is currently there!

The building looks great to me and I doubt it will have much impact on what the square is used for currently anyway.

Eastern37 said:

Remember there is currently a building where this is proposed, it's not completely open space. Looking at how the ground floor has been designed I actually don't think it will differ too much to what is currently there!

The building looks great to me and I doubt it will have much impact on what the square is used for currently anyway.

Click to expand...

It’s restaurants and cafes that are there currently, and don’t be tricked any new podium for a building like this will require a significant amount of space just for services. For a commercial building of that size you’re looking at 20 lifts and 4 seperate fire escape stairs. The footprint of all those along without any additional podium space will easily exceed what’s there already.

Yes it’s a nice looking building, but we aren’t that hard up for development sites that public space is the only option. Keep the design and build it somewhere else.

#Project: Brisbane Square Tower 2 - Office

KJBrissy said:

Is it in the planning scheme as public space, or is this a classic example of developers temporarily giving to the public when they don't yet want to develop to its full potential?

Click to expand...

I just checked PDOnline's interactive mapping, and you're right - it's not zoned as public space. Having never seen the DA for Brisbane Square (a bit before my time), I still wonder whether the inclusion of Reddacliff Place was a required element by Council.

That said, I wouldn't say this was planned all along, as I don't believe the current owners of Brisbane Square were the original developers.

nathandavid88 said:

I just checked PDOnline's interactive mapping, and you're right - it's not zoned as public space. Having never seen the DA for Brisbane Square (a bit before my time), I still wonder whether the inclusion of Reddacliff Place was a required element by Council.

That said, I wouldn't say this was planned all along, as I don't believe the current owners of Brisbane Square were the original developers.

Click to expand...

This was my thinking. Therefore, it would only be FSR (easy to overcome) and impact on Treasury that will be an issue IMO.

I doubt there will be much impact on the Treasury building as far as viewlines based on the current render as I doubt views from within buildings will count. IMO, it will only be dominance and distance and it looks to be more than a street width away going from that unreliable render.

IMO, there would be little stopping this from being approved. Whether I think it should or not I'm a little undecided, but as far as the law goes, they will find a way to make it work legally.

there used to be a public road beside the QSM bus tunnel. it was closed off as a part of the development of brisbane square and reddacliff place, but i wonder if the road land/parcel was sold to the developers, or kept by council?

something makes me think it was kept by council and used to create half of reddacliff place, and if so, i wonder how this tower is squeezing in between brisbane square and the road.

poor trevor must be rolling in his grave right now.

i reckon they're going to have trouble squeezing it in. BSQ1 has a footprint area of 2,600m2, and you need a big floorplate to appeal to tenants. i reckon there will be something tricky in the DA... i don't expect this one to be an easy approval like you're suggesting.