SkyscraperCity banner

721 - 740 of 800 Posts

·
...........
Joined
·
23,969 Posts
IMO, the scale is fine. Site coverage IMO is fine (they just want it to be Impact Assessable so they can take it to court), traffic flow IMO is not an issue as it generally uses existing crossovers.
The only thing that I'd agree with is design.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
350 Posts
Imagine something like the London Shard on the river there.
I think, contextually, you meant this kindly, a net positive. I'm a shard hater, along with a lot of other people. Imagine how crap our skyline could, be, if we allowed something as bogus as the shard to be built here.

About the only worse choice would be the cheese-grater "melting cars at 400m since forever" or possibly, the butt-plug design of the gherkin.

I would rather we had the reichstag, if we're looking for modern architecture signature style. Berlin doesn't need more tall-ies, and (IMHO) neither do we.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,323 Posts
IMO, the scale is fine. Site coverage IMO is fine (they just want it to be Impact Assessable so they can take it to court), traffic flow IMO is not an issue as it generally uses existing crossovers.
The only thing that I'd agree with is design.
While they are looking to get it impact accessible (which, IMO, a development of this scale should be anyway), they are alleging some major issues regarding how Dexus are calculating their site coverage to do so. I believe it has to do with Dexus including their river leasehold area in their recorded Tower Site Cover numbers to lower their site coverage in a way that, it is alleged, could set a dangerous precedent for any future redevelopments along the river. Without the river leasehold area, they're looking at 70-90% tower site coverage, depending on how you read it.

If it is true that Dexus are trying to fudge the coverage numbers, that is something that needs to be addressed.
 

·
...........
Joined
·
23,969 Posts
That's a good point. If it ends up with a good design, then great! I'm personally hopeful for a full height design of the floorplate scale of Waterfront Place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,323 Posts
The opposition against Brisbane Waterfront grows with Penelope Seidler, widow of the late Harry Seidler and director of Harry Seidler & Associates, the latest to speak out against it.

GROWING OPPOSITION
The widow of the late great architect Harry Seidler has added her voice to the mushrooming protest against the proposed $2.1 billion redevelopment of Eagle Street Pier and Waterfront Place.

In a submission to the Brisbane City Council this month, Penelope Seidler says she is “horrified’’ by the plans put forward by the owner, property giant Dexus.

“It would obviously have a detrimental impact on the iconic Brisbane waterfront,’’ she writes.

Her opposition would seem to carry a bit of extra weight, considering she is an architect in her own right and still runs the firm Harry Seidler & Associates in Sydney.

Architect Penelope Seider.

Architect Penelope Seider.

Harry was an influential and award-winning architect before he passed away in 2006.

He left his mark in Brisbane in a big way, designing two of the CBD’s standout waterfront towers, Riverside Center and Riparian Plaza.

Dexus hopes to build two mixed-used skyscrapers as part of its “Waterfront Brisbane’’ scheme, which would include new ground-level retail spaces and a redesigned riverside walkway.

But Penelope says the plan is “anathema’’ to the city skyline.

“Waterfront Brisbane appears as an over-scaled wall of glass positioned without any regard to the established principles respected in the design of all other towers to their mutual benefit and to the benefit of this part of Brisbane,’’ she says.

“The building shape forms a wall separating the city from the river.’’

Her opposition follows objections lodged this month by owners of multimillion-dollar units in Riparian Plaza, including jobs queen Sarina Russo and former Collection House boss John Pearce.

Building owner Bloomberg Incorporation has also weighed in, slamming the Dexus scheme as too intense and “Sydney-centric’’.

Dexus has declined to comment on the criticism.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,454 Posts
But Penelope says the plan is “anathema’’ to the city skyline.

“Waterfront Brisbane appears as an over-scaled wall of glass positioned without any regard to the established principles respected in the design of all other towers to their mutual benefit and to the benefit of this part of Brisbane,’’ she says.

“The building shape forms a wall separating the city from the river.’’
I 100% agree with her.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,323 Posts
^^ The more I've read the criticism coming out, the more I've tended to agree with it. But now with someone the calibre of Penelope Seidler weighing in, I think more than ever that serious questions need to be asked of the Dexus plan.
 

·
New Urbanist
Joined
·
5,487 Posts
I don't understand why a tower going next to it is going to detract from architecture? it will complement the design.

While the proposed towers designs are quite 'lazy' and not very inspiring, i disagree with the notion that 'nothing can go next to it'.
 

·
Yeah but No!!
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
I think Dexus should have fought harder to use the airspace above Eagle St, even if they didn't close Eagle St, that would allow a re-orientation of each building which surely could give a better outcome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Out of the 3 proposals in the past few years I think the first would be the design that compliments surroundings.

Whereas with the second proposal floor space is prioritised over any unique design choices.

Third and finally the most recent proposal is where dexus is at today, and I could not agree more with a revision of the overall design. The towers look great and have decent height to them, but for a billion dollar development they are lacking anything worthy of being on the waterfront. Maybe eventually we will see an updated design but for now I could not agree more with Penelope.

2018:
673434


2019:
673438


2020:
673442
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,323 Posts
I don't understand why a tower going next to it is going to detract from architecture? it will complement the design.

While the proposed towers designs are quite 'lazy' and not very inspiring, i disagree with the notion that 'nothing can go next to it'.
Penelope is not arguing that nothing can go next to Riparian, she's arguing that what is being proposed is simply wrong for the location and flies in the face of 40 years worth of design principles developed around and for the Brisbane River.
 

·
Registered
Tall building enthusiast
Joined
·
647 Posts
Most on here disagreed with Sarina Russo's comments a few weeks ago, why the change of tune now?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
Precisely what I was going to say bribri. I have no quarrel against this area being developed however, someone who is upset about their views being built over is entirely different from the perspective of someone who spent their life submerged in the architectural field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
952 Posts
Her 'opinion' seems to be based on nothing but two statements that the proposal is 'horrible' and that it is against design principles creating a wall?? Is that it? Seriously, that is the extent of her argument?
 

·
I only buy it for the pic
Joined
·
388 Posts
I'd like to see a single large tower with the rest open space/ restaurants/ bars/ greenery on the podium levels. I did do a brief design copying Waterfront place and expanding all dimensions at scale by 150%. I reckon it looked pretty good and preserved sight lines. Maybe change the colour to a dark green (glass to be approved by this forum first of course!)
 

·
...........
Joined
·
23,969 Posts
So kitch, but I actually absolutely love it! Privides separation of towers, large floorplates, a nod to the past and will even maintain view lines along Maru Street!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,323 Posts
Her 'opinion' seems to be based on nothing but two statements that the proposal is 'horrible' and that it is against design principles creating a wall?? Is that it? Seriously, that is the extent of her argument?
Firstly, her opinion comes as an awarded architect of over 50 years experience and as both the personal and professional partner to Harry Seidler.

Secondly, that is just what the newspaper article paraphrased. Here it the entire text from her submission:

Dear Ms Kruze,

It has come to my attention that Council has received a Development Application to build two towers “Waterfront Brisbane” on the site of Eagle Street Pier.

I have examined the proposal and I am horrified that this development would be considered, it would obviously have a detrimental impact on the iconic Brisbane waterfront.

My late husband Harry Seidler was the architect for the first major building in Brisbane to open the city to the waterfront; the Riverside Centre is now over thirty years old.

The Riverside Centre was master planned anticipating the construction of a number of other tall buildings in the precinct. The form and placement of the Riverside Centre was established not only to maximise its outlook to the river and the Story Bridge, but in accordance with the master-plan, to allow view sharing from other adjacent waterfront sites and to maximise the openness of the river to the city spatially.

What is now proposed is an anathema - “Waterfront Brisbane” appears as an over-scaled wall of glass positioned without any regard to the established principles respected in the design of all other towers to their mutual benefit and to the benefit of this part of Brisbane. The proposed design seems to turn its back in disrespect of Brisbane: “if you are not on our waterfront, you don’t exist”. The building shape forms a wall separating the city from the river.

Harry Seidler was also the architect for Riparian Plaza. The “Waterfront Brisbane” proposal has particularly adverse impacts on Riparian Plaza - its form does not coexist; it seeks to dominate and disadvantage Riparian Plaza by trespassing upon the established Brisbane River spatial corridor. The “Waterfront Brisbane” proposal should not be granted approval in its present design.

Yours sincerely,

HARRY SEIDLER & ASSOCIATES

PENELOPE SEIDLER AM LFRAIA
Architect NSW 2321
 
721 - 740 of 800 Posts
Top