SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 265 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
76,985 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
after restarting thread its time for new one.
first part >
http://skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=55319&page=20&pp=25
some recent clips and pix.


Vow to build hated tower
Annabelle McDonald
April 19, 2006

IT may be a "monstrosity" in the eyes of Brisbane's Lord Mayor, but developers of the contentious Emerald Tower project have vowed to start construction on the inner-city high-rise as soon as possible.

Sydney consortium Emerald Developments yesterday defended the aesthetics of their 77-storey Brisbane tower, proposed for an inner-city site the size of two housing blocks, saying it was a not only a "great looking" piece of architecture, but also legal.

The Supreme Court last week found the state Government had acted illegally in using "call-in" powers to block the project in October 2004.

Planning Minister Desley Boyle had found the tower would leave too great a mark on the city's CBD and skyline.

Having demanded the Government intervene two years ago, Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell ****** yesterday called on Ms Boyle to again block the project - this time legally.

"I continue to oppose the original project known as Emerald Tower, the 77-storey tower, the pencil, on a very small block of land," Mr ****** said.

"I have asked the minister to look at calling the project in again and reviewing the situation under the actual city plan codes."

But developer Eddy Faress said the only criticism of the project had come from the Lord Mayor and the tower would still be built.

"Everybody else sees great merit in the project ... it far exceeds the design of many other buildings being approved in Australia," Mr Faress said.

Ms Boyle had originally assessed the tower as a project of state interest, a process that Chief Justice Paul de Jersey found unlawful, and the council never made an assessment under its city plan codes.

Mr ****** expressed a view at the time that the council could not stop the tower. Mr Faress yesterday insisted it complied with the codes that existed at the time.

A spokesman for Ms Boyle confirmed the minister would assess the project under the codes.

While unable to say whether that assessment would use the previous codes, or the since-updated city plan, Ms Boyle's spokesman indicated the process would be more thorough and extensive than would have occurred under the council.

"We're going to look at it with fresh eyes," he said.

The Government is also likely to amend legislation to clarify the call-in powers, which have been used for a range of major projects.

While Ms Boyle's spokesman refused to say whether the minister still opposed the project, Mr ****** repeated his opposition to the tower.

"I know you walk into very difficult territory when you make judgments on architecture, but I think that I am on safe ground on this particular project," Mr ****** said.

"Many commentators have said the same thing as me."

Mr Faress said the developers would work with the government "to ensure the best development outcomes for the community".

The developers recently purchased a laneway next to the site, at the corner of Queen and Ann Streets, which had fuelled the controversy in 2004, given it was to act as a driveway for the residents of the Emerald Tower's 354 apartments.

Emerald Group site, with new Emerald tower page!

http://www.emeraldgroup.net
Some cool new renders of this awesome tower:















 

·
...
Joined
·
449 Posts
Another pic from the 'crone partners architecture' website.
http://www.cronepartners.com/queen.html



And a bit of a spiel from their site too...

550 Queen Street, Brisbane Australia

The Emerald Tower urban renewal project presents a unique opportunity through innovative planning and architecture to establish a new community adding a new dimension to Brisbane.

The site, as Brisbane gateway from the East interconnects the city’s grid, forming a composition with flowing aspects to the Brisbane River.

This landmark 85 storey tower creates an interplay of curved and rectilinear forms. This reflects its location on the intersection of city grid and free form street patterns, following the flow of the Brisbane River.
 

·
I only buy it for the pic
Joined
·
420 Posts
Quoted above it has now become a "landmark 85 storey tower". At this rate of jumping from 73 to 75 to 77 and now 85, it will be about 200 levels on completion! lol!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76,985 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
i think alot of floors are undeground? 10 levels.?i still think its approx 75 above grd.
in this pic, i count 70 levels for the tower, with 5 storey podium thus=75?
what does everyone else think?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76,985 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
colours and trim remind me alot of World tower. incidentally its same height.
but this is our tallest. Emerald will just be another tall in bris.lol

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,681 Posts
Yeah it's probably counting car parks, I would say it's 75-77 above ground and then 8-10 stories of carparking=85 storeys.

Though, who knows, maybe it has grown a few storeys above ground, can't rule that out either.
 

·
Dinosaur Planner
Joined
·
218 Posts
Locke said:
Yeah it's probably counting car parks, I would say it's 75-77 above ground and then 8-10 stories of carparking=85 storeys.

Though, who knows, maybe it has grown a few storeys above ground, can't rule that out either.

It would be the car parks they are counting.

It would not be a change in the design. Any change would need another application and I dont think Emerald would dare that.

On another matter I was quite negative about this situation primariliy because it undermined Qld's planning framework.

Now, just as I predicted several devlopers who's developments were refused by the minister after a call in have already indicated they are putting a court challenge. These are all awful development that should not go ahead under any circumstances, FAR FAR worse than the problems with Emerald.
 

·
Like whatever....
Joined
·
9,177 Posts
Great News - another big tall for Brisbane. Hey, our skyline will kick ass pretty soon if all these talls get built.

Great!
 

·
Its a sleepy little town
Joined
·
3,883 Posts
gerbilus said:
It would be the car parks they are counting.

It would not be a change in the design. Any change would need another application and I dont think Emerald would dare that.

On another matter I was quite negative about this situation primariliy because it undermined Qld's planning framework.

Now, just as I predicted several devlopers who's developments were refused by the minister after a call in have already indicated they are putting a court challenge. These are all awful development that should not go ahead under any circumstances, FAR FAR worse than the problems with Emerald.
What Developments, and where.. And why are they bad?
 

·
Dinosaur Planner
Joined
·
218 Posts
SoulvisionQ1 said:
What problems exactly?

Mainly some innapropriate residential subdivisions.
 

·
Dinosaur Planner
Joined
·
218 Posts
Malt said:
In what suburb

(a) Montville links development based on conflicts with Maroochy Shire Plan and the State Planning Policy on Good Quality Agricultural Land;
(b) Attunga Heights development at Noosa due to possible impacts on a wildlife corridor;
(c) Buchan’s Point development (between Cairns and Port Douglas) due to impacts on visual amenities;

Its the devlopers of Buchan's point that is considering the judical review.

These are only the most recent 3 call ins

I cant be arsed listing the rest
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
9,681 Posts
The real question is, what happens now?

According to the article, Boyle now has to reassess Emerald, and will look at it 'with fresh eyes' to see whether it complies with the town plan. Now as Emerald complies with the plan then theoritically that means she has to approve it? But is it that simple?
 
1 - 20 of 265 Posts
Top