[U/C] Festival Plaza Redevelopment | $800 million

[Waewick]

Hopefully whichever one wins, it's on architectural merit, not government interference

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

[SRW]

Hopefully whichever one wins, it's on architectural merit, not government interference

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

It's a government contract, so I don't know how you'd limit 'interference'. And I'm not sure architectural merit is a leading concern for Services Australia.

For my own, I'd rather see Charter Hall's project get up (with heritage building retained) as I both dislike Walker's oversized proposal and think that the Southern Cross rebuild would better benefit the city.

[Waewick]

Hopefully whichever one wins, it's on architectural merit, not government interference

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

It's a government contract, so I don't know how you'd limit 'interference'. And I'm not sure architectural merit is a leading concern for Services Australia.

For my own, I'd rather see Charter Hall's project get up (with heritage building retained) as I both dislike Walker's oversized proposal and think that the Southern Cross rebuild would better benefit the city.

So we have a federal agency looking for floor space between competing interests with one providing a State Government an opportunity to 'finish' a project.

Said state government is also the same colour as Federal Government.

Do I need to spell it out even more for you?

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

[SRW]

Hopefully whichever one wins, it's on architectural merit, not government interference

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

It's a government contract, so I don't know how you'd limit 'interference'. And I'm not sure architectural merit is a leading concern for Services Australia.

For my own, I'd rather see Charter Hall's project get up (with heritage building retained) as I both dislike Walker's oversized proposal and think that the Southern Cross rebuild would better benefit the city.

So we have a federal agency looking for floor space between competing interests with one providing a State Government an opportunity to 'finish' a project.

Said state government is also the same colour as Federal Government.

Do I need to spell it out even more for you?

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

If you reread my post, you'll see this was entirely an exercise for yourself. I've no illusions about the probity standards of this government.

[AndyWelsh]

From today:








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Norman]

Another variation has been lodged with SCAP, making a few small material changes and removing the courtyard between Parliament House and the retail component, instead creating a back lane between the two buildings.

First, the new renders
















Now, the Before and After

Before


After


Before


After






Before


After


Before


After






Before


After


After

[Patrick_27]

More plane trees?! Are they not capable of planting anything else? They've literally removed proposed jacarandas in favour of more plane trees.

And so begins the dumbing down and cost saving of this project, an already bland office tower and retail building is set to become even more bland. And how do they expect to find nine hospitality tenants to service the spaces made available?

There is nothing new or exciting about this proposal, it's been done before so many times elsewhere.

[citywatcher]

It will certainly end up a b grade cafe area and the tower will probably never happen

Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

[Nathan]

"Dear architects, we appreciate the efforts you put in to give us a nondescript tower, but we feel the louvres are adding too much interest. Can you please just make it a glass box? Ta."

[Pikey]

I'm probably going against the grain here, but I quite like the revision. If the materials are of high quality, with the facade having low transparency, I actually reckon it could look quite striking. The view of the northern facing skyline will be massively more modern, with this tower all but blocking out Westpac.

just my two bobs.

[Algernon]

"Dear architects, we appreciate the efforts you put in to give us a nondescript tower, but we feel the louvres are adding too much interest. Can you please just make it a glass box? Ta."

Nailed it.

[how good is he]

I have this feeling that no matter how many glossy renders they put out, this whole re-development will end up looking nothing like the images portrayed.

[AndyWelsh]

Thanks for this update Norman, particularly all the before and afters. So interesting to see these changes side by side.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SRW]

Thanks for the update Norman. Do you have a link to the file?

As for the changes, I'll concede the appearance of the ground level interface of both the tower and retail space is marginally better, but I resent that they've done this by stealing not just more public space but landscaped public space. You'll remember that the revised plaza plans also reduced grassed and planted areas, so these changes add weight to the fear the area will be a concrete paradise with no relief from sun and wind and few pleasant places to actually gather (not unlike the old plaza).

The tower goes from bad to worse. At least the old design made a more coherent attempt at breaking up the massing into discrete tower forms. This is giving me flashbacks to the disjointed mess of the City Central buildings. Hell, maybe they should just tack on a couple 'pods'.

[obituary resider]

Looks like its been value managed to kingdom come and back