Well depending on where you get the definition from the minumim height can be anywhere from 10 - 35 stories. So yeah, for this example its near the middle, and using the term makes it sound more outrageous! The whole point and only reason I'm arguing is because 25 stories is two high. 10 would probably be the absolue maximum.
I think you fail to appreciate that skyscrapers are actually far beyond your declared range of outrageous. You know, if you think 25 floors is tall, wait till you walk around Central in Hong Kong...
We probably should, I never said we shouldn't...
Mhm, fair enough.
Honest question: Can you give me some examples of cities that have 25 story buildings that far from the cbd?
I have no knowledge so I looked up two random stations that looked the same distance on google maps then found the real distance.
Kellyville-Sydney = ~29km as the crow flys
New York - Union station (new Jersey) ~ 21km as the crow flys: no tall buildings at all
station ~24km as the crow flys: no tall buildings at all.
So where are these other places that you keep quoting?
I'm probably asking for a '$1 engineer'-type outrage from jedimasterc
, but you're more likely to find this in big Asian cities. Since Singapore (which, by the way, has two 40-floor HDB tower blocks on top of malls opposite Clementi MRT)
seems to be an example I'm not allowed to use, I'll use Hong Kong.
'Outlying' new towns such as Tuen Mun, Yuen Long, Tung Chung, and (albeit slightly closer to Central) Sha Tin all have towering blocks of apartments. This is quite normal, and you're welcome to check them out online. Even car-oriented cities like Kuala Lumpur have significant numbers of high-rise residential developments (e.g. Mont Kiara in KL), and some are actually very nice (admittedly, there is also a market in terrace houses as well as McMansions).
Granted, commercial towers are less common in these areas. It remains unclear as to whether this structure in Kellyville is to be residential or commercial. I would concede that a commercial tower in Kellyville to be pretty pointless, and better of in, say, Macquarie Park or Parramatta.
However, if it's residential, I see no reason why it shouldn't end up in Kellyville. Yes, you can keep your mansions, but they have their places and in close proximity to an expensive railway, wasting precious prime land, is not one of them.
You know what? Screw it - I'm going to use Singapore anyway.
I accept that the idea of a Singapore-style HDB town centred on a strong transport node is unappealing to those accustomed to their big cars and bigger houses. A railway station, bus interchange and connected suburban shopping mall, coupled with other local amenities such as markets and libraries forms the core; from this spreads a network of apartment blocks, smaller commercial areas (e.g. food centres or shop rows) and other facilities such as schools which benefit from a slightly decentralised location within the town. It's not everyone's thing, but it works.
Contrary to what some may believe, one does not feel too packed in when in these new towns in Singapore. Care has been taken to have enough open civic space. Roads are wide, gardens are spacious, trees hang over and provide good shade. It's not everyone's thing, but it works - damned well.
When it comes to maximising the efficiency of land use and infrastructure investment, it's the way forward. We would do well to emulate it, if only in a more limited, locally-compatible manner. We need more density, and the only way is up.
I can concede that this entire project could certainly be better handled. But as far as I can tell, opposing high-rise development in its most logical place just because it doesn't suit your ideas is, to borrow the word from the article, obscene.
A sensible suggested local application of the strong-core taper-out concept was outlined upthread by djf01
IMHO, we need fewer but better clusters built on a heavy rail scaffolding. A 25 story development within 5 min walk of a heavy rail station shouldn't be deemed "overdevelopment". It's what's required at the centre of these nodes, with medium-rise (up to 10 floors) 5-10min away, then regular medium density (flats without lifts, freestanding houses) >=15 walk from the node. By this measure, stations should be no less than 30 min walk (non-stop, straight line) apart, which is every 5-6km.
Balances it perfectly. This dovetails nicely with the Singaporean model I outlined earlier in this post.
It's a far more effective model. Everything works much better. It's a win-win situation.EDIT: Oh look, the Gold Coast features lots of apartments, just like certain parts of Sydney. Evidently, not all Australians dream of a McMansion and a Holden Commodore.