News & Discussion: Height Limits
- skyliner
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2359
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
- Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
THe interesting thing about all this is the proximity of Bris. airport to the CBD -used by similar planes to here I understand - and all using flightpaths as well - have 'somehow' got the planes to fly in a different direction than over the CBD - can someone explain why this has not happened long ago here? I'm thinking beurocratic tape, lack of co-ordinated informed decision making across all relevant bodies involved.Jusy too hard!
As well, I have read on this site that the planes never get close down to the CBD and that very few go over the CBD.
Now also note - 289M in Bris as against Adelaides 135m before the real screaming match starts (all for airport at a similar from distance from the CBD).
I'm getting confused. The more you look into this, the harder it gets.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
As well, I have read on this site that the planes never get close down to the CBD and that very few go over the CBD.
Now also note - 289M in Bris as against Adelaides 135m before the real screaming match starts (all for airport at a similar from distance from the CBD).
I'm getting confused. The more you look into this, the harder it gets.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
Jack.
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
With the ACC now effectively out of the loop on approving tall buildings, perhaps we should send a letter to Pat C requesting that he "gently persuade" AAL, CASA, DOTARS, etc to publicise in clear/plain english the PANS-OPS height limitations across the entire CBD (as well as Nth Adelaide, and the Torrens River district in between)...
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
- Ho Really
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2715
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
- Location: In your head
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
Maybe not low enough but they do fly over it, like right above the corner of Grenfell and King William Streets. These are usually the smaller jets (mostly 737s). I've never seen a 747, A330 or 777 do this (as most would bank on a larger turn and fly on a route that would take them over the southern part of Norwood such as Cathay Pacific to Melbourne).skyliner wrote:...As well, I have read on this site that the planes never get close down to the CBD and that very few go over the CBD...
As I have said before it is definitely a radar matter. I would presume the line-of-sight issue is in regards to the radar at the top of Greenhill Road (off Ridge Road).
Cheers
Confucius say: Dumb man climb tree to get cherry, wise man spread limbs.
- skyliner
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2359
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
- Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
I forgot about the radar issue - thanks Ho Really.
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
ADELAIDE - TOWARDS A GREATER CITY SKYLINE
Jack.
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
I was disappointed to hear that height limitations remain unaffected, because they are still pursuant to the Development Act, which is what the new IDAC will assess all developments by. However, I think we will start seeing a lot more developments approved that are in variance to the Act - because essentially that is what the State Government can alter through legislative measures, and with Rann's majority, it'll seem likely so until the Development Act is revised. After all, that is the State Government's intention to make Adelaide more attractive to developers.
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
I have flown on both Boeing 737's & Airbus A330's that have tracked directly accross the top of Westpac house! It was like taking a helicopter flight over the cityHo Really wrote:Maybe not low enough but they do fly over it, like right above the corner of Grenfell and King William Streets. These are usually the smaller jets (mostly 737s). I've never seen a 747, A330 or 777 do this (as most would bank on a larger turn and fly on a route that would take them over the southern part of Norwood such as Cathay Pacific to Melbourne).skyliner wrote:...As well, I have read on this site that the planes never get close down to the CBD and that very few go over the CBD...
As I have said before it is definitely a radar matter. I would presume the line-of-sight issue is in regards to the radar at the top of Greenhill Road (off Ridge Road).
Cheers
The fact is that they do not have to track accross the City on their departure BUT, they may have to if they have an 'Engine Out' event on takeoff.
EDIT: About half a dozen approved Departure Paths for aircraft out of Adelaide Airport track over the city..
ADELAIDE SINGAPORE LONDON BERLIN AMSTERDAM PARIS TOKYO AUCKLAND DOHA DUBLIN HONG KONG BANGKOK REYKJAVIK ROME MADRID BUDAPEST COPENHAGEN ZURICH BRUSSELS VIENNA PRAGUE STOCKHOLM LUXEMBOURG BRATISLAVA NASSAU DUBAI BAHRAIN KUALA LUMPUR HELSINKI GENEVA
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
Hi guys,
Ok this is what I understand of the height restrictions due to the the location of Adelaide Airport.
The definition of the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) from MOS Part 139 is as follows: "The OLS are conceptual (imaginary) surfaces associated with a runway, which identify the lower limits of the aerodrome airspace above which objects become obstacles to aircraft operations, and must be reported to CASA".
The OLS is calculated from the ground up and I believe that dispensations can be sought for buildings which penetrate the OLS. Once the OLS is penetrated, certain buildings in close proximity to the initial building might not be considered to penetrate the OLS (depending on the distance apart and height of the other buildings).
The PANS-OPS is something that is calculated from air to ground and it relates to the emergency flight paths of planes that need to return to the airport after take off. For example, if a plane loses an engine straight after take off it would need to circle back for landing. My initial thought was that the PANS-OPS cannot be penetrated by any buildings. However, section 7.1.8.5 of MOS Part 139 states that "Any object that may penetrate the PANS-OPS surface, as per advice from the procedure designer, must be forwarded to the Airservices Australia Procedure Design Section". I am still unsure of the context of the statement as I haven't had time to read through the whole section on the obstacle restriction and limitation in MOS.
Hope that made sense
Ok this is what I understand of the height restrictions due to the the location of Adelaide Airport.
The definition of the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) from MOS Part 139 is as follows: "The OLS are conceptual (imaginary) surfaces associated with a runway, which identify the lower limits of the aerodrome airspace above which objects become obstacles to aircraft operations, and must be reported to CASA".
The OLS is calculated from the ground up and I believe that dispensations can be sought for buildings which penetrate the OLS. Once the OLS is penetrated, certain buildings in close proximity to the initial building might not be considered to penetrate the OLS (depending on the distance apart and height of the other buildings).
The PANS-OPS is something that is calculated from air to ground and it relates to the emergency flight paths of planes that need to return to the airport after take off. For example, if a plane loses an engine straight after take off it would need to circle back for landing. My initial thought was that the PANS-OPS cannot be penetrated by any buildings. However, section 7.1.8.5 of MOS Part 139 states that "Any object that may penetrate the PANS-OPS surface, as per advice from the procedure designer, must be forwarded to the Airservices Australia Procedure Design Section". I am still unsure of the context of the statement as I haven't had time to read through the whole section on the obstacle restriction and limitation in MOS.
Hope that made sense
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
Lets face it guys it seems the airport and the planes flight paths may limit us on have massive buildings. My question is why cant we have more the size of Westpac house around Westpac house as apposed to filling every little gap that we have with 14-20 stort buildings.
We need to utelise the available room that we have and built to the available hight limit. In other words if the height restriction is 120m for a certain arean WE BUILD a building that hight!
Hope fully with Powers being stripped from the concervative counsil we will see some change
We need to utelise the available room that we have and built to the available hight limit. In other words if the height restriction is 120m for a certain arean WE BUILD a building that hight!
Hope fully with Powers being stripped from the concervative counsil we will see some change
South Australia the Festival State
Re: Proposal to Lift CBD Height Restrictions Defeated
Taller buildings can be built, if they are East of Westpac House. The ACC (and now the Govt) just need Developers to buy CBD land, and seriously propose such buildings!!!joshzxzx wrote:Lets face it guys it seems the airport and the planes flight paths may limit us on have massive buildings. My question is why cant we have more the size of Westpac house around Westpac house as apposed to filling every little gap that we have with 14-20 stort buildings.
We need to utelise the available room that we have and built to the available hight limit. In other words if the height restriction is 120m for a certain arean WE BUILD a building that hight!
Hope fully with Powers being stripped from the concervative counsil we will see some change
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.htmlFoley backs a high-rise Adelaide
Article from: The Advertiser
* Font size: Decrease Increase
* Email article: Email
* Print article: Print
* Submit comment: Submit comment
July 19, 2008 12:30am
SOUTH Australians should "not be afraid to embrace height" in any proposed developments, Deputy Premier Kevin Foley says.
Mr Foley said a "modern city like Adelaide needs height" in order to progress and attract commercial and residentialinterest.
He said new transport-oriented development zones, such as the 10ha Clipsal site at Bowden, will have height and density.
High rise: See the options http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/files/buildings.pdf
"We will allow serious height on that (Clipsal) site," he told The Advertiser yesterday.
"But I am not suggesting we are going to have massive skyscrapers there.
"Yet, developers should be able to look at serious height, whether that be 15 or 20 storey buildings – something that allows commercial property to be built there as well as residential."
Mr Foley said given Adelaide's population and geographical size, there were a lot of 15 to 20 storey buildings being built.
"Personally, I like height. I think this city should not be afraid to embrace height," he said. "That's why, since Labor has come to office, there has been a number of projects that have been given major project status.
"In that way, we have been able to accelerate development and not have it stymied."
Mr Foley said initial advice was for unlimited height at the Clipsal site, and while he personally was not opposed to that, it was not something to which the Government could agree.
"We need to come to an agreement with the council and residents, if we can, about what they would accept," he said.
Sites such as the one at Bowden provided an opportunity to "house thousands of South Australians in affordable accommodation on transport links, relatively close to the city".
"It gives us a good opportunity to cater for our population growth without having the suburbs falling too far north and too far south," Mr Foley said.
Earlier this week, during a speech at a property industry function, Mr Foley said development at Bowden would be unlike anything seen before in Adelaide.
Colliers International has been enlisted to sell the 10.2ha site but its industrial zoning must be changed before any mixed-used development can occur.
Under a State Government review, Urban Development and Planning Minister Paul Holloway would have responsibility for the rezoning taking it out of the hands of the Charles Sturt City Council and classifying it as a "state significant development".
John O'Neill, part owner of the nearby Brompton Hotel, said removing height or density restrictions on the old Clipsal site would be a great "step forward"
wtf.. where did this come from??
Re: No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
Woo! *head spins out of control*
Another step forward for the state. Excellent news.
Another step forward for the state. Excellent news.
-
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 233
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 6:12 pm
Re: No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
Awesome. It's finally happening, the mood has changed.
Re: No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
Great news.
Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work.
Re: No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
Wow. I'm just blown away by the news of late, planning overhauls, the ACC, the transport revolution, and this. Like it's huge, and is sending a serious message out there.
How cool will Adelaide be in a decade's time, we'll have quite the few mini-skylines around. CBD, Bowden, West Lakes, Port, Mawson Lakes, Glenelg and all the other TOD's. Who would have thought this just a year ago?
The AdelaideNow poll shows promising insight into the issue. Up yours, North Adelaide!
Labor's securely got my vote in this state until 2018 (Rann's resignation date).
How cool will Adelaide be in a decade's time, we'll have quite the few mini-skylines around. CBD, Bowden, West Lakes, Port, Mawson Lakes, Glenelg and all the other TOD's. Who would have thought this just a year ago?
The AdelaideNow poll shows promising insight into the issue. Up yours, North Adelaide!
Labor's securely got my vote in this state until 2018 (Rann's resignation date).
Last edited by Shuz on Sat Jul 19, 2008 11:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: No more height restrictions in Adelaide?!
New Licence Plates for Adelaide should read:
ADELAIDE - ONWARDS & UPWARDS
Awesome news!
ADELAIDE - ONWARDS & UPWARDS
Awesome news!
ADELAIDE SINGAPORE LONDON BERLIN AMSTERDAM PARIS TOKYO AUCKLAND DOHA DUBLIN HONG KONG BANGKOK REYKJAVIK ROME MADRID BUDAPEST COPENHAGEN ZURICH BRUSSELS VIENNA PRAGUE STOCKHOLM LUXEMBOURG BRATISLAVA NASSAU DUBAI BAHRAIN KUALA LUMPUR HELSINKI GENEVA
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 6 guests