Cbus Vs Grocon Proposal – Cast Your Vote

19

Plans have been revealed of the alternative design the Queensland Government was considering as part of the national tender for 1 William Street.

The runner up design by Grocon (seen above on the right) included a massive futuristic glass facade featuring LED screen lighting on the sides of the tower which could display the Queensland Government logo, images or any event related artwork such as a Riverfire theme.

However on the 21st of December 2012, the Queensland Government announced that superannuation giant Cbus, was the winning tenderer for the massive 60,000 sqm government lease (shown above on the left).

Meanwhile, its not all doom and gloom for Grocon, in early December last year Grocon announced it had secured mining giant BHP Billiton as the anchor tenant for a $650m development at 480 Queen Street, Brisbane, work on that project is predicted to commence soon.

So now the question arises, which design do the people of Brisbane prefer?

Cast your vote at the end of the post or voice your opinion in the comments section below.

Grocon’s ‘One William Street’

Renders and video by our vision.

Cbus’ ‘1 William Street’ (Winning tender)

1William_hero 1William_N2 1William_N3 1William_N4

Architectural design

100 %

Building amenities

100 %

Building greenery (Buildings that breathe)

100 %

Public realm / Street activation

100%

Sustainability

100%

By 19 reviewer(s)

  • Avatar

    Sarah

    As somebody else mentioned they do both look too ‘fat’ and really stick out from their context. I think either way the building will have a pretty negative impact on that part of the city skyline. I think I would pick the giant lipstick as the least offensive!

    October 28, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    DJ

    Would be good to see the actual architects who designed these buildings credited for their work in conjunction with the developers.

    June 21, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    swinging voter

    grocon versus CBUS….. which dysfunctional attention seeking developer sotle the most limelight for the work of the architects/design team?

    this building will serve as a beacon for fascist,authoritarian style decision making. at a guess, grocon will line up as the builder for CBUS now that they lost the bid….. why is the LNP government& Kev07 throwing so much weight behind grocon? which politicians are invested in grocon and who would benefit from grocon’s imminient public listing?

    March 23, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    enjay57

    Who is “designing” this rubbish? That looks like a giant pill bottle – the problem is still that they are both too big fat & ugly for the site & its surroundings. Both buildings would fit perfectly in the architectural hotch potch in places like Dubai and Shanghai, but not here.
    We have a rare opportunity to create something truly great here – these proposals don’t come anywhere close to fitting that criteria.

    March 21, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    Y

    Yes true that both buildings are way too big for Brissie. But it also means that the state government might carry out demolition of several low levelled government buildings and be planning for the new skylines for Brisbane looking from South Brisbane, along with recent forward upon consent of high rise buildings on South Brisbane-West End area.

    March 15, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    ambilove

    so who is paying for this giant over appointed lipstick?

    February 22, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    MT

    Both proposlas totally ignore the beautiful low rise heritage buildings around them and the beautiful and sympathetic Neville Bonner building – how you can stick a huge monstrosity next to the neo-clssical architecture of Parliament and George Street government precinct I cannot fathom.

    I thought we learnt the lesson with the Parliamentary Annexe the ugliness of which we have to live with every day. Typical Brisbane – never learns.
    Go back to the drawing Board and get some heritage architect’s advice.

    February 21, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    Nick

    Walking to work every day past the Shard and having worked in the Gherkin its a real disappointment that back home this of cheap looking rubbish is proposed. Accepted its a Government building and expectations should be low… but please!

    Something slanting back from the river / goodwill bridge with more character thanks.

    February 19, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    Craneman

    as the world’s leading cranespotter, i’ll be watching this development with a keen eye. the CBus building would be cheaper to build & thats why Govt would have picked that. All Govt tenders go to cheapest price #Fact (rather than best value for Money). I prefer to see the Grocons building in the Skyline over “the Exhaust” thats garn ahead.

    February 11, 2013

    Helpful?

  • Avatar

    Viv

    I am at odds with both of them. Wish we could of had the ‘never to be built there, so why can’t we have it here’ Chicago Spire instead (obvious arguments aside).

    The Cbus reminds me too much of a lipstick, very simple design. A competition was held to see how quickly someone could recreate it (plus putting it on a map) in Sketch-Up, winner took 4 minutes from starting the program… yeah.

    The Grocon building reminds me too much of the evil boxy robot from futurama… http://theinfosphere.org/Boxy_Robot

    Chicago Spire: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Spire

    February 5, 2013

    Helpful?

Leave feedback about this

Your email address will not be published.

Architectural design
Building amenities
Building greenery (Buildings that breathe)
Public realm / Street activation
Sustainability