City Council to evaluate Victoria Square tower

Press, 21 February 1987, Page 9

City Council to evaluate Victoria Square tower

The Christchurch City Council held a special meeting yesterday afternoon to discuss the proposed Victoria Square tower. After discussion the council recommended that an officer project group, including the Victoria Square Advisory Group where appropriate, be convened to evaluate the tower proposal. The group would be directed to discuss the tower in relationship to Victoria Square as a whole, town planning, parking and reserves, and land tenure and the financial implications. A preliminary report would be presented to the April meeting of the policy and finance committee.

The directors of Tourist Towers, Ltd, the developer of the proposed tower, were present to promote the development to the council, and to answer questions. When the presentation was completed, Mr Jamie Tulloch, a director and spokesman for Tourist Towers, faced a barrage of questions by several councillors. Cr David Cox said that no parking had been proposed by the developer for staff or visitors, and Cr Dennis Rich said that the predicted influx of tourist coaches would also strain the limited parking available.

Mr Tulloch said provision for parking would have to be discussed with perhaps the planned Park royal Hotel development Research indicated that the greater

number of visitors to the tower would occur at offpeak parking times and a parking bay near the tower was planned for coaches to drop off and pick up passengers. Cr Charles Manning questioned the number of new jobs. In his presentation Mr Tulloch spoke of 320 new jobs generated by the tower but Cr Manning asked if these would be new jobs or merely a transfer of people from one established job to another.

If the tower plans went ahead Victoria Square would have to be redesigned round the effect of the tower and several councillors were concerned that the decision to redesign should not lie in the hands of Tourist Towers, a private company.

Mr Tulloch assured the council that Tourist Towers would not take sole responsibility for redesigning Victoria Square. Cr Aiex Clark also queried the raising of capital funds by Tourist Towers and the leasing of land and ownership of the building.

“In terms of investment, there is no doubt that Victoria Square is an ideal placement,” but the financial regards should not overshadow public opinion and the loss of the traditional Victoria Square. “They should make sure the visual area is enhanced and not detracted from,” he said.

Mr Tulloch: We feel the

tower is distinctive but not out of keeping with Christchurch; an attractive building to look at but not imposing upon its surroundings. Cr Clark also said that when the council considered a leasing agreement for the tower it should take into account not only the value of the land beneath the tower but also the entire Victoria Square.

He said that if the developers had had to build on any other central-city site their tower would be confined by other tall buildings, losing most of its visual impact, and it would cost a lot more.

Other questions included the effect the tower would have on the Town Hall and the strength of the actual structure.,

Cr Rich was concerned that the facilities offered by the tower would, not complement the Town Hall — rather it would reduce the patronage experienced there.

Mr Tulloch believed the reverse would be true. The tower would attract more people to Victoria Square and the spin-off would be good for the Town Halt He said that the conference facilities offered by the tower would be too small to be considered in competition with anyone. The conference room would seat about 150 people.

Mr Barry Dacombe, a representative of Warren and Mahoney, who designed the tower, explained how the tower was to be constructed.

The I2m-high base containing the three lower floors and basement would be built first The steel tower would be built in sections, welded together, and emplanted in the foundation.

Each new welded section would raise the first section higher until it reached 135 metres. At that point the upper floors would be built and hydraulically pumped up the outside of the shaft to perch on top.

Mr Dacombe said the strength of the steel shaft would be such, that other forms of bracing for the structure would not be necessary.

Tourist Towers had thoroughly researched the design of the tower structure with the assistance of Monash University, Melbourne. Wind-tunnel testing on scale models was also done, said Mr Dacombe.

Although earthquake activity on such a structure had been assessed the designers’ main concern lay with wind levels, be said. “The wind factors are the governing element in terms of the structure of the tower, and not seismic factors,” he said.

Even with the strongest wind Christchurch had experienced the tower would sway a maximum of 50cm.

A system designed to dampen even that movement was being investigated for the building because comfort of the visitors or diners would be paramount, Mr Dacombe said.