[PRO] Masonic Lodge | 183m | 37 Levels | Mixed Use

[VinyTapestry849]

Don't forget that the twin tower development on the Newmarket Hotel site corner of North and West Terraces went so far in the process of challenging the airport height limits, involving CASA and AAL, that they have confirmed that airport height limits will be revised and take effect in mid December. We will know more then.

What these new height limits are, we don't know yet, but it will have an impact right across the CBD, because that site is the closest to the airport runway in the whole CBD grid area. Watch this space.

Well that's something, finally, some developers are manning up to this issue.

Almost like the system works where if developers can make a solid case for raising limits there is a process to go through it.

Almost

[VinyTapestry849]

You sound bitter Rev, I am merely proving an obvious point. The evidence is there and you can't dispute it. Residences Realm, Adelaidean, Central market all have been 'overrun' with offers from firms, tenants, and commercial businesses BEFORE THEY WERE BUILT, which directly proves there is sufficient demand for quality highrise developments exceeding 130 metres. The restrictions are impacting developments inside the city, and driving down growth. The other members of the forum are in agreement, you're outnumbered. In response to your utterly ignorant statement that I want supertalls, no. As a complete maximum, there should be a limit of around 200. There are companies who are hovering around Adelaide this very minute ready to develop due to the abundance of properties available but are hindering starting due to these unwarranted restrictions.

Wheres is your evidence? Where's your proof that the limitations aren't directly impacting the CBD? I have mine, where is yours?

Those graphs I posted, that you keep ignoring, are from the Property Council of Australia, and are based on factual data.
Your posts are your opinion. They are not based on factual data.

Go read my post of images on the reason why. No one wants to move into the aging and disgusting concrete block buildings of the CBD, that's why we have low rates. My point is we should remove restrictions to make it easier for developers to construct towers which will attract interstate and overseas corporations.

[Llessur2002]

Go read my post of images on the reason why. No one wants to move into the aging and disgusting concrete block buildings of the CBD, that's why we have low rates. New and quality office blocks is what we need.

As per my last post, where are you expecting the new tenants to come from to fill these new CBD office buildings?

Are they currently working remotely due to lack of high quality CBD office space? If so they've proven their work can be done effectively from home so why would they want to pay high rents for CBD space?

Are they currently renting much cheaper office space in the metro area? If so, why would an organisation that can work effectively from a cheap metro building want to double or triple their rent to move in to an expensive new CBD space?

Or are you expecting that the building of new high quality office space will attract corporations to move from overseas or interstate? If so, where's the evidence to show that the only reason those companies are not currently based in Adelaide is the lack of tall office buildings? Which companies are lining up to move to Adelaide as soon as we build them something tall enough?

If new towers will simply shift CBD tenants from older buildings to new ones then how will that help boost the overall occupancy rate? You need an influx of new tenants to do that.

Again, I'm not having a go at your enthusiasm but the 'build it and they will come' argument seems very simplistic - especially when no one fully knows what office space requirements will look like post-COVID.

[VinyTapestry849]

Go read my post of images on the reason why. No one wants to move into the aging and disgusting concrete block buildings of the CBD, that's why we have low rates. New and quality office blocks is what we need.

As per my last post, where are you expecting the new tenants to come from to fill these new CBD office buildings?

Are they currently working remotely due to lack of high quality CBD office space? If so they've proven their work can be done effectively from home so why would they want to pay high rents for CBD space?

Are they currently renting much cheaper office space in the metro area? If so, why would an organisation that can work effectively from a cheap metro building want to double or triple their rent to move in to an expensive new CBD space?

Or are you expecting that the building of new high quality office space will attract corporations to move from overseas or interstate? If so, where's the evidence to show that the only reason those companies are not currently based in Adelaide is the lack of tall office buildings? Which companies are lining up to move to Adelaide as soon as we build them something tall enough?

If new towers will simply shift CBD tenants from older buildings to new ones then how will that help boost the overall occupancy rate? You need an influx of new tenants to do that.

Again, I'm not having a go at your enthusiasm but the 'build it and they will come' argument seems very simplistic - especially when no one fully knows what office space requirements will look like post-COVID.

My point is not to build all these new towers and have no one occupy them. Its that we need to remove or ease restrictions so its easier and less hassle-ridden for developers to build sites that will attract corporations due to etc. prestigious location/addresses, A-grade facilities, to drive up occupancy rates and invest in the City of Adelaide.
I've said this quite repeatedly but there is some demand for quality high rise developments in the City, otherwise, these 100+ buildings wouldn't be lodged to the Planning body, would they?
e.g.
https://indaily.com.au/news/2021/06/07/ ... developer/

My view is that we should make it easier and ease limitations for height, to attract the developers and corporations to form a 'chain reaction' so that more and more businesses set up in the city, and boost our economy leading into the future. Its not all to do with height limitations, but it has a substantially large impact in the planning phase which continues to turn developers away.

[VinyTapestry849]

My point is not to build high rise towers and expect random corporations to file in automatically. It's to ease or remove height limitations to encourage developers to build taller structures when they have a need for taller towers. There is demand, but limitations like height put developer's off, its obvious.

[Nort]

On topic, does anyone know exactly why they want this building to be significantly taller than anything else, while still only having 39 floors?

Is it because of the height of the podium?

[VinyTapestry849]

On topic, does anyone know exactly why they want this building to be significantly taller than anything else, while still only having 39 floors?

Is it because of the height of the podium?

The story is that the current freemason hall has concrete cancer (rusting steel reinforcements within the concrete base), and It will cost in the millions to fix, as well as additional structural problems.
The freemasons are building the tower to produce revenue through the rents of the hotel, student accommodation, ticket sales from the viewing platform, and office space yearly so they can preserve the current hall.
It has to be this tall and have around 30 - 39 floors to produce enough revenue to fund the restoration, otherwise, there would be no point in building the tower If it doesn't produce enough.
They are looking to go even higher if the planning body allows it.

[MicBara]

G'day, everyone.
I'm the lead project manager on the Freemasons Hall redevelopment, so I'm happy to answer any questions.
I had no idea this forum existed, but I love a good old fashioned forum.

I've had a scroll through the thread, so here are some answers to the more common questions:

Why so tall
Firstly, the original building that opened in 1927 was an icon using new construction methods and was one of, if not the tallest in the city. We think it would be nice to reclaim that spot.
Secondly, the building envelope is very tight, and we have several financial hurdles to hit. Going taller gives us more floors to let, more potential revenue and a better chance to recover the expensive upfront costs to deal with the tight squeeze and costs to renovate the retained heritage building (estimated to cost around $8million).
Lastly, North Terrace is our cultural boulevard and will remain that way, and we'll only build it once, so the objective is to deliver something that suits the skyline and the area for the next 100 years.
Depending on tenants and financial constraints, we may go higher but keep that one to yourselves

The design
The design released so far is purely a concept, and it's being refined with every meeting; the core concept will remain through - a simple, elegant and understated tower. As for the number of floors, we are focused on very high ceilings with flexible spaces on the first eight floors and the top 5 floors; this will ultimately come down to the tenants selected, a few of which are confidential.
We're looking at innovation in the building lighting and display effects - if I have my way, you'll see dramatic effects when a goal is scored at the Oval and something interesting to see from the plane as you come home. We're also looking at innovative ways to manage basement access and transport in and out of the site.
Lastly, we're taking on the "Living building challenge, " a challenging building standard focused on a "net positive" carbon footprint. It's a highly ambitious standard, and we'll be pushing the engineers (ARUP) and WalterBrooke (architects) hard to find ways to reduce waste, build smart and sustainable. I'm not going to go out and say we will meet that "net positive" goal but we're going to do everything we can to push the envelope without breaking the budget.

Commercial demand
I agree with some of the comments regarding the level of commercial demand in the CBD; this is primarily influenced by the number of low quality or semi dilapidated assets owned by elderly gents with no desire to renovate. This is a problem for hotels, and many are caught in a discounting cycle that burns any revenue they could put aside for FF&E, leaving them with tired assets.
The economics of SA is pretty interesting, but the averages don't tell you the full story. Our approach on this site is to keep pure commercial to a minimum and focus on AAA+ tenants.
Regarding Hotels - demand is very high. The interest from operator groups was overwhelming, and without spilling too much, we're likely to hit a record for m2 rates. Primarily because the location is so great, public transport out the front, excellent restaurants behind us, lot 14, Uni Adelaide etc. right on the doorstep etc.

We're currently working with heritage to ensure we can demolish the rear hall; that's the most critical next step. After that, we'll focus on finalising the tenant mix and lodging plans for approval.
At this stage, I'm expecting we will complete the building in 2025, well ahead of the building centenary in 2027.

I hope you find that all interesting. I'm happy to post up some more pictures from the process if anyone would like.

[HiTouch]

G'day, everyone.
I'm the lead project manager on the Freemasons Hall redevelopment, so I'm happy to answer any questions.
I had no idea this forum existed, but I love a good old fashioned forum.

I've had a scroll through the thread, so here are some answers to the more common questions:

Why so tall
Firstly, the original building that opened in 1927 was an icon using new construction methods and was one of, if not the tallest in the city. We think it would be nice to reclaim that spot.
Secondly, the building envelope is very tight, and we have several financial hurdles to hit. Going taller gives us more floors to let, more potential revenue and a better chance to recover the expensive upfront costs to deal with the tight squeeze and costs to renovate the retained heritage building (estimated to cost around $8million).
Lastly, North Terrace is our cultural boulevard and will remain that way, and we'll only build it once, so the objective is to deliver something that suits the skyline and the area for the next 100 years.
Depending on tenants and financial constraints, we may go higher but keep that one to yourselves

The design
The design released so far is purely a concept, and it's being refined with every meeting; the core concept will remain through - a simple, elegant and understated tower. As for the number of floors, we are focused on very high ceilings with flexible spaces on the first eight floors and the top 5 floors; this will ultimately come down to the tenants selected, a few of which are confidential.
We're looking at innovation in the building lighting and display effects - if I have my way, you'll see dramatic effects when a goal is scored at the Oval and something interesting to see from the plane as you come home. We're also looking at innovative ways to manage basement access and transport in and out of the site.
Lastly, we're taking on the "Living building challenge, " a challenging building standard focused on a "net positive" carbon footprint. It's a highly ambitious standard, and we'll be pushing the engineers (ARUP) and WalterBrooke (architects) hard to find ways to reduce waste, build smart and sustainable. I'm not going to go out and say we will meet that "net positive" goal but we're going to do everything we can to push the envelope without breaking the budget.

Commercial demand
I agree with some of the comments regarding the level of commercial demand in the CBD; this is primarily influenced by the number of low quality or semi dilapidated assets owned by elderly gents with no desire to renovate. This is a problem for hotels, and many are caught in a discounting cycle that burns any revenue they could put aside for FF&E, leaving them with tired assets.
The economics of SA is pretty interesting, but the averages don't tell you the full story. Our approach on this site is to keep pure commercial to a minimum and focus on AAA+ tenants.
Regarding Hotels - demand is very high. The interest from operator groups was overwhelming, and without spilling too much, we're likely to hit a record for m2 rates. Primarily because the location is so great, public transport out the front, excellent restaurants behind us, lot 14, Uni Adelaide etc. right on the doorstep etc.

We're currently working with heritage to ensure we can demolish the rear hall; that's the most critical next step. After that, we'll focus on finalising the tenant mix and lodging plans for approval.
At this stage, I'm expecting we will complete the building in 2025, well ahead of the building centenary in 2027.

I hope you find that all interesting. I'm happy to post up some more pictures from the process if anyone would like.

Welcome, pics or it didnt happen

[arki]

Thanks for the insight, great to hear things are moving along with this project. Of course I think everyone here would be keen to see more pictures 'from the process' as you say.

[MicBara]

ok lets see if the attach file works so I don't need to go host them like some kind of internet caveman

[MicBara]

here's the view from the top

[Howie]

Thanks for the post MicBara, always good to get insight into the process behind the design. Nothing like a good old banter on the forums.

[HiTouch]

Big fan of the photos and the decisions around sustainability.

[crawf]

G'day, everyone.
I'm the lead project manager on the Freemasons Hall redevelopment, so I'm happy to answer any questions.
I had no idea this forum existed, but I love a good old fashioned forum.

Welcome to the forum MicBara. Great insight, thanks for sharing.

All sounds very promising!

Lastly, North Terrace is our cultural boulevard and will remain that way, and we'll only build it once, so the objective is to deliver something that suits the skyline and the area for the next 100 years.

Would be great if other developers also had this mindset *cough, Switch*