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

[ghs]

That’s more like it !!!!

[thecityguy]

Amazing! Get it done


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[VinyTapestry849]

I want this so much! We'll have our official first skyscraper. I know it's more of a vision, but I think it'll be great, creating jobs, helping the economy.
I hope it will retain its height. It doesn't impact flight paths to Adelaide airport, it doesn't impact people on the ground, It doesn't impact the surrounding buildings (except balcony views), and it doesn't impact the skyline in a negative way! It's tall enough to have an observatory for god sake, how cool is that.

[aceman]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

[rhino]

I want this so much! We'll have our official first skyscraper.

WTF? We had our fist skyscraper in 1925 - the T&G Building on the corner of King William and Grenfell. Then in the 1960s the AMP Building on the corner of King William and North Tce was a skyscraper. You think this will be a skyscraper, but in a couple of generations it won't be considered one. It certainly isn't our first, just our first by current standards.

[Nort]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

If not for the State Bank collapse I suspect we would have seen something around this height in the 1990s. I'm very dubious about ever seeing this particular proposal get up, but if the authority to build that high is issued then it's very plausible we'll see buildings above the current tallest.

Heck, if not for the height limits Realm and/or Adelaidean probably would have gone taller.

[VinyTapestry849]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

you must be old then

[gnrc_louis]

I want this so much! We'll have our official first skyscraper.

WTF? We had our fist skyscraper in 1925 - the T&G Building on the corner of King William and Grenfell. Then in the 1960s the AMP Building on the corner of King William and North Tce was a skyscraper. You think this will be a skyscraper, but in a couple of generations it won't be considered one. It certainly isn't our first, just our first by current standards.

Exactly, Adelaide has a long history of skyscrapers, including some like the MLC Building which have national prominence in their design.

[Algernon]

What was once considered a skysraper was reclassified as a high rise when itturned out 12 storeys wasn't quite where to set the bar for the long haul. It's a semantic difference and apparently it's going to keep a few people here occupied for days.

[rev]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

Gee you're more pessimistic then I am
I dont think it'll take as long to get a new tallest at least UC, within 10 years. But most probably a boring design.

[aceman]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

Gee you're more pessimistic then I am
I dont think it'll take as long to get a new tallest at least UC, within 10 years. But most probably a boring design.

it's not pessimism mate it's just the way things work here. the last 30 years shows that.

[Nort]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

Gee you're more pessimistic then I am
I dont think it'll take as long to get a new tallest at least UC, within 10 years. But most probably a boring design.

it's not pessimism mate it's just the way things work here. the last 30 years shows that.

The last 30 years weren't just nothing approaching that height going up, they were nothing big going up full stop.

It's only in recent years that new buildings >100m have started going up, and as soon as anything in that range started going up we quickly had multiple in the tallest range.

If you're saying that Adelaide is going to go back to only seeing short proposals then I'd be curious why. If you think we will still be getting >100m proposals then I would be curious what makes you think they will all start being at the lower end of that range.

[cmet]

I want this so much! We'll have our official first skyscraper.

WTF? We had our fist skyscraper in 1925 - the T&G Building on the corner of King William and Grenfell. Then in the 1960s the AMP Building on the corner of King William and North Tce was a skyscraper. You think this will be a skyscraper, but in a couple of generations it won't be considered one. It certainly isn't our first, just our first by current standards.

Skyscraper = Building over 150m in height where over the 50% of the height are habitable floors - As defined by the Council on Tall Building and Urban Habitats. We have no skyscrapers by the actual definition.

[crawf]

no one who's alive today will live long enough to see anything remotely close to 160m ever built in adelaide. since westpac in 1988 it took over 30 years to build something which topped it by around 5 metres or so. it's a good vision but I wouldn't be holding my breath that's for sure.

Gee you're more pessimistic then I am
I dont think it'll take as long to get a new tallest at least UC, within 10 years. But most probably a boring design.

it's not pessimism mate it's just the way things work here. the last 30 years shows that.

By the end of this decade, I can see at least one or two buildings over the 150m mark. It's really not that tall.

The last 5-6 years have shown anything is possible. Before that the city was held back by archaic planning regulations set by the ACC.

[1NEEDS2POST]

I'm excited about the height, but really, it doesn't look like anything special.