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

[VinyTapestry849]

To be fair, I think VinyTapestry's positivity toward this project is underrated so I wouldn't blame you doing this, at first I thought he was trolling but I really see his passion. Maybe the long line of heartbreak in the Adelaide development landscape has made us other members a bit aged and jaded. Kudos to Viny!

Cheers Hitouch, I'm very passionate about my city and I want it to evolve and become better. I'm sure you do too.

Don’t worry mate, we’ve got a few changes to floor plates internally and lighting will be part of that variation.
Changing colours? Sure but the aim is to be able to say “Welcome back VinyTapestry849” when you’re coming back from a holiday.

Awesome!! gotta make it sparkle!!

[5000]

The thing about JWDT Pulteney, that gives me a small bit of (delusional) hope that it's still alive - its an awful lot of effort, time and resources to engage an architect and engage planning consultants to design a 180m+ building, especially in Adelaide. If it was just just another stock standard 12 storey building I'd say it's dead but given its a 40 storey tower you wouldn't go to that effort unless you were serious about following through on it.

$0.5m maybe - peanuts.

What do you think they've paid on holding costs over the time it has sat idle?

Capital value and, if they have managed to keep their consent valid, easily surpasses what you think a 'loss' is.

Of course it is dead. Developers develop when the iron is hot. The iron couldn't be colder at SA1.

[[Shuz]]

Surely more than half a million.

MicBara, maybe you can give us some insight?

How much money do you think (or know) has been spent just to get Keystone Tower going before construction has even started.

[5000]

Surely more than half a million.

MicBara, maybe you can give us some insight?

How much money do you think (or know) has been spent just to get Keystone Tower going before construction has even started.

Architecture 400k
Heritage advice 10k
Facade engineering 10k
Aerospace 10k
Traffic 5k
Waste 5k
Site contamination 5k
Acoustic 5k
PM 50k

Have I forgotten anything?

[Prodical]

There is a stack of money when proposing something this significant. Fees + modelling + Engineering and foundation analysis + wind and acoustic reports - 200

Airfares and accommodation to examine other buildings, finalise hotel lease arrangements, management stuff 100

Staff salaries and costs 200

+ + +

No change out of a $ million. These are commercial in confidence finances, so not fair to ask for exact amounts - the figure would end up being used by the fringe dwellers against the owner.

I am waiting in anticipation of something happening on site, so fingers crossed. This building + Tower II at Festival area are really important to the look and feel of a future Adelaide.

[Nort]

Surely more than half a million.

MicBara, maybe you can give us some insight?

How much money do you think (or know) has been spent just to get Keystone Tower going before construction has even started.

Architecture 400k
Heritage advice 10k
Facade engineering 10k
Aerospace 10k
Traffic 5k
Waste 5k
Site contamination 5k
Acoustic 5k
PM 50k

Have I forgotten anything?

Like Prodical says, actual values would be confidential so doubt we'll ever see them, but I would guess that most of your estimates there are at least an order of magnitude too low.

[MicBara]

Someone will probably kill me if I post the exact figures but.. a lot.

Geo-technical investigation alone was $250,000 and we will be open sourcing the soil data for anyone who is interested.
Remember it's a complex site with heritage, complex engineering, a massive power cable etc.
It costs a lot more when you're doing something interesting because everyone wants more detail than you usually need at this stage.
Traffic engineering - no change out of $50k.
Aerospace required both the aviation consultant and crane consultants so we could articulate the sweep path and make some comment on construction methodology - we only have 90 days to construct the top of the tower when we breach the height limit - no change out of $100k.

Nearly every engineering disciplines already been involved from vertical transport to, lighting, electrical, fire, structural you name it.

Let's just say the last sticky project I did in SA was Glenelg North and it hasn't been built yet (ever?, bless his cotton socks) It required us to increase the height limit for the entire street - that project cost more than $1mil to get approved. This is WAY harder and at a FAR more advanced stage.

As for the exact costs - dunno there might be a book about it?

[VinyTapestry849]

huh? fellas the tower has got a different top now

like a staircase. That is definitely not the design

[Nort]

Someone will probably kill me if I post the exact figures but.. a lot.

Geo-technical investigation alone was $250,000 and we will be open sourcing the soil data for anyone who is interested.
Remember it's a complex site with heritage, complex engineering, a massive power cable etc.
It costs a lot more when you're doing something interesting because everyone wants more detail than you usually need at this stage.
Traffic engineering - no change out of $50k.
Aerospace required both the aviation consultant and crane consultants so we could articulate the sweep path and make some comment on construction methodology - we only have 90 days to construct the top of the tower when we breach the height limit - no change out of $100k.

Nearly every engineering disciplines already been involved from vertical transport to, lighting, electrical, fire, structural you name it.

Let's just say the last sticky project I did in SA was Glenelg North and it hasn't been built yet (ever?, bless his cotton socks) It required us to increase the height limit for the entire street - that project cost more than $1mil to get approved. This is WAY harder and at a FAR more advanced stage.

As for the exact costs - dunno there might be a book about it?

Thanks!

Is this level of openness just you, or part of a general approach of openness given the Masons driving it and the stated aims of the project?

[[Shuz]]

The thing about JWDT Pulteney, that gives me a small bit of (delusional) hope that it's still alive - its an awful lot of effort, time and resources to engage an architect and engage planning consultants to design a 180m+ building, especially in Adelaide. If it was just just another stock standard 12 storey building I'd say it's dead but given its a 40 storey tower you wouldn't go to that effort unless you were serious about following through on it.

$0.5m maybe - peanuts.

What do you think they've paid on holding costs over the time it has sat idle?

Capital value and, if they have managed to keep their consent valid, easily surpasses what you think a 'loss' is.

Of course it is dead. Developers develop when the iron is hot. The iron couldn't be colder at SA1.

Well, if recent posts are any indication of pre-development costs - Pulteney Street surely can't be dead. On hold, maybe, but not dead. That's a shocking amount of money to lose on not proceeding.

[Nort]

The thing about JWDT Pulteney, that gives me a small bit of (delusional) hope that it's still alive - its an awful lot of effort, time and resources to engage an architect and engage planning consultants to design a 180m+ building, especially in Adelaide. If it was just just another stock standard 12 storey building I'd say it's dead but given its a 40 storey tower you wouldn't go to that effort unless you were serious about following through on it.

$0.5m maybe - peanuts.

What do you think they've paid on holding costs over the time it has sat idle?

Capital value and, if they have managed to keep their consent valid, easily surpasses what you think a 'loss' is.

Of course it is dead. Developers develop when the iron is hot. The iron couldn't be colder at SA1.

Well, if recent posts are any indication of pre-development costs - Pulteney Street surely can't be dead. On hold, maybe, but not dead. That's a shocking amount of money to lose on not proceeding.

The money is spent one way or another, so the amount spent to this date isn't really relevant (apart from helping indicate how serious they were about it at that time), it's all about if they can get more funding, and if more money spent on the project at this point would make a positive return.

[rev]

The thing about JWDT Pulteney, that gives me a small bit of (delusional) hope that it's still alive - its an awful lot of effort, time and resources to engage an architect and engage planning consultants to design a 180m+ building, especially in Adelaide. If it was just just another stock standard 12 storey building I'd say it's dead but given its a 40 storey tower you wouldn't go to that effort unless you were serious about following through on it.

$0.5m maybe - peanuts.

What do you think they've paid on holding costs over the time it has sat idle?

Capital value and, if they have managed to keep their consent valid, easily surpasses what you think a 'loss' is.

Of course it is dead. Developers develop when the iron is hot. The iron couldn't be colder at SA1.

Well, if recent posts are any indication of pre-development costs - Pulteney Street surely can't be dead. On hold, maybe, but not dead. That's a shocking amount of money to lose on not proceeding.

I'd imagine there might be some tax implications for the costs they've outlaid already
And correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't SA1 get approved? If so, they could surely sell the site to another developer who can get it done.

[MicBara]

Someone will probably kill me if I post the exact figures but.. a lot.

Geo-technical investigation alone was $250,000 and we will be open sourcing the soil data for anyone who is interested.
Remember it's a complex site with heritage, complex engineering, a massive power cable etc.
It costs a lot more when you're doing something interesting because everyone wants more detail than you usually need at this stage.
Traffic engineering - no change out of $50k.
Aerospace required both the aviation consultant and crane consultants so we could articulate the sweep path and make some comment on construction methodology - we only have 90 days to construct the top of the tower when we breach the height limit - no change out of $100k.

Nearly every engineering disciplines already been involved from vertical transport to, lighting, electrical, fire, structural you name it.

Let's just say the last sticky project I did in SA was Glenelg North and it hasn't been built yet (ever?, bless his cotton socks) It required us to increase the height limit for the entire street - that project cost more than $1mil to get approved. This is WAY harder and at a FAR more advanced stage.

As for the exact costs - dunno there might be a book about it?

Thanks!

Is this level of openness just you, or part of a general approach of openness given the Masons driving it and the stated aims of the project?

It's something I've pushed for since day one, there had been previous attempts to develop the rear hall, always shrouded in secrecy and they all failed.
My view was that this needed to be a public project not a private one and it had to align with the Freemasons values of brotherhood, benevolence/charity and self-improvement. Thankfully the successive board members have agreed with this approach and they are 100% behind being as open as possible.

[Mpol02]

Then let's get this moving yes yes yes. Very cool Mic thanks again for pulling the curtain open a tad and sharing this.

[Nort]

Someone will probably kill me if I post the exact figures but.. a lot.

Geo-technical investigation alone was $250,000 and we will be open sourcing the soil data for anyone who is interested.
Remember it's a complex site with heritage, complex engineering, a massive power cable etc.
It costs a lot more when you're doing something interesting because everyone wants more detail than you usually need at this stage.
Traffic engineering - no change out of $50k.
Aerospace required both the aviation consultant and crane consultants so we could articulate the sweep path and make some comment on construction methodology - we only have 90 days to construct the top of the tower when we breach the height limit - no change out of $100k.

Nearly every engineering disciplines already been involved from vertical transport to, lighting, electrical, fire, structural you name it.

Let's just say the last sticky project I did in SA was Glenelg North and it hasn't been built yet (ever?, bless his cotton socks) It required us to increase the height limit for the entire street - that project cost more than $1mil to get approved. This is WAY harder and at a FAR more advanced stage.

As for the exact costs - dunno there might be a book about it?

Thanks!

Is this level of openness just you, or part of a general approach of openness given the Masons driving it and the stated aims of the project?

It's something I've pushed for since day one, there had been previous attempts to develop the rear hall, always shrouded in secrecy and they all failed.
My view was that this needed to be a public project not a private one and it had to align with the Freemasons values of brotherhood, benevolence/charity and self-improvement. Thankfully the successive board members have agreed with this approach and they are 100% behind being as open as possible.

Love it. The level of openness and willingness to engage with community, including the biggest detractors, is something that convinced me that you are genuine in intents when you talk about things like the heritage hit of losing the hall being necessary to ensure the greater heritage conservation