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

[[Shuz]]

If anything, aside from height, this is not a grandiose proposal. It's actually just another glass box tower that just inverts towards the top.

[Mpol02]

My thoughts exactly.
If the glazing isn’t exceptional on this then we’ll have another Adelaidan

[brizzlar]

Yeah I don't think it's about necessity as much as creating potential. Whether people like it or not, skyscrapers are often considered the mark of a world city. If Adelaide wants to regain the relative importance it once enjoyed in the 70s and 80s, this is one thing it needs to embrace. Additionally, there is some truth to the old adage 'build it and they will come' - if companies see that Adelaide is turning a new leaf and finally catching up to the other big 5, they're more likely to invest. The same goes for individuals who want to be in a city that's moving forward. I acknowledge that not everyone has such a mindset, but many do.

There's no "thanks" button anymore. But I would press it for this post.

I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on that. Skyscraper being the mark of a world city? I suppose Rome has a massive skyline? Or Edinburgh perhaps? Hell, have you seen Montreal's skyline? HUGE! Skylines don't make world cities, unique offerings and liveability make world cities. I will be the first to admit that Adelaide seriously needs to improve on its business sector offerings, be that through the removal or red-tape or creating more Lot 14 type precincts. But people are kidding themselves if they think we're ever going to resemble the type of world city that Melbourne or Sydney are. Adelaide might as well position itself in its own light, a boutique city churning out world firsts. Now, I love this design and I couldn't think of a better spot for it to go, especially with how it ties in with its heritage front, but I'm also a realist. No amount of 'mixed use' is going to change the facts around my original point... Apartment sales are down, international students residing in Adelaide are minimal, business sector requiring premium office space is non-existent and the hotel market is on the verge of saturation. COVID and the knock on effect is not going to change for at-least a decade, our state would be better off steering away from oversupply and trying to develop new industries that might one day require these types of buildings rather than preempting a flood of grown that hasn't really been sourced and nurtured.

I take your point Patrick. You rightly point out that there are some important cities without skyscrapers. But to be fair, the majority of the alpha global cities have them and even a number of beta world cities have them. I concede that there are a number of European cities that have towers equal to or smaller than Adelaide, with more global influence/significance. I agree that skyscrapers aren't everything. But this doesn't therefore mean that Adelaide shouldn't aim to build a little higher.

I don't think it's realistic at all for ADL to become the next Melbourne or Sydney - that's Brisbane's future and perhaps Perth's. But what harm is there in ADL aspiring to become the next Perth - with several big towers and a mid-sized metro population of around 2 million? Or even to become like Vienna, which happens to have 3 buildings over 150m and a population of about 2mill?

You make a good point about the apartment sales being down etc - so perhaps there's wisdom in not aiming for such development like this just yet.

[rev]

There's no "thanks" button anymore. But I would press it for this post.

I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on that. Skyscraper being the mark of a world city? I suppose Rome has a massive skyline? Or Edinburgh perhaps? Hell, have you seen Montreal's skyline? HUGE! Skylines don't make world cities, unique offerings and liveability make world cities. I will be the first to admit that Adelaide seriously needs to improve on its business sector offerings, be that through the removal or red-tape or creating more Lot 14 type precincts. But people are kidding themselves if they think we're ever going to resemble the type of world city that Melbourne or Sydney are. Adelaide might as well position itself in its own light, a boutique city churning out world firsts. Now, I love this design and I couldn't think of a better spot for it to go, especially with how it ties in with its heritage front, but I'm also a realist. No amount of 'mixed use' is going to change the facts around my original point... Apartment sales are down, international students residing in Adelaide are minimal, business sector requiring premium office space is non-existent and the hotel market is on the verge of saturation. COVID and the knock on effect is not going to change for at-least a decade, our state would be better off steering away from oversupply and trying to develop new industries that might one day require these types of buildings rather than preempting a flood of grown that hasn't really been sourced and nurtured.

I take your point Patrick. You rightly point out that there are some important cities without skyscrapers. But to be fair, the majority of the alpha global cities have them and even a number of beta world cities have them. I concede that there are a number of European cities that have towers equal to or smaller than Adelaide, with more global influence/significance. I agree that skyscrapers aren't everything. But this doesn't therefore mean that Adelaide shouldn't aim to build a little higher.

I don't think it's realistic at all for ADL to become the next Melbourne or Sydney - that's Brisbane's future and perhaps Perth's. But what harm is there in ADL aspiring to become the next Perth - with several big towers and a mid-sized metro population of around 2 million? Or even to become like Vienna, which happens to have 3 buildings over 150m and a population of about 2mill?

You make a good point about the apartment sales being down etc - so perhaps there's wisdom in not aiming for such development like this just yet.

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

[[Shuz]]

Perths economy is only bigger than it should be because of mining.

[brizzlar]

I'm sorry, but I call bullshit on that. Skyscraper being the mark of a world city? I suppose Rome has a massive skyline? Or Edinburgh perhaps? Hell, have you seen Montreal's skyline? HUGE! Skylines don't make world cities, unique offerings and liveability make world cities. I will be the first to admit that Adelaide seriously needs to improve on its business sector offerings, be that through the removal or red-tape or creating more Lot 14 type precincts. But people are kidding themselves if they think we're ever going to resemble the type of world city that Melbourne or Sydney are. Adelaide might as well position itself in its own light, a boutique city churning out world firsts. Now, I love this design and I couldn't think of a better spot for it to go, especially with how it ties in with its heritage front, but I'm also a realist. No amount of 'mixed use' is going to change the facts around my original point... Apartment sales are down, international students residing in Adelaide are minimal, business sector requiring premium office space is non-existent and the hotel market is on the verge of saturation. COVID and the knock on effect is not going to change for at-least a decade, our state would be better off steering away from oversupply and trying to develop new industries that might one day require these types of buildings rather than preempting a flood of grown that hasn't really been sourced and nurtured.

I take your point Patrick. You rightly point out that there are some important cities without skyscrapers. But to be fair, the majority of the alpha global cities have them and even a number of beta world cities have them. I concede that there are a number of European cities that have towers equal to or smaller than Adelaide, with more global influence/significance. I agree that skyscrapers aren't everything. But this doesn't therefore mean that Adelaide shouldn't aim to build a little higher.

I don't think it's realistic at all for ADL to become the next Melbourne or Sydney - that's Brisbane's future and perhaps Perth's. But what harm is there in ADL aspiring to become the next Perth - with several big towers and a mid-sized metro population of around 2 million? Or even to become like Vienna, which happens to have 3 buildings over 150m and a population of about 2mill?

You make a good point about the apartment sales being down etc - so perhaps there's wisdom in not aiming for such development like this just yet.

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either. I'm keen for genuine discussion and am open to being persuaded from existing beliefs. Perth's economy is much larger. And I'm proposing that Adelaide (a gamma world city with a small metro market) should aspire to reaching an economy the size of Perth's (a beta global city sized economy which links a mid-sized metro market into the world economy). I'm guessing you're trying to say that things like primary industry (eg car manufacturing, mining etc) matter more than towers in a CBD. In once sense I agree. As you would know, a city needs numerous primary industries to form a diversified economy. I was simply trying to assert that many of the successful cities both in Australia and abroad (esp in North America and Asia) happen to have skyscrapers. I see a pattern there. What do you think?

[brizzlar]

Perths economy is only bigger than it should be because of mining.

Everyone on the east coast keeps saying that and they may be right. But surely it has to be more diverse than just mining right?

[HiTouch]

I take your point Patrick. You rightly point out that there are some important cities without skyscrapers. But to be fair, the majority of the alpha global cities have them and even a number of beta world cities have them. I concede that there are a number of European cities that have towers equal to or smaller than Adelaide, with more global influence/significance. I agree that skyscrapers aren't everything. But this doesn't therefore mean that Adelaide shouldn't aim to build a little higher.

I don't think it's realistic at all for ADL to become the next Melbourne or Sydney - that's Brisbane's future and perhaps Perth's. But what harm is there in ADL aspiring to become the next Perth - with several big towers and a mid-sized metro population of around 2 million? Or even to become like Vienna, which happens to have 3 buildings over 150m and a population of about 2mill?

You make a good point about the apartment sales being down etc - so perhaps there's wisdom in not aiming for such development like this just yet.

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either.

Oh he is. Rev is the silver medal of one upping. Second only to Nort.

[rev]

I take your point Patrick. You rightly point out that there are some important cities without skyscrapers. But to be fair, the majority of the alpha global cities have them and even a number of beta world cities have them. I concede that there are a number of European cities that have towers equal to or smaller than Adelaide, with more global influence/significance. I agree that skyscrapers aren't everything. But this doesn't therefore mean that Adelaide shouldn't aim to build a little higher.

I don't think it's realistic at all for ADL to become the next Melbourne or Sydney - that's Brisbane's future and perhaps Perth's. But what harm is there in ADL aspiring to become the next Perth - with several big towers and a mid-sized metro population of around 2 million? Or even to become like Vienna, which happens to have 3 buildings over 150m and a population of about 2mill?

You make a good point about the apartment sales being down etc - so perhaps there's wisdom in not aiming for such development like this just yet.

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either. I'm keen for genuine discussion and am open to being persuaded from existing beliefs. Perth's economy is much larger. And I'm proposing that Adelaide (a gamma world city with a small metro market) should aspire to reaching an economy the size of Perth's (a beta global city sized economy which links a mid-sized metro market into the world economy). I'm guessing you're trying to say that things like primary industry (eg car manufacturing, mining etc) matter more than towers in a CBD. In once sense I agree. As you would know, a city needs numerous primary industries to form a diversified economy. I was simply trying to assert that many of the successful cities both in Australia and abroad (esp in North America and Asia) happen to have skyscrapers. I see a pattern there. What do you think?

Not sure what you're trying to say about one upping.

You need people to fill buildings. To fill those hotels and apartments.

More industries more jobs...more people. More people working, more money flowing in the local economy. Also means more likely that big business will setup a presence here, meaning tall buildings in the cbd.

Cant have one without the other.

Economic confidence is important. Look what happened after the state bank collapse.

[Nort]

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either.

Oh he is. Rev is the silver medal of one upping. Second only to Nort.

Thank you? But in this case Rev is exactly right. Tall buildings are generally an indicator of economic development, not a driver of it.

[brizzlar]

Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? A bigger & stronger economy.
And Perth's economy is twice the size of Adelaide's.

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either. I'm keen for genuine discussion and am open to being persuaded from existing beliefs. Perth's economy is much larger. And I'm proposing that Adelaide (a gamma world city with a small metro market) should aspire to reaching an economy the size of Perth's (a beta global city sized economy which links a mid-sized metro market into the world economy). I'm guessing you're trying to say that things like primary industry (eg car manufacturing, mining etc) matter more than towers in a CBD. In once sense I agree. As you would know, a city needs numerous primary industries to form a diversified economy. I was simply trying to assert that many of the successful cities both in Australia and abroad (esp in North America and Asia) happen to have skyscrapers. I see a pattern there. What do you think?

Not sure what you're trying to say about one upping.

You need people to fill buildings. To fill those hotels and apartments.

More industries more jobs...more people. More people working, more money flowing in the local economy. Also means more likely that big business will setup a presence here, meaning tall buildings in the cbd.

Cant have one without the other.

Economic confidence is important. Look what happened after the state bank collapse.

Rev I'm keen to get your thoughts on what I said above on the specific points I made - ie regarding different world cities and their features.

Yes agreed you need jobs to get people etc. Not disputing that.

The point about one upping was in reference to your initial comment: 'Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? - it came across as both sarcastic and as trying to say 'you're wrong I'm right.' It might well have been misinterpreted but that's how it read.

[brizzlar]

Hey Rev,

haha,I'm not here to one up anyone mate. I trust you aren't either. I'm keen for genuine discussion and am open to being persuaded from existing beliefs. Perth's economy is much larger. And I'm proposing that Adelaide (a gamma world city with a small metro market) should aspire to reaching an economy the size of Perth's (a beta global city sized economy which links a mid-sized metro market into the world economy). I'm guessing you're trying to say that things like primary industry (eg car manufacturing, mining etc) matter more than towers in a CBD. In once sense I agree. As you would know, a city needs numerous primary industries to form a diversified economy. I was simply trying to assert that many of the successful cities both in Australia and abroad (esp in North America and Asia) happen to have skyscrapers. I see a pattern there. What do you think?

Not sure what you're trying to say about one upping.

You need people to fill buildings. To fill those hotels and apartments.

More industries more jobs...more people. More people working, more money flowing in the local economy. Also means more likely that big business will setup a presence here, meaning tall buildings in the cbd.

Cant have one without the other.

Economic confidence is important. Look what happened after the state bank collapse.

Rev I'm keen to get your thoughts on what I said above on the specific points I made - ie regarding different world cities and their features.

Yes agreed you need jobs to get people etc. Not disputing that.

The point about one upping was in reference to your initial comment: 'Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? - it came across as both sarcastic and as trying to say 'you're wrong I'm right.' It might well have been misinterpreted but that's how it read.


Cheers.

[Nort]

The point about one upping was in reference to your initial comment: 'Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? - it came across as both sarcastic and as trying to say 'you're wrong I'm right.' It might well have been misinterpreted but that's how it read.

I don't want to speak for Rev, but this was your post that started this branch of the conversation:

Additionally, there is some truth to the old adage 'build it and they will come' - if companies see that Adelaide is turning a new leaf and finally catching up to the other big 5, they're more likely to invest. The same goes for individuals who want to be in a city that's moving forward. I acknowledge that not everyone has such a mindset, but many do.

I would agree in calling out that assumption as mostly wrong when it comes to an established city such as Adelaide. Yes these things tend to come in waves, where some successful developments lead to others as companies and investors see the market is there, however if the economic foundations are not already there over-development can actually be counter-productive to further investment, as they see large rates of hotel vacancies and office floors going unleased.

[brizzlar]

The point about one upping was in reference to your initial comment: 'Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? - it came across as both sarcastic and as trying to say 'you're wrong I'm right.' It might well have been misinterpreted but that's how it read.

I don't want to speak for Rev, but this was your post that started this branch of the conversation:

Additionally, there is some truth to the old adage 'build it and they will come' - if companies see that Adelaide is turning a new leaf and finally catching up to the other big 5, they're more likely to invest. The same goes for individuals who want to be in a city that's moving forward. I acknowledge that not everyone has such a mindset, but many do.

I would agree in calling out that assumption as mostly wrong when it comes to an established city such as Adelaide. Yes these things tend to come in waves, where some successful developments lead to others as companies and investors see the market is there, however if the economic foundations are not already there over-development can actually be counter-productive to further investment, as they see large rates of hotel vacancies and office floors going unleased.

Hi Nort,

yeah I've got zero issues with being challenged. More than happy for that. My concern is the manner in which it's done. I'm finding on this whole website that certain people find it appropriate to speak in a derogatory manner towards those they disagree with. Having people swear at you/your ideas is unprofessional and unnecessary.

I certainly did make an initial statement that took the conversation in a different direction - and perhaps my initial statement lacked balance. I made it sound like an entire economy can change when one builds a few skyscrapers - I know that's false and should have been clearer in stating that. So I'm happy to concede that.

[brizzlar]

The point about one upping was in reference to your initial comment: 'Do you know what's more important then tall shiny buildings? - it came across as both sarcastic and as trying to say 'you're wrong I'm right.' It might well have been misinterpreted but that's how it read.

I don't want to speak for Rev, but this was your post that started this branch of the conversation:

Additionally, there is some truth to the old adage 'build it and they will come' - if companies see that Adelaide is turning a new leaf and finally catching up to the other big 5, they're more likely to invest. The same goes for individuals who want to be in a city that's moving forward. I acknowledge that not everyone has such a mindset, but many do.

I would agree in calling out that assumption as mostly wrong when it comes to an established city such as Adelaide. Yes these things tend to come in waves, where some successful developments lead to others as companies and investors see the market is there, however if the economic foundations are not already there over-development can actually be counter-productive to further investment, as they see large rates of hotel vacancies and office floors going unleased.

Hi Nort,

yeah I've got zero issues with being challenged. More than happy for that. My concern is the manner in which it's done. I'm finding on this website that certain people find it appropriate to speak in a derogatory manner towards those they disagree with. Having people swear at you/your ideas is unprofessional and unnecessary. It's disappointing because like most/all people on here, I'm keen to share and debate ideas about the future of Adelaide.

I certainly did make an initial statement that took the conversation in a different direction - and perhaps my initial statement lacked balance. I made it sound like an entire economy can change when one builds a few skyscrapers - I know that's false and should have been clearer in stating that. So I'm happy to concede that.