[U/C] 88 O'Connell Street | 63m | 13, 13 and 15 Levels | Mixed Use
-
skyliner
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2359
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 9:16 pm
- Location: fassifern (near Brisbane)
[U/C]
Looks btilliant to me. There is nothing else being built that is like it.
I echo previously expressed and inferred feelings - the sooner they get on with it the better. Inaction speaks well of nothing. North Adelaide needs that hole fiilled up - it's a disgusting eyesore in a top city.
The new design reminds me a little of 19th century architectural designs that you would come across in Europe - but this a distinct style that belongs in a city - North Adelaide will get that 'city' feel.
On the cautionary side I hope that this does not result in a lot of empty shops in North Adelaide.
Overall, a great move!
I echo previously expressed and inferred feelings - the sooner they get on with it the better. Inaction speaks well of nothing. North Adelaide needs that hole fiilled up - it's a disgusting eyesore in a top city.
The new design reminds me a little of 19th century architectural designs that you would come across in Europe - but this a distinct style that belongs in a city - North Adelaide will get that 'city' feel.
On the cautionary side I hope that this does not result in a lot of empty shops in North Adelaide.
Overall, a great move!
-
Ho Really
- Super Size Scraper Poster!
- Posts: 2713
- Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 3:29 pm
- Location: In your head
[U/C]
I agree with you Urban. Adelaide has made too many mistakes like this in the past and it continues to do so. It seems we are in a rut that we can't get out of.urban wrote:Why don't European cities use this type of pseudo heritage with their new developments?
It is because they recognise that it detracts from the integrity of the heritage areas...
As for the donations to the ALP, I'm not surprised. Remember Makris is Greek...and most Greeks vote Labor.
Besides these, my remarks, I am happy to see a development finally happening on this site. I hope as skyliner mentioned, that it doesn't result in too many vacancies in other areas of North Adelaide.
Cheers
[U/C]
I think it will actually have the opposite effect as it will help to establish North Adelaide & O'Connell Street as a destination in its own right.skyliner wrote:On the cautionary side I hope that this does not result in a lot of empty shops in North Adelaide.
-
stumpjumper
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
[U/C]
The latest chapter in this saga sets some disturbing precendents.
Look at the sales history of the site. The mess began as a fallout from the State Bank fiasco.
The first real sale was by half owner Mr Norris Blanks to his co-owner. The price for that sale was set by the potential of the site under the currnet Development Act, ie three stories.
All sales of the property or parts have been on the basis of three stories max, including the recent Oberdan to Makris sale.
Makris, whose greed is legendary even among Greek landlords, decided to go for a rezone to multiply ihs profit.
Now he has that rezoning.
In my humble opinion, before such a windfall profit is delivered to an owner following rezoning on the baiss that the owner claims he cannot make a profit under present zoning, the council involved should require a neutral expert party to assess whether or not the owner is correct in saying that the site cannot be profitably developed under presnt zoning.
I know the Le Cornu site intimately, and have been involved in several development scenarios for it.
I can say with conviction that at the price Makris paid for the whole parcel of land which has now been rezoned, that he COULSD make a profit with a mixed residential/retail/office develpment tjhat conforms to the current development plan.
I challenge anyone to show that this is not true, using any reputable current guide to constrcution costs and any standard feasibility calculation.
Makris got what he wanted for not much effort (OK, he paid the government about $180,000, but he'll get that back).
But what a precedent. You want more bang for your buck out of a piece fo land you've just bought? Easy - pop some money in the mail and apply for rezoning.
The worst outcome is if Makris , now that he has the extra value on the site, just remortgages it and uses the cash elsewhere. After all, Makris has just created an extra $10,000,000 value or so out of thin air. It's been given to him, really, by a grateful state goivernment. Not a bad return on $180,000! Now Makris might as well use the extra value constructively. And that doens't mean to build anything except a bank account.
Makris might decide, given that he can't let the shops over the road in his North Adelaide Village centre, to put the whole Le Cornu site on the market - 'with approval for commercial/residential development to six stories...'.
Wonderful. And the wheels of commerce grind on.
Why can't we all do this - buy a property, have it rezoned, and make whoopee with the extra cash.
Well the simple answer is that to get your property rezoned in your own interest, you have to a be a big deal. A very big deal. And if you ask Con Makris and his good friends Foley, Rann and Conlon, they will be more than somewhat pleased to tell you that Makris is a very big deal indeed.
Look at the sales history of the site. The mess began as a fallout from the State Bank fiasco.
The first real sale was by half owner Mr Norris Blanks to his co-owner. The price for that sale was set by the potential of the site under the currnet Development Act, ie three stories.
All sales of the property or parts have been on the basis of three stories max, including the recent Oberdan to Makris sale.
Makris, whose greed is legendary even among Greek landlords, decided to go for a rezone to multiply ihs profit.
Now he has that rezoning.
In my humble opinion, before such a windfall profit is delivered to an owner following rezoning on the baiss that the owner claims he cannot make a profit under present zoning, the council involved should require a neutral expert party to assess whether or not the owner is correct in saying that the site cannot be profitably developed under presnt zoning.
I know the Le Cornu site intimately, and have been involved in several development scenarios for it.
I can say with conviction that at the price Makris paid for the whole parcel of land which has now been rezoned, that he COULSD make a profit with a mixed residential/retail/office develpment tjhat conforms to the current development plan.
I challenge anyone to show that this is not true, using any reputable current guide to constrcution costs and any standard feasibility calculation.
Makris got what he wanted for not much effort (OK, he paid the government about $180,000, but he'll get that back).
But what a precedent. You want more bang for your buck out of a piece fo land you've just bought? Easy - pop some money in the mail and apply for rezoning.
The worst outcome is if Makris , now that he has the extra value on the site, just remortgages it and uses the cash elsewhere. After all, Makris has just created an extra $10,000,000 value or so out of thin air. It's been given to him, really, by a grateful state goivernment. Not a bad return on $180,000! Now Makris might as well use the extra value constructively. And that doens't mean to build anything except a bank account.
Makris might decide, given that he can't let the shops over the road in his North Adelaide Village centre, to put the whole Le Cornu site on the market - 'with approval for commercial/residential development to six stories...'.
Wonderful. And the wheels of commerce grind on.
Why can't we all do this - buy a property, have it rezoned, and make whoopee with the extra cash.
Well the simple answer is that to get your property rezoned in your own interest, you have to a be a big deal. A very big deal. And if you ask Con Makris and his good friends Foley, Rann and Conlon, they will be more than somewhat pleased to tell you that Makris is a very big deal indeed.
-
.::G!oRgOs::.
- Gold-Member ;)
- Posts: 83
- Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2005 12:01 am
- Location: City of Unley
-
stumpjumper
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
[U/C]
I just checked my wallet and I don't think it's me.
According to the Local Govt website, it's Makris.
According to the Local Govt website, it's Makris.
[U/C]
Whops he is, according to a article from 2004
Though that that article is pretty old, so someone could of taken over him. I seriously thought someone in mining was the richest man in SA.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/ ... 52381.html$583 million, Con Makris (South Australia)
Though that that article is pretty old, so someone could of taken over him. I seriously thought someone in mining was the richest man in SA.
[U/C]
And so what? he makes money- we get development, employment, money. He spends the money he makes and we get... development, employment, money..........
I am being simplistic but hell, good on him, wish I was that smart and lucky! (and rich!)
I am being simplistic but hell, good on him, wish I was that smart and lucky! (and rich!)
-
how_good_is_he
- High Rise Poster!
- Posts: 238
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:32 pm
[U/C]
Stumpjumper can I remind you of a few things -
Vince Oberdan had approval to do a 9 storey development on this very site 20 years ago. Now Makris has to fight and go to the State Govt to try to get 6 stories - it shows that North Adelaides planning laws are going backwards.
Bob Wallis {Wallis cinemas} bought the site from Oberdan some 7 years ago and GAVE UP TRYING TO GET AN APPROVAL and put the site on the OPEN MARKET FOR SALE by public tender.
It took him over over 6 months to sell it because NO ONE WANTED IT - IT WAS CONSIDERED CURSED [OBERDAN WENT BANKRUPT AND LOST MILLIONS].
If the Adelaide City Council [esp Cr Anne Moran] was so enamoured by the site they could quite easily have BOUGHT IT and set their strict guidelines of what they wanted built there. They could have then sold it to a developer of THEIR choice with a legal undertakings to abide. [ala Samaras and Rundle St/Frome St].
Makris' architects worked with the planning dept. of the Adelaide City council for well over a year when drawing up his initial 9 storey development!
They told him that a new PAR [Plan Amendment Report] for the North Adelaide was being prepared and were working together to make it comply [Why would Makris pay architects/consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with something that had no chance of approval?]
Council [read Cr Anne Moran & co.] then threw out the new PAR.
Just in case you think Makris is making a killing, bear in mind the vacant site is cost him approx $1m a year in interest/rates etc or $20,000 per week. From the time he bought it until the time he finishes may be 10 years, so say $10m wasted.
You should applaud him for having the balls for taking such a massive risk with no guarantee of an approval in trying to deliver a world-class development where many others have failed ....
He could have taken his money to QLD or Dubai and done the same thing without any headaches!
Vince Oberdan had approval to do a 9 storey development on this very site 20 years ago. Now Makris has to fight and go to the State Govt to try to get 6 stories - it shows that North Adelaides planning laws are going backwards.
Bob Wallis {Wallis cinemas} bought the site from Oberdan some 7 years ago and GAVE UP TRYING TO GET AN APPROVAL and put the site on the OPEN MARKET FOR SALE by public tender.
It took him over over 6 months to sell it because NO ONE WANTED IT - IT WAS CONSIDERED CURSED [OBERDAN WENT BANKRUPT AND LOST MILLIONS].
If the Adelaide City Council [esp Cr Anne Moran] was so enamoured by the site they could quite easily have BOUGHT IT and set their strict guidelines of what they wanted built there. They could have then sold it to a developer of THEIR choice with a legal undertakings to abide. [ala Samaras and Rundle St/Frome St].
Makris' architects worked with the planning dept. of the Adelaide City council for well over a year when drawing up his initial 9 storey development!
They told him that a new PAR [Plan Amendment Report] for the North Adelaide was being prepared and were working together to make it comply [Why would Makris pay architects/consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars to come up with something that had no chance of approval?]
Council [read Cr Anne Moran & co.] then threw out the new PAR.
Just in case you think Makris is making a killing, bear in mind the vacant site is cost him approx $1m a year in interest/rates etc or $20,000 per week. From the time he bought it until the time he finishes may be 10 years, so say $10m wasted.
You should applaud him for having the balls for taking such a massive risk with no guarantee of an approval in trying to deliver a world-class development where many others have failed ....
He could have taken his money to QLD or Dubai and done the same thing without any headaches!
[U/C]
Here Here "how_good_is_he" and "mooshie"
so what if makris is going to make money out of it. No one does something for nothing... and anyway, how many of us here wouldn't wan't to get the most out of our dollar?
I'm sure that throughout his life he would've worked very hard and wouldve taken many risks with the little money he had (early on), and with a degree of luck & good life choices & future forcasting, has created the wealth he enjoys today!
As 'how_good_is_he wrote'... he couldv'e gone to the Gold Coast and built a skyscraper appartment and made 10 fold, but he's dedicated to making SA a better place and to bring us inline with the other states as we have been lagging behind for far too long. We should be close to or on par with WA and possibly even QLD in such areas, but the truth is we're not and Makris is dedicated to making that happen. Without such people would places like Glenelg beach for example, today still remain how it was 15 years ago? Who knows...
so what if makris is going to make money out of it. No one does something for nothing... and anyway, how many of us here wouldn't wan't to get the most out of our dollar?
I'm sure that throughout his life he would've worked very hard and wouldve taken many risks with the little money he had (early on), and with a degree of luck & good life choices & future forcasting, has created the wealth he enjoys today!
As 'how_good_is_he wrote'... he couldv'e gone to the Gold Coast and built a skyscraper appartment and made 10 fold, but he's dedicated to making SA a better place and to bring us inline with the other states as we have been lagging behind for far too long. We should be close to or on par with WA and possibly even QLD in such areas, but the truth is we're not and Makris is dedicated to making that happen. Without such people would places like Glenelg beach for example, today still remain how it was 15 years ago? Who knows...
-
Redback20
- Gold-Member ;)
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 2:48 pm
- Location: Adelaide southern suburbs
[U/C]
Exactly right, we need developers with that kind of capital and entrepreneurial attitude in SA, good on him. This is a capitalist free market country last time i checked, and any government HAS to work with private sector business, sometimes more on their terms than the pollies would like, but hey thats often how things get done.
I don't see why it is bad for the state govt to be good mates with the big business of this state, and other states & overseas for that matter. I'd argue they should be encouraging as much business as possible to come here, in fact as a voter I think I'd insist its their job to ensure Makris and others like them invest in South Australia.
I don't see why it is bad for the state govt to be good mates with the big business of this state, and other states & overseas for that matter. I'd argue they should be encouraging as much business as possible to come here, in fact as a voter I think I'd insist its their job to ensure Makris and others like them invest in South Australia.
-
stumpjumper
- Legendary Member!
- Posts: 1497
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:10 pm
[U/C]
I defer to your greater knowledge, how_good_is_he. Oberdan did have approval to do more than Makris has eventually managed.
However, the laws in the intervening time changed, and, developers being neither exempt from the laws of a democratic parliament nor lawmakers themselves, have to operate within the planning regimes of the time. 50 years ago there were barely any planning rules at all in the city of Adelaide.
I understood Wallis' main problem was that he couldn't find an anchor tenant (eg Coles).
As for the hopeless Adelaide CIty Council - don't get me started, especially on Ms Moran and her selective memory, multiple positions etc.
I honestly can't think what ACC has added to this business except confusion and cost. And they've managed to do that without any advantage to their ratepayers! Well done, tossers.
However, the laws in the intervening time changed, and, developers being neither exempt from the laws of a democratic parliament nor lawmakers themselves, have to operate within the planning regimes of the time. 50 years ago there were barely any planning rules at all in the city of Adelaide.
I understood Wallis' main problem was that he couldn't find an anchor tenant (eg Coles).
As for the hopeless Adelaide CIty Council - don't get me started, especially on Ms Moran and her selective memory, multiple positions etc.
I honestly can't think what ACC has added to this business except confusion and cost. And they've managed to do that without any advantage to their ratepayers! Well done, tossers.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], gnrc_louis, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests