COM/CAN: Aurora on Pirie | 54/57m | 14/15lvls | Office

Message

#1 Post by **Ben** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:19 pm

The Powerstate Credit union building recently got sold to the Zamels group who own the adjacent 4 storey building and the building behind.
I have heard rumours that when powerstate move to thier new building in July 2006 the three buildings will get demolished for a new office tower. It is quite a large block of land and next to the new KPMG building and with the conservatory will look great in hindmarsh square.

Does anyone know what the height limits for Adelaide are? and if so is their anyway they will be increased in the future so Adelaide might be able to have atleast one decent size building, so our skyline will not be as embarressing as how we can not open our new airport.

Algernon · #2 Post by **Algernon** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:45 pm

beamer85 wrote:Does anyone know what the height limits for Adelaide are?

These vary greatly by zone in the CBD. Also leep in mind that something called a Planning Ammendment Report was approved by council. What this means is the development plan, including height limits, have been altered. However, these don't come into effect until they're approved by the state planning minister. So for now, hard to make a call on the height limit, because it depends on when this building is proposed.

Also, height limits in Adelaide are not absolute. Prior to the PAR, we had a system where a building that didn't meet the development regulations (such as height) were immediately classed non complying. Our new system has something called 'merit based assessment', which means a building can in some ways circumvent development regulations if it has significant 'merit' as judged by the council. This doesn't mean you can build as high as you want, however it can buy you an extra level or two if your building is really smancy looking.

greenchilli · #3 Post by **greenchilli** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:04 am

thats better than before, but we really need to make an effort to increase it to 135m + at least (height of santos) as santos really has no interference with flight path and the 'close proximity to airport' restriction is stupid.

Algernon · #4 Post by **Algernon** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 12:18 am

greenchilli wrote:thats better than before, but we really need to make an effort to increase it to 135m + at least (height of santos) as santos really has no interference with flight path and the 'close proximity to airport' restriction is stupid.

Will an IP cross reference with you and shuzstar have an interesting result?

With regards to the height limit, i've given it more thought, and from memory Admiral House scraped in under the old height regime. From memory it was either a grade 2 or 3 development (it definitely required public notication, so it was in some way non complying). Admiral is around 36m in height. Perhaps that's a good guide to the height limit, but as i've said new planning rules come into effect soon so maybe a shade higher is possible.

#5 Post by **AtD** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 1:05 am

greenchilli wrote:we really need to make an effort to increase it to 135m + at least

Why?

greenchilli · #6 Post by **greenchilli** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 2:46 pm

Algernon wrote:
Will an IP cross reference with you and shuzstar have an interesting result?

Um what? I dont get that sentence, made NO sense 2 me.

#7 Post by **Will** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 3:34 pm

Algernon wrote:
greenchilli wrote:thats better than before, but we really need to make an effort to increase it to 135m + at least (height of santos) as santos really has no interference with flight path and the 'close proximity to airport' restriction is stupid.
Will an IP cross reference with you and shuzstar have an interesting result?

With regards to the height limit, i've given it more thought, and from memory Admiral House scraped in under the old height regime. From memory it was either a grade 2 or 3 development (it definitely required public notication, so it was in some way non complying). Admiral is around 36m in height. Perhaps that's a good guide to the height limit, but as i've said new planning rules come into effect soon so maybe a shade higher is possible.

Admiral is 30.55m in height. And It did not scrap under the old height regime, it was approved by council because they thought it had high merit. The old height restriction for that part of Hindmarsh square was 21m, however the council decided to apply their new height restrictions which for that part of Hindmarsh Square are now 29m, so the council decided that the extra 1.55m was not enough to reject the proposal.

#8 Post by **Will** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:01 pm

AtD wrote:
greenchilli wrote:we really need to make an effort to increase it to 135m + at least
Why?

Why not?

Adelarch · #9 Post by **Adelarch** » Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:52 pm

well this is getting a little offtopic but on the subject of Admiral, last I heard several weeks ago the scaffolding was coming off, yet no-one's posted anything since

Is the scaffolding still on, or did the building end up looking crap in the end (doubtful) or is general indifference the reason?

Would be great to see some pics (nudge nudge, wink wink)

...ditto that new 8 level office in light square. Otherwise I'm just gonna have to come and take some myself in a few weeks

#10 Post by **AtD** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:13 am

Hindmarsh Sq itself has been fenced off. I can't remember hearing what they intend to do, but the Square is in need of a face lift.

#11 Post by **Ben** » Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:13 pm

They are building a childrens playground you can read more under major projects on the acc website.

#12 Post by **Howie** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:44 am

Confidence sky-high with towers
RHIANNON HOYLE, REAL ESTATE EDITOR

April 14, 2007 12:15am Article from: The Advertiser

CONFIDENCE in the South Australian economy has been highlighted by plans for two premium commercial towers, valued at $210 million, to be developed on Pirie St.

Urban Construct have revealed plans exclusively to The Advertiser, outlining their proposal for two buildings Ã¢â‚¬â€œ 14 and 15 floors respectively Ã¢â‚¬â€œ next to the recently completed 151 Pirie complex.

The development will deliver almost 30,000sq m of office space to the commercial sector.

Urban Construct chief executive Todd Brown said the timing for the project was "ideal".

"The most recent Property Council of Australia report shows vacancy rates for Adelaide's core office market are at historic lows with a rate of 6.6 per cent, down 1.2 per cent in the six months to January 2007," he said.

"There has been about $500 million worth of commercial properties come on to the market in the Adelaide CBD over the past two years, yet the market has absorbed this influx of commercial offerings and continues to demand more."

The project is the latest in a line of major developments announced by Urban Construct, including the $1.5 billion Newport Quays waterfront redevelopment at Port Adelaide, the $600 million The Precinct redevelopment of the Balfours/bus station sites and the $600 million Holdfast Shores development.

A development application for the Pirie St project was lodged with Adelaide City Council last week.

"We believe this continued economic growth will see the market rapidly absorb the opportunities available in the Pirie St development, with the eastern tower offering 13,000sq m and a further 16,500sq m available in the western tower," Mr Brown said.

The complex will aim to achieve a 5-Star Green Star rating and will include:

ON-SITE parking.

GROUND floor retail space.

CHILDCARE facilities.

A STATE-of-the-art rooftop recreation and function facility Ã¢â‚¬â€œ including a pool, gym, sauna, spa and landscaped gardens.

If approved, the eastern building will be the first to come to the market in late May.

Sensational-Adelaide's original Rumour thread about this posted by Beamer85 back in Dec 05
http://www.sensational-adelaide.com/for ... &sk=t&sd=a

bva · #13 Post by **bva** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 2:12 am

got worrid for a minute as i though this article was referring to the 31storey tower!
if built it rpovide nice enclosure to Hindmarsh Square, along with the Conservatory Building, although i would prefer a more interesting design

Snorkie · #14 Post by **Snorkie** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 3:31 am

Fuck me dead!!! This is a joke. There is so many projects at the moment that I cant keep up with it anymore. This one seems to look quite good, and certainly a good skyline/density booster. With so many projects around at the moment lets hope they all get built, cause hate to say it, but i fear many will not. At 15 floors this one should come in at about 60m (I think), which is pretty good for that part of town, and hindmarsh square will look awsome surrounded by these two new towers.

Pistol · #15 Post by **Pistol** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:43 am

If all these proposals go ahead, the Adelaide skyline will change SO much over the next couple of years. The skyline of 2010 will definitely be a lot different to now

[COM] COM/CAN: Aurora on Pirie | 54/57m | 14/15lvls | Office

[COM] COM/CAN: Aurora on Pirie | 54/57m | 14/15lvls | Office

[COM] Re: New tower for Hindmarsh square?

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

[COM] #U/C: Aurora on Pirie | 54/57m | 14/15lvls | Office

[COM]

[COM]

[COM]

Who is online