12 posts in this thread / 0 new
Last post
Mark Baljak's picture
FISHERMANS BEND | 123-125 Montague St | 28-36-28L | 94-119-94m | Residential

renders © Peddle Thorp

elevations

podium use

landscape plan

podium top landscaping

Peter Maltezos's picture

A seriously good design, and from Peddle Thorpe of all people! yes

I collect, therefore I am.
thecollectormm.com.au

Nicholas Harrison's picture

This site is now for sale bofroe they even got a permit for teh above development.

Mark Baljak's picture
Mark Baljak's picture

City rezone reaps millions

June 24, 2013

Marika Dobbin

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/city-rezone-reaps-millions-20130623-2o...

>> One astute land owner, Austpac Properties, is hoping to more than double its money in less than three years by selling its site at 123 Montague Street in South Melbourne.

Austpac has put to market a key site in the new Montague precinct that it purchased in late 2010 for $12.7 million.

Agent CBRE said the interest from buyers had so far been worth about $25 million but, if the right developer came along, it could exceed $30 million.

>>>>>> cue the bullshit

>> ''With the stroke of a pen, the minster has an enormous amount of power to add tens of millions to the value of a property,'' Mr Tee said.

''He's ticking and flicking these tall tower proposals and making speculators incredibly wealthy, but really destroying any opportunity to have a soulful community on this site. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to get this iconic site right and it needs a plan to ensure it does not become Docklands mark two.''

>> RMIT planning professor Michael Buxton said Fishermans Bend was an example of ''world's worst practice''.

''It's scandalous what the government did in rezoning such a large area of land as capital city zone without any rules being in place and enriching canny speculators who saw this coming,'' he said. ''You could not get a worse example of how not to do development than Fishermans Bend.''

Nicholas Harrison's picture

I'm not sure that the good professor is aware that the area is covered by a developemnt contribution plan which will see those windfall gains spend on public infastructure as the sites are developed.

Also so far the Minster has been true to his word and not approved anyhting before the masterplan is complete.

Nicholas Harrison's picture

New status: never built.

Mark Baljak's picture

AFR
Fishermans towers face chop

>> Development projects worth hundreds of millions of dollars have been put in jeopardy by the Victorian government’s latest plan for the vast Fishermans Bend renewal zone on the edge of ­Melbourne’s CBD.

Under the interim plan, a number of high-density residential proposals with towers of 30 to 50 storeys will be ­dramatically cut back to just four or eight storeys.

>> Circa had been consistently encouraged by state planners to make its initial proposal of about 30 storeys “higher”, Mr Stokie said.

“Based on their advice I kept putting it up. Now it’s four levels [the height limit],” he said. “It will never get off the ground. You can’t build basements in that area because of the soil.

“By the time we build two levels of car parking there is nothing left for apartments.”

Mr Stokie said Circa had done extensive due diligence on the site and checked its proposals with the planning department before buying.

“Thirty levels is 30 levels. It’s not four levels,” he said.

Mr Stokie said as many as 20 towers in proposals on nearby streets were now under threat.

“And now none of them, going by this draft, can go ahead,” he said.

>> Developers and their consultants are now poring over an ill-defined map that was issued with last week’s plan. The map, which does not have street names, sets out the proposed height limits.

“We don’t have any other maps,” a Places Victoria spokeswoman said.

>> Along the street from Circa’s project is Austpac’s proposal for 705 apartments across three towers of 35 levels and more. An eight-storey limit appears set on its site.

It is the same story with a nearby 50-level tower proposed by Sungard Availability Services’ Adrian Bogatez. It too faces an eight-storey limit. But Mr Bogatez said the plan was not final, ­discussions with planners were continuing, and that he was still “optimistic”.

“It will be very disappointing if there was reduction in height in that area. It would be a big step backwards,” he said.

Two streets away private player MAB Corporation is also staying hopeful. It has about 700 units proposed across three towers of up to 28 levels.

The height limit on its section is now 18 levels. “This proposed height restriction is not consistent with the pre-application discussions we have had prior to ­lodging the application for the planning permit,” MAB chief operating officer David Hall said.

has the making of a f**k up already?

Nicholas Harrison's picture

Well Matthew Guy is the king of the backflip, just look at Ventnor and Green Wedge Zone planning 'mistakes'.

Andrew Mck's picture

Matthew Guy has done more damage than good imho.
Just look at the new zones and how much of suburbia is now off limits to development.
Just look at all the new height limits around the Shrine and Port Melbourne and now the area with the most potential for development in Fishermans Bend reduced to 4L.
What happend to redevelopment of Richmond Station being one of the 1st urban regenerational projects to get off the ground according to him, what happend to it ??
His bunggling and eventually doing NOTHING about the PAN OPs has completly changed my view of Matt Guy as being clueless and dangerous, he backflips at the whiff of pressure from NIMBY lobby groups, outer urban sprawl will speed up under his watch, he considers Mary Drost a persional friend, and on and on it goes.

He has deliverd nothing of good so far..

Qantas743's picture

He approved 568 Collins, Prima Pearl extension, Vision, Queensbridge Tower and Tower Melbourne (even after Doyle kicked up a stink and CEL were cheekily selling apartments off the plan before approval).

But yeah FB, residential zoning reforms and PANS-OPS are/were all a massive let down.

Melbman's picture

I actually don't mind the FB draft plan.

Call me old fashioned, but I like the use of clear design principles used, with variances in height depending on location. At least it is clear.

Tall buildings for the sake of it are getting boring. Mixing it up would bring more value to the area IMHO.