15 posts in this thread / 0 new
Last post

FISHERMANS BEND ZONE | 132-134 Ferrars St | 165m | 49L | Residential

Mark Baljak's picture

Rothew Lowman design


carpark - childcare - 381 apartments

current look

additional renders © Rothe Lowman


typical layout

rooftop area

Back to top
Qantas743's picture


Back to top
Riccardo's picture

Yes, i did say i wouldn't register here, but anyway...

This building is bloody beautiful!

Lets have more like it.

Back to top
Chris Peska's picture

Welcome Riccardo :-) yes this building is quite nice, I think it sort of looks like eureka in some ways. Would be great if it gets up.

Observe. Design. Build. Live.

Back to top
MelbourneGuy's picture

Makes a very bold statement where it's situated.

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture

City of Port Phillip have advised the minister they do not support the proposal.

Plans and report can be found here:


Back to top
Chris Peska's picture

No surprises there. The PPCC were never going to approve this off the bat. It will be interesting to see how the state government and council work together as the urban renewal process matures for FB.

Observe. Design. Build. Live.

Back to top
MelbourneGuy's picture

Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever heard any council actively support high rise development. I could be wrong but that's what it feels like.

Back to top
Peter Maltezos's picture

The council represents the locals.


I used to live in Richmond in a two storey block of flats and from my windows on the second floor, I could see into most of my neighbours back yards and even inside their rooms when the blinds were open or curtains pulled back from their windows.


Did I perv? No.

Did I care? No.

Could my neighbours vice-versa see me? Yes.


So I was quite surprised when my neighbour knocked on my door to sign a petition against a development next door to us that was going to be two storeys as well.


"They'll be able to see into our back yards and homes", he said.


I just tried to keep a straight face and politely refused to sign it.


He then gathered a large group of concerned citizens to try and block another similar development on our block a year later and went door knocking again for more support.


This was in Richmond, it's even worse in other suburbs.

Yes, the councils often oppose, but they do represent their constituents.

One of the reasons I left Richmond was because I was sick of dealing with so many reactive, small minded conservative people.


I now live happily in the city. smiley

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

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture

City of Port Phillip is a NIMBY Council voted in on the backlash against the St. Kilda Triangle Development.

The Montague Precinct Plan was generally a good document except that it contains height limits with no strategic baisis.

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture

New status: Never built.

Back to top
Alastair Taylor's picture


Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture

new scheme submitted for two smaller towers onsite, 18 & 23 levels

Back to top
Melbourne Muse's picture

Shakes head. This was a beautiful - and appropriate - proposal.

Marvelous Mega-Melbourne

Back to top
melbourne's picture

Approved by VCAT at 18 levels. Site should be for sale in the near future ;)

Americans get clearance for Fishermans Bend tower

US technology company Sunguard Availability Services has won approval for a high-rise tower in Melbourne's Fishermans Bend after drastically shrinking the scale of the project to comply with new state government planning controls.

Sunguard acquired the low-rise office building at 134-142 Ferrars Street in South Melbourne in 2012 and sought one of the first permits for a high-rise tower in the urban regeneration precinct. This followed rezoning of 250 hectares of industrial land (now 485 hectares) south-west of the CBD by former planning minister and now state Opposition Leader Matthew Guy.

The original permit application was for a massive Rothelowman-designed 49-storey tower with almost 400 apartments in a glass-encased building.

Following a hearing at planning tribunal VCAT, Sunguard secured a permit last month for an 18-storey development with an end value of $39 million.

It is unclear whether Sunguard will develop the site themselves, but given its expertise is in IT disaster recovery (annual revenues of US$1.4 billion) it is highly likely the company will look to sell-on the project to a bona fide developer.

Despite the drastic reduction in height and apartment yield, Sunguard should still make a tidy profit having paid just $3 million for the near 2000-square-metre corner site five years ago.

Read more: http://www.afr.com/real-estate/residential/vic/americans-get-clearance-f...
Follow us: @FinancialReview on Twitter | financialreview on Facebook

Back to top