335 posts in this thread / 0 new
Last post

Pages

Mark Baljak's picture
#252

Hawke King
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

MILQ
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

The Principal
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Arden Park
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#253

The Spencer - General Cranes pics

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#254

Arden Park - one of the best completions in recent times
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Spencer - I think it's turned out fairly well
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#255

20-storey Spencer Street development stretches West Melbourne tower height limit

Quarry owner and private developer Paul Lofitis has gained planning approval for a 20-storey apartment complex on a site in Spencer Street he purchased for $12.75 million in December last year.

Mr Lofitis, who runs Lofts Quarries and a development firm, snapped up the former Dalston Bakery site on the corner of Spencer and Batman streets after gaining a significant windfall from another property deal nearby.

The windfall deal was a textbook case of site flipping which saw Mr Lofitis get planning approval for a 62-storey tower with 431 apartments on a site at 299 King Street which he then onsold to China-backed developer Aurumstone Group for $44 million.

According to Whitemark Property and Planning consultant and former politician Clem Newton-Brown, who acted for Mr Lofitis, the developer was unlikely to repeat his flipping technique on his latest foray in West Melbourne which saw him apply for a planning permit to build 22-storey tower with at 405-421 Spencer Street.

http://www.theage.com.au/business/property/20storey-spencer-street-devel...

Back to top
theboynoodle's picture
#256

Spencer - I think it's turned out fairly well

Really? I think it looks like a mishmash of several low-quality low-imagination towers combined to produce something substantially less than the sum of it's dreary parts. One of the 'treatments' looks ok in it's own right, but as a whole I cannot fathom what the architects were trying to achieve and why anyone at all thought this was something that should be built. In short.. it's hideous.

From my desk I can look over and see those three towers along City Road ("The Three Twats", as I like to call them) with Platinum in the middle. This one reminds me of those, but is worse than all three.

(opinions eh!)

Back to top
3000's picture
#257

The side with the white cladding looks okay, the rest not so much.

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#258

opinions indeed

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#259

The original plans involved full demolition of the art deco building that now forms the podium, didn't they?

Back to top
Rohan Storey's picture
#260

Yes they were, that was way back in like 2005 !

Lookingupatbuildings

Back to top
Rohan Storey's picture
#261

Looks like the design changed a few times, not for the better - one render shows all elements white or silvery, tying it all together, another shows them all dark, but no smaller top thing, again, tying them all in better. Guess the idea was to break up the bulk, make it look like at least 3 things stuck together, making the whole more vertical - but the horizontal solid balconies now dominate, undermining that idea. Not one of katsalidis' best, sometimes he nails it sometimes not.

Lookingupatbuildings

Back to top
redden's picture
#262

[QUOTE=redden;141527179]Workmen were erecting scaffolding and screens on the Melbourne Village site today. When I spoke to them about it, they said it was to be demolished. Not according to the render. Thanks to melburn21 for video and render.

Melbourne Village, 83 batman St West Melbourne

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=139198089

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Laurence Dragomir's picture
#263

I think they are demolishing it and building a new podium clad in brick or similar.

Back to top
Melbourne_Fragments's picture
#264

both an environmental and social waste to demolish a perfectly good historic brick structure just to replace it again with a faux-edition

Back to top
zenith's picture
#265

How exactly is it a 'social waste'?

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#266

Reflections
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Arden Gardens
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Close enough - Riverwalk Kensington
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#267

Reworked Wreckyn Street student accomm by Nettleton Tribe

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#268

Another completion - MILQ

Nice result
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
3000's picture
#269

MILQ came up alright. I just do not like the street-level balconies. Had a had experience with them a while back.

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#270

Arden Gardens
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Reflections with its reflective silver clad in place
NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

NORTH MELBOURNE + WEST MELBOURNE | 3051 + 3003 | Projects

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture
#271

Historic CBD building slated for demolition

Tower projects proposed by developers Fridcorp and Piccolo have been knocked back by the state planning tribunal on the grounds of size, while an historic 19th century industrial building on the CBD-fringe is ready for the wreckers.

The Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal has granted a permit for Spacious Property Development to build a 17-storey tower at 488 La Trobe Street, rejecting claims that the 130-year-old Spinks Tinsmiths factory would be eligible for protection under the City of Melbourne's proposed new heritage scheme.

The City of Melbourne is working on a new structure plan for West Melbourne and a new heritage regime but neither have been completed and a request to grant 488 La Trobe Street protection was not forthcoming.

The VCAT decision noted that, "because the minister for planning has declined to apply interim heritage controls over the review site, no permit is required to demolish the existing building on the site".

Among a slew of VCAT decisions, Fridcorp's proposal for a 12-storey project at 3-15 Shiel Street, North Melbourne, was rejected on the grounds it was too large and did not provide the appropriate graduated link between larger developments on nearby Haines Street and the low-rise Victorian streetscapes that have dominated the North Melbourne neighbourhood.

"Ultimately, we cannot find that all of the criteria for exceeding the preferred height limit are achieved, primarily as a number of the objectives are not met, where they specifically seek that the height and setback of new development respond to the context with low-scale residential neighbourhoods," the decision noted.

North Melbourne architect Peter Hogg welcomed the VCAT decision but slammed the Arden-McAuley scheme which had allowed a strip of large bulky projects to overshadow Gardiner's Reserve, the only public children's playground in North Melbourne.

"I think it's a very poor piece of urban planning – it's the sort of thing you'd expect from the 1960s urban planning period," Mr Hogg said.

Piccolo's 10-storey project at 341-347 Queensberry Street, around the corner from the Victoria Market, was rejected on the grounds that there were not enough setbacks in the building's design.

And at 164-184 Roden Street, West Melbourne, Oliver Hume's plans to demolish and add to existing buildings also were rejected, partly on the grounds that a series of proposed warehouse shells "may not receive acceptable levels of daylight".

http://www.theage.com.au/business/property/historic-cbd-building-slated-...

Back to top
Rohan Storey's picture
#272

Very sad about 488 Latrobe; the Minister obviously preferred to allow development unfettered by an HO in this case - in other cases in other suburbs he has signed off on interim protections even when someone had bought a place intending to demolish eg the City North heritage review listed 139 Franklin, so the design was modified to facade it instead. Couldve been done here. A very intact elaborate and old industrial front, strange no greater attempt to save it.

Lookingupatbuildings

Back to top
3000's picture
#273

Disappointing indeed.
North Melbourne is becoming the newest battleground in trying to make developers a bit more accountable for what they think they can knock down.
The problem seems to be that councils have also dragged their feet in getting sites listed and by the time they generate enough buzz the site goes straight to VCAT who developers seem to see as something of a win.

Back to top
Bilby's picture
#274

What was the motivation for the minister rejecting this specific interim heritage request from council? Actions have reasons. What was the reason in this case?

Back to top
theboynoodle's picture
#275

I would think that interim controls being applied as a response to a planning application are problematic. They are a 'cost' to a site owner, who may have recently purchased that site without controls and be able to legitimately ask why, if the building merits heritage protection, that wasn't identified sooner. Councils need to get their heritage controls in place on a timely basis. The minister can't be expected to bail them out, at the expense of a bona fide purchaser of a develop-able site, every time they screw up. His powers should be used selectively, otherwise it's a failure of the rule of law and you'll probably find taxpayers being stung to compensate site owners.

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture
#276

The minister did not put interim controls on the site because they already had a demolition permit issued by the City of Melbourne.

Back to top

Pages