Advertisement
67 posts in this thread / 0 new
Last post

Pages

SOUTHBANK | Southbank Central | 1-11 Balston Street | 48L | 154m | Residential

Ryan Seychell's picture
#1

I think Nick mentioned somewhere recently that this was now approved and at pre-launch sales. Figured it would be time to make a thread.

Back to top
Michael Berquez's picture

Oh dear.....I'm already scared

Back to top
3000's picture

Here we go...

Back to top
Ryan Seychell's picture

Model:

Back to top
MelbourneGuy's picture

CE don't really try hard to create anything of architectural worth imo. I can see this building being torn down in thirty years.

Back to top
Peter Maltezos's picture

I'm afraid we are stuck with these buildings for a very long time.

One has to purchase each individual strata titled apartment to own the building to be able to demolish it and then find a way to make a profit after building something else on the site as well.

Good luck to anyone who takes that on.laugh

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

Back to top
Ryan Seychell's picture

All their names are the same, this one is being marketed as "Southbank Central".

http://www.southbankcentral.com.au/

Back to top
3000's picture

What the hell is this

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture

must have nuked the surrounding towers out of shot...

Back to top
Qantas743's picture

I only count 45 levels...

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture

I have 48 there

Back to top
Ryan Seychell's picture

Me too

Back to top
Dean's picture

LOL 3 levels must be hidden under all your negativity.

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture

larger verison:

I think it is OK, no work of art, but it is very glassy and better than many other CE towers.

Back to top
Nicholas Harrison's picture

Back to top
Crz's picture

It looks okay but you can tell its finishing will be very cheap

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture

Construction tender open

Back to top
Mark Baljak's picture

up and running

Back to top
Ryan Seychell's picture

Back to top
Ryan Seychell's picture

Was just looking at the original design Central Equity proposed for this site, think the final version looks much better.


Back to top
3000's picture

I'm a bit confused as to why they kept the facade on this one.

Back to top
Adam Ford's picture

Err... because it has a Heritage Overlay on it and demolishing it would be, like ... illegal.
See that picture above? See that contiguous herirtage streetscape of the nature Southbank is screaming for?
Any more dots need drawing ?

Back to top
Dean's picture

You dont have to be such a prick about it.

Back to top
3000's picture

Thank you for answering my question, Adam. I'm sure you thought out a clear, concise and polite response....then deleted it for this trash.

Back to top
Bilby's picture

The tone frustration is entirely understandable. The fact that many posters on this site have consistently failed to recognise the self-evident crisis in heritage protection in Melbourne over the past 5 years contributes to the atmosphere of desperation around this issue. The reason that the heritage defenders are out and passionate about their work right now has nothing to do with being anti-development, and everything to do with protecting what heritage amenity we have left in this city for the hundreds of thousands of additional new residents that will call it home in the next decade. Here we have a classic early 20th century warehouse facade in an area that was once dominated by classic industrial buildings - a suburb that now has just a few key examples remaining. Southbank is notoriously soulless and the council is in a panic to redress the damage already done. It is entirely obvious why this building (not just the facade) should have been kept - retaining the facade is better than nothing, but it won't assist the residents of Southbank in terms of the kind of character interiors needed at street level that places like Brunswick, Fitzroy, Collingwood, Prahran and Richmond have in spades. It will provide an interesting element in the streets cape and some modicum of connectedness with the district's past, though.

Back to top
3000's picture

I think Adam was just being a jerk because he could.
I have never sought to downplay heritage, Bilby. I may not spend the majority of my posts harping on about x and z loss but I think heritage has always been important. It's clear you care a lot and I respect that.
This baffling trend of facadism is a freaking insult to Melbourne it's just allowing developers to get away with the bare-minimum in terms of design. You are 100% correct when you both say SB is soulless, it is a train wreck in terms of what builders like CE have done to it.
I'm not here to dispute the importance of heritage or good design because they both should be a given imo. Like I said, Adam was just being a jerk.

Back to top

Pages

Development & Planning

Friday, January 20, 2017 - 00:00
A rush of planning applications either side of the festive break are cumulatively seeking to add to South Melbourne's robust development scene, with four major apartment projects lodged. City of Port Phillip will now assess the respective merits of the fresh applications, along with a handful of other noteworthy towers already at planning that when combined, would provide the popular suburb with thousands of new apartments.

Policy, Culture & Opinion

Tuesday, January 17, 2017 - 00:00
On 2 January 2017, it was reported that several popular eateries and bars in Footscray had been vandalised, including the perennially successful 8 Bit Burgers on Droop Street, and Up In Smoke on Hopkins Street. 8 Bit had the warm new year's welcome gift of 14 smashed windows and the words “F**k off hipster scum” spray-painted on their entrance.

Advertisement

Visual Melbourne

Wednesday, August 31, 2016 - 17:00
Melbourne’s architectural landscape is a wonderful juxtaposition of modern and Victorian architecture. Although the CBD has been peppered with many skyscrapers, its historical structures have won Melbourne the title of “Australia’s most European city”.

Transport & Design

Sustainability & Environment

Tuesday, November 29, 2016 - 12:00
Timber mid-rise buildings are becoming the preferred choice for many stakeholders in Melbourne, due to a combination of factors, including cost-effectiveness, liveability, ease and efficiency of construction. Within the recent National Construction Code change, Deemed-To-Satisfy provisions allow mid-rise timber construction for buildings up to 25 metres “effective height” (typically, eight storeys).