<html><body>
Victoria Walks, a walking promotion charity supported by VicHeath, is leading a crowdsourcing initiative that is supported by the State Government and 14 councils. The campaign aims to collect and analyse opinions on walking right across the Melbourne metropolitan area.

The authorities are asking people to indicate their walking safety concerns through an interactive online map on CrowdSpot's platform.

"This is the first time the CrowdSpot platform has been used to gather pedestrian perceptions right across a major city" said Anthony Aisenberg, Director of CrowdSpot.

Melburnians can "indicate concerns like a lack of pedestrian crossings, poor street lighting, high traffic speed or footpath problems" reads a media release from Victoria Walks.

Dr Ben Rossiter, the Executive Officer of Victoria Walks, said "our understanding of road safety issues is usually limited to official crash statistics, which only tell part of the story".  

"Crash statistics provide data on serious injury crashes, but they don't tell us about all crashes, what people are worried about and where they do or don't feel safe walking".

In the last 10 years, 444 pedestrians lost their lives on Victorian roads and Dr Rossiter says that business as usual is not an option anymore.

"Road agencies won't be able to fix every problem and action will take time. But the feedback from the community will help them decide what to do and where".

To get involved, see the 'WalkSpot' platform: https://www.walkspot.org.au/

 

 
</body></html>

Alastair Taylor

Victoria Walks launches crowdsourcing campaign: opinions on walking around Melbourne

Revisiting a Melbourne orbital rail line

<html><body>
Changes to first home buyer incentives, alteration of the relationship between stamp duty and off-the-plan purchases, a new vacant housing tax and re-prioritising owner-occupiers over investors are all crystallised in Spring Street's <a href="http://www.vic.gov.au/system/user_files/Documents/housing/FINAL%20PDF%20DTF046_Q_housing01.pdf">Homes for Victorians</a>.

Having spent its first two years in government resetting planning &amp; development market fundamentals through initiatives like Capital City Zone reforms and the structure planning process that's still underway in Fishermans Bend, the release of Homes for Victorians is the next iteration of housing market reform.

While the stamp duty removal for first home buyers has already grabbed the headlines elsewhere, the clear prioritisation refocus on owner-occupiers for off-the-plan purchases is easily the most unexpected component among all the consumer-focused changes.  

<blockquote>
Rebalancing the market between investors and home buyers - Making off-the-plan fairer

The current off-the-plan stamp duty concessions mean the beneficiaries only pay stamp duty on the value of their land, before construction begins. This is a considerable saving compared to buying once the homes are built. It is particularly attractive for apartments.

Victoria is the only state to offer such a broad concession. And while it’s great for those who purchase property to build their future home, it also gives investors an unfair advantage.

To make sure that genuine home buyers are getting the subsidy, this concession will now only be available to home buyers who intend it to be their principal place of residence or who qualify for the first home buyer stamp duty concessions.

This initiative will apply to contracts entered into from 1 July 2017.

This measure will tilt the scales away from investors and back toward first home buyers. This change is expected to reduce the amount paid as subsidies by $841 million over the next four years.

This saving will be used to fund changes to stamp duty for first home buyers.
<a href="http://www.vic.gov.au/system/user_files/Documents/housing/FINAL%20PDF%20DTF046_Q_housing01.pdf"><cite>Homes for Victorians, page 14</cite></a>
</blockquote>

The Vacant Residential Property Tax will "provide an incentive to reduce the high number of houses and apartments being left vacant in the inner and middle ring of Melbourne", the Homes for Victoria's document states.

The tax rate is set to kick off at 1% of a property's capital improved value.  The documents further state "in the first instance, it will be based on self-assessment with subsequent enforcement action being taken by the State Revenue Office on the basis of publicly available information".

Exemptions from the new tax include holiday houses, city flats for people who need use them to base themselves for work, deceased estates and homes owned people who are temporarily overseas.

"The design of this tax and the exemptions to be provided will be the subject of consultations with the property sector over the next two months".

One would hope that in its consultations with the property sector, these exemption definitions are fleshed out properly. For instance, the section on exemptions seems to imply that "holiday homes" are only outside the city which seems somewhat odd in this day and age. 

The Victorian Government is also set to launch a new pilot scheme called HomesVic which will see the government offer to co-purchase properties with 400 first home buyers who meet the target criteria: singles with incomes of up to $75,000 and couples on a combined income of $95,000.

In this scheme, presumably subject to approval from the government, the state will take a 25% equity in the property being bought by the first home buyer - the buyer will only need to have a 5% deposit, effectively removing the need for the buyer to purchase Mortgage Lenders Insurance.

If the property is sold, "Homes Vic will recover its share of the equity and reinvest it in other homes".

Likewise, Spring Street is set to introduce a new approach to help first home buyers purchase in government-led developments - the Homes for Victorians documents single out the Arden precinct out, which is set to be developed slowly until the new Melbourne Metro station is complete and accelerate thereafter.

Spring Street is "setting a target that at least 10% of all properties in government-led developments will be prioritised for first home buyers". 

The definition of 'government-led' isn't all that clear - for instance will this apply to all future developments - executed by a private a developer on behalf of the government -  that occur on surplus VicTrack land (like at Jewell station) or only apply to large precincts like Arden?  

To view the entire suite of initiatives, see the Homes for Victorians website www.vic.gov.au/affordablehousing
</body></html>

Owner-occupiers prioritised over investors in Spring Street's new housing policy direction

<html><body>
Landchecker is a free online tool, which enables users to access property planning and due diligence information, through a user friendly mapping interface.

Will Leaf from Landchecker says that “the tool will appeal to both property professionals, home-owners and investors alike”.

<blockquote>
Landchecker’s advantage to these user groups is a fast, efficient and reliable way of accessing planning zones, planning overlays, permit activity, schools, satellite, cultural heritage sensitivity, bush prone areas as well as site area and dimensions on every property in Victoria. Landchecker has a broad ranging appeal to all property sectors and promotes strong due diligence habits for developers as well as selling agents.

The visual premise of Landchecker makes it easily understood as everyone can relate to maps and graphics in contrast to reports and spreadsheets. The combination of mapping and satellite imagery ensures that consumers can easily orientate themselves and instantly assess any planning or topographical constraints
<cite>Will Leaf, Founder, Landchecker</cite>
</blockquote>

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/image005.png" rel="gallery-all" title="The Landchecker user interface"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="399" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/image005.png?itok=gXN1Hvr4" title="The Landchecker user interface" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The Landchecker user interface</figcaption></figure>On the main map view, users can either work their way across Victoria with the map controls or directly search for a property address. Upon selecting an individual property, a summary appears outlining applicable planning zones, planning overlays as well as displaying nearby schools, whether the property is in a bushfire prone area or has cultural heritage sensitivity.

Furthermore, users can click to view a more detailed property report - at no charge - which outlines cadastral details, municipal and council information (along with contacts for the statutory planning units in each municipality).

Detailed maps and satellite images are then provided for each piece of summarised information on the property.

Sign up for free, and happy mapping. https://landchecker.com.au/
</body></html>

Landchecker online due diligence and property information tool now free to all

<html><body>
In a not-so-surprising move, the commencement of construction on the level crossing removals at Edithvale (Edithvale Road) and Bonbeach (Bondi Road) have been delayed by at least a year due to the Level Crossing Removal Authority determining an environmental effects statement (EES) must be conducted for the two sites.

At the same time, the Minister for Public Transport, Jacinta Allan, on Sunday morning also announced that Station Road in Seaford will be fast tracked and a hybrid lift-one, lower-the-other design solution has been chosen. Seaford Road is set to be sunk by 1.5 metres and the Frankston rail line will be raised on an embankment either side of Seaford road and cross the sunken thoroughfare.

"Detailed technical investigations have found that it is not feasible to lower the line into a trench to remove the level crossing in Seaford, due to the impact a rail trench would have on groundwater and its effect on Kananook Creek and nearby Ramsar-listed Edithvale-Seaford wetlands".

<iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FDanielAndrewsMP%2Fvideos%2F1322772607787272%2F&amp;show_text=0&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

<h2>Skye/Overton Road gets fast-tracked, rail over road</h2>

On Saturday, the Public Transport Minister announced that Skye/Overton Road between the terminus at Frankston and Kananook station is to be fast-tracked with construction scheduled to start this year. A rail bridge over road was the selected design response.

Final designs are still under development, however the images used on the Level Crossing Removal Authority's website for consultation depict the bridge as being 900 metres long and have an approximate height of 8m.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/skye-overton-aerials.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Skye/Overton Road rail bridge. Level Crossing Removal Authority"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="232" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/skye-overton-aerials.jpg?itok=QQtrHAAL" title="Skye/Overton Road rail bridge. Level Crossing Removal Authority" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Skye/Overton Road rail bridge. Level Crossing Removal Authority</figcaption></figure><h2>Comment</h2>

If proximity to sensitive wetlands or other hydrographic features is a key determinant after conducting initial tests that leads to ruling out trench rail design responses then at Carrum, it's hard to see how this could work. Carrum and Aspendale Stations are the two stations on the Frankston line located closest to the foreshore (Aspendale is not on the list of 50 level crossings) and the Patterson River complicates things at Carrum.

With the station precinct surrounded by water on two sides and Eel Race Road in effectively the same boat, perhaps this is why the initial investigations are still underway.

The Herald Sun <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/andrews-government-facing-budget-blowout-over-the-cost-of-removing-rail-level-crossings-on-frankston-line/news-story/78024a09d14f2eecf5f900bbb64e93e3">yesterday published a report</a> that said "the budget for eight level-crossing removals along the Frankston line could blow out by between $1 and $2 billion if suburban sky rail options are dumped. Five sites have the option of expensive rail trenches while three, in Carrum and Frankston, are earmarked for rail bridges."

The Frankston line along with the South Morang and Upfield lines are perhaps Melbourne's worst for the frequency of level crossings and a casual glance at the <a href="https://www.ptv.vic.gov.au/about-ptv/ptv-data-and-reports/network-development-plan-metropolitan-rail/">PTV Network Development plan</a> paints a picture of how train services will increase dramatically over time and it can't happen with so many level crossings still throughout the metro area.

Whether the Herald Sun report has any truth in it or not, no-one can afford to kowtow to local opposition groups at every turn when there's still a lot of work to do beyond the government's initial list of 50.
</body></html>

Bonbeach and Edithvale level crossing removals delayed by EES

<html><body>
<h2>Comment</h2>

Casual observers of transport investment in Melbourne could be forgiven for missing the bigger picture with the quick succession of recent announcements by the Minister for Public Transport over the past few weeks.

The series of announcements which began on February 16th dealt many of the technical components required to produce what the Melbourne Metro Tunnel project aims to achieve: a giant high-frequency rail line from two different ends of the city, right through the middle.

To date, the overwhelming majority of projects announced by the Victorian Government have been about shovels in the ground or manufacturing things; the 50 level crossing removal projects and the new dedicated train fleet that will start on the Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury lines are the best examples.

Up until this point as well, the Victorian Government has been happy - and has effectively got away with it - to use quite an array of buzzwords from the rail world. TUAG (Turn Up And Go) services, High Capacity Metro Line (does that mean Metro as in the operator or does metro mean <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_M%C3%A9tro">métropolitain</a>?), HCS (High Capacity Signalling) and so on.

What does this mean? Here's my take.

<h2>Connecting some of the dots</h2>

The announcement on 16th of February continued the shovels-in-the-ground theme, stating that platforms on the Pakenham-Cranbourne lines will be extended. I assume that a similar package will be announced at some point closer to the completion of the Metro tunnel (as the Sunbury line stations will need to be configured in the same way as the Pakenham/Cranbourne line is about to be).

Due to the nature of platform screen doors that you find in other metro systems around the world - the doors are in a fixed position and only open when a train is stopped in the right position at a platform - having a dedicated fleet of trains is going to allow the Melbourne Metro Tunnel stations (Arden, Parkville, Melbourne Central, Flinders Street and Domain) to have them.

I put a question to one of the Minister for Public Transport's aides: the Pakenham/Cranbourne line station platforms are set to be lengthened, however what about platform heights? Will platform heights be augmented to allow higher accessibility for wheelchairs/prams regardless of where a passenger is located on a station platform?

Existing platforms that are being extended will retain the same platform height and the new stations that are getting built as part of the level crossing removal projects will be built to the current standard: 1170mm above the rail head.

"The High-Capacity Metro Trains (HCMTs) will be built to a similar height as X'Trapolis trains, but it's worth noting that floor heights of a train vary in operation depending on the number of passengers on board", the Minister's aide said.

The design of the new HCMTs is still, presumably, being finalised - ditto for the platform extensions - however, we may see a more widespread roll out of the wheelchair ramps we see at City Loop stations now.

Pakenham/Cranbourne (and eventually Sunbury) line trains are about to be orphaned from the rest of the network, and despite platform clearances still required to cater for V/Line and Freight trains, there would appear to be a bit of wiggle room for the design of the new station platforms to match up - as best it can - with the new HCMTs, thus making it possible to completely roll out the wheelchair ramps to all stations on the line.

Because if trains are going to be running as frequently as the Victorian Government has said, minimising driver delays will be paramount and providing a uniform experience at each and every station for those who require the use of a wheelchair is the right thing to do.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/raised_platform.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © Marcus Wong"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="305" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/raised_platform.jpg?itok=YkIV7nHq" title="Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © Marcus Wong" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Raised platform for wheelchairs at Melbourne Central. Image © <a href="https://railgallery.wongm.com/city-loop/F111_7953.jpg">Marcus Wong</a></figcaption></figure>From the same announcement on the 16th of February, it was stated: "more than 70 kilometres of overhead power lines will be rebuilt, 20 substations will be built or upgraded, and a section of track in South Dandenong will be duplicated to boost reliability and support more services."

New and upgraded substations point to further sectorisation of Melbourne's rail network: it's likely a precursor to a voltage change in the overhead wiring in order to run the new, longer, trains operating on higher frequencies. This was also foreshadowed in the Melbourne Metro Tunnel business case document suite.

Will the Pakenham/Cranbourne-Sunbury line join the Brisbane, Perth and now Adelaide rail networks and switch to alternating current (25kV AC) or will we remain an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_Currents">Edison acolyte</a> and stick with direct current, but at a higher voltage like the networks in Italy and Belgium? (Melbourne &amp; Sydney rail networks operate at 1500V DC; Italian and Belgian mainline networks use 3000V DC).

From a passenger's perspective, the voltage used in the traction system matters little, however it would be a marked, technical, change.

The most recent piece in the enormous jigsaw puzzle that is the Melbourne Metro + Level Crossing Removal + HCMT project was the Minister announcing on Tuesday, via her Facebook page, that bids for the rail systems package have been received.

<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="500" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FJacintaAllanMP%2Fvideos%2F1121614744615681%2F&amp;show_text=1&amp;width=560" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

Up until this point, it's all been about physical things: the new trains, the extended platforms, the level crossing removals, the tunnel, the new substations, the new catenary. The rail systems package includes more physical things, however it's the train control and safety system embedded within the HCS - High Capacity Signalling - component where the quantum leap (in context of how we manage rail operations) will occur.

And with a $1 billion pricetag, perhaps now we'll finally get a new network command and control centre. After all, it's been on the cards for <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/the-ball-starts-rolling-on-new-train-control/2005/07/01/1119724809180">years</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metrol#History">years</a>.

<h2>And some more thoughts</h2>

Maintaining a level of scepticism when jargon is thrown about by government is always healthy, and now two years on, all the components required to take two century-and-a-half year old rail corridors and blitz it into the realm of standard modern rail practice are all pointing in the right direction. Yet there are still some unknowns.

On the new power/traction components: will we start to see the roll out of line-side infrastructure to support storing energy generated by a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_brake#Conversion_to_electric_energy:_the_motor_as_a_generator">regenerative braking</a> system on the new trains?

As base-load power supplied to the rail network is predominantly supplied from coal power plants, this type of system is an economic plus as well as an environmental cost saving measure. The savings come from storing energy generated by trains braking on the line which can then be fed back in - less demand for power, in theory, reduces the overall power bill and it follows with less power required to operate the rail network, that's less coal burned - hence the environmental cost saving.

On intermodal integration: an unrelated announcement also recently made by the Minister for Public Transport was that bus operator contracts are-a-changing. Our first 'High Capacity Metro Line' can't just be fed by people parking cars at stations or riding a bike to a station, those people who live further than a comfortable walk away from a station need an alternative to driving to the station.

On the eastern side of this new High Capacity Metro Line, high-frequency bus routes exist in some places which interface well with rail services: the smartbus routes (which are sadly the exception, not the rule). Will we see more of these routes to the east and west of the city connecting with the new metro line and running on better frequencies to create a much wider, true, intermodal network?

How can this fit with an <a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/first-home-owners-in-regional-victoria-get-a-boost-from-state-government-20170302-gupix6">emerging decentralisation agenda</a>? Specifically: the Monash National Employment Cluster is partially serviced by the High Capacity Metro Line (Springvale, Westall, Clayton and Huntingdale stations) but what of the 'last mile' into the precinct? Is the VPA factoring in a major bus route overhaul as part of <a href="https://vpa.vic.gov.au/project/monash-employment-cluster/">its planning work</a>?

On where the network will get its power from in future: back in January the Minister for Energy, Environment and Climate Change (Lily D'Ambrosio) announced, to much surprise, that the Victorian Government will "voluntarily surrender renewable energy certificates matching the amount of electricity used by all of Melbourne's trams". In short, the power required to operate the tram network will come from renewable sources in future.

Is the same thing on the cards for the heavy rail network?
</body></html>

Melbourne's first 'High Capacity Metro Line'

<html><body>
The Minister for Public Transport, Jacinta Allan, this morning announced the preferred design option for removing level crossings in Cheltenham and Mentone would include sinking the rail lines under existing road grades and rebuilding both stations in respective trenches.

The level crossings on Frankston line to go are Park Road and Charman Road in Cheltenham and Balcombe Road in Mentone.

According to the Minister, "lowering the rail line at Cheltenham will require the acquisition of 32 properties - 25 hours and 7 businesses.  There are no acquisitions required at Mentone".

Initially, only Charman Road was included in the scope of the level crossing removal project in Cheltenham, however Park Road - which along with the railway line and Charman Road form a distinct triangle in Cheltenham's activities district - was added during the community consultation period.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/frankston_charman_under_exaerials.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="LXRA diagram from community consultation phase in Cheltenham"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="232" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/frankston_charman_under_exaerials.jpg?itok=d8ZAc3zH" title="LXRA diagram from community consultation phase in Cheltenham" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>LXRA diagram from community consultation phase in Cheltenham</figcaption></figure>The image above was used during the early consultation phase for the entire Frankston line suite of level crossing removals.  The quite substantial property acquisitions for this station precinct appear to be related to Cheltenham station needing extra space below ground to fit three platforms and three tracks (and respective connections).

At present, Cheltenham's third platform is only connected to the main running tracks for the Frankston line on the 'up' (City) side of the station - in a video released by the Level Crossing Removal Authority, the three platforms and tracks appear to be connected at both ends.

"The project will also re-instate the third track at Cheltenham Station and extend it to connect with the mainline, creating space for more trains, more often on [the] Frankston Line".

Cheltenham received a mention in the Melbourne Metro Tunnel's business case as one of the mid-points on key rail lines that were likely to receive extra rail infrastructure to support shorter train runs - Essendon on the Craigieburn line and Gowrie on the Upfield line were the other two explicit mentions.  (Click the image below to see a larger version - Cheltenham, Essendon and Gowrie are listed under the 'Wider Network Enhancements - Other Corridor Works' section).

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/m5cikzf.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="The 'plan on a page' from the Melbourne Metro Tunnel business case - the link between multiple current rail transport projects underway in Melbourne"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="332" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/m5cikzf.jpg?itok=6Mbf3-sr" title="The 'plan on a page' from the Melbourne Metro Tunnel business case - the link between multiple current rail transport projects underway in Melbourne" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>The 'plan on a page' from the Melbourne Metro Tunnel business case - the link between multiple current rail transport projects underway in Melbourne</figcaption></figure>And judging by the development pipeline in Cheltenham, coupled with the new station nearing completion at Southland, this area is going to need a new tier of service.

Upwards of 650 units are currently in the pipeline in Cheltenham alone - 200 of which are under construction.

The project listed below are all within a 500m radius of the existing station entry.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/a22e4InLhow" width="100%"></iframe>

This article has been amended to include new Cheltenham Station details.
</body></html>

Rail trenches for Cheltenham and Mentone, hundreds of new units in the development pipeline to benefit

<html><body>
Starting with an alert from their architect about unused space at their display suite, PACE Development Group has begun a unique collaboration with co-Ground, a registered charity who has located a pop-up cafe on the land where the display suite for PACE's next project - PACE of Collingwood - will eventually rise.

<a href="http://co-ground.org/our-story/">Co-Ground launched in 2015</a> in response to the devastation caused by record-breaking category 5 Cyclone Pam in Vanuatu and their 100% of their profits generated by Co-Ground are channelled into support their education and livelihood programs across the Asia-Pacific region.

With PACE covering rent, electricity, water and other associated building costs, Co-Ground is set to maximise revenue for its charitable ventures, whilst at the same time bringing good coffee to the locals of Collingwood.

<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="645" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fartyarramunuagallery%2Fposts%2F1635583576751237&amp;width=500" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

<blockquote>
“We are absolutely thrilled to be working with Co-Ground. Not only because they make spectacular coffee - although that’s obviously a bonus – but also because of the important work they do with communities to improve education in developing nations. We believe being socially responsible is just as important as being fiscally profitable and corporate responsibility is a key component to being in business in the modern age,”
<cite>Andrew Crichton - PACE Development Group</cite>
</blockquote>

<iframe allowtransparency="true" frameborder="0" height="523" scrolling="no" src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fpaceofcollingwood%2Fposts%2F1207537522663993%3A0&amp;width=500" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" width="100%"></iframe>

PACE of Collingwood is a 79 unit <a href="/developments/collingwood-vic-3066">development</a> located on the corner of Wellington &amp; Langridge Streets in Collingwood.  Building architect is <a href="/architects/sjb-architects">SJB Architects</a> and interiors by <a href="http://wearehuntly.com.au/">We Are Huntly</a>; the project is set to have a fully activated rooftop garden featuring an open-air kitchen, barbeques, entertainment areas, dining facilities and uninterrupted CBD view from the roof and from level 4 upwards.

The building will have 9 residential levels and 4 basement levels which house car parks and lock-up storage spaces.  The ground floor is set to house bicycle storage and 3 retail tenancies on the prime corner.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/pace_of_collingwood.png" rel="gallery-all" title="PACE of Collingwood - 75 Wellington Street, Collingwood"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="413" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/pace_of_collingwood.png?itok=2gtMKTIz" title="PACE of Collingwood - 75 Wellington Street, Collingwood" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>PACE of Collingwood - 75 Wellington Street, Collingwood</figcaption></figure>The Co-Ground cafe is now open and will be remaining open over the summer season.
</body></html>

Pace initiates collaboration with Co-Ground at new project in Collingwood

<html><body>
It was announced by the Premier and Planning Minister this morning that <a href="/new-apartments/one-queensbridge-street-1-23-queensbridge-street-southbank">One Queensbridge Street, Southbank</a> - previously known as Queensbridge Tower - has been approved.

A media release distributed this morning confirmed the project will maintain 388 hotel suites and 708 residential apartments across its 90 floors.

<blockquote>
The Government has also taken steps to ensure Crown Melbourne and the Schiavello Group give back to the state, with a $100 million community benefits package, including:

<ul>
<li>A $25 million upgrade to Queensbridge Square, including landscaping and two new cafes</li>
	<li>A further $15 million for the Sandbridge Rail Bridge</li>
	<li>Landscaping and public realm improvements on Southbank Boulevard, including a new bike strip</li>
	<li>Street furniture and additional trees along Queensbridge Street, and better connectivity with Freshwater Place</li>
</ul>
<cite><a href="http://www.premier.vic.gov.au/4000-jobs-created-in-a-boost-for-victoria/">Victorian Government media release</a>, 9/2/2017</cite>
</blockquote>

3,000 direct and indirect jobs are anticipated during the construction phase and once complete a further 1,000 operational jobs are expected to be created.

<h2>The pecking order</h2>

We've come a long way since Rialto ruled over Melbourne's skyline.

<table border="1" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="1" style="width:100%;">
<thead><tr>
<th scope="col">Project / Building</th>
			<th scope="col">Height (metres)</th>
			<th scope="col">Status</th>
		</tr></thead>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td><a href="/new-apartments/one-queensbridge-street-1-23-queensbridge-street-southbank">One Queensbridge Street</a></td>
			<td>323</td>
			<td>Approved</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/buildings/australia-108-southbank-70-southbank-boulevard-southbank">Australia 108</a></td>
			<td>319</td>
			<td>Under Construction</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eureka_Tower">Eureka Tower</a></td>
			<td>297</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/new-apartments/38-freshwater-place-southbank">38 Freshwater Place</a></td>
			<td>272</td>
			<td>Planning Assessment</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/buildings/west-side-place-melbourne-250-spencer-street-melbourne-vic-3000">West Side Place Tower 1</a></td>
			<td>270</td>
			<td>Registration and Sales</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/buildings/aurora-melbourne-central-224-la-trobe-street-melbourne">Aurora Melbourne Central</a></td>
			<td>267</td>
			<td>Under Construction</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/120_Collins_Street">120 Collins Street</a></td>
			<td>265 (spire height)</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/101_Collins_Street">101 Collins Street</a></td>
			<td>260 (spire height)</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/buildings/sapphire-by-the-gardens-63-la-trobe-street-melbourne-vic-3000">308 Exhibition Street Tower 1</a></td>
			<td>254</td>
			<td>Planning Assessment</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="/buildings/sapphire-by-the-gardens-63-la-trobe-street-melbourne-vic-3000">308 Exhibition Street Tower 2</a></td>
			<td>254</td>
			<td>Planning Assessment</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourke_Place">Bourke Place</a></td>
			<td>254 (antenna height)</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_Pearl">Prima Pearl</a></td>
			<td>254</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
<tr>
<td><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rialto_Towers">Rialto Towers</a></td>
			<td>251</td>
			<td>Built</td>
		</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
* heights rounded to nearest metre.
</body></html>

One Queensbridge Street approved

<html><body>
<h2>COMMENT</h2>

Both the State and Federal Parliaments are back with their first sitting weeks for the year and today it's been reported the state opposition planning spokesperson, David Davis, is set to move a motion in the Legislative Council that would see the City of Stonnington take on shared control of planning for the Melbourne Metro project.

<blockquote>
Opposition planning minister David Davis, who will move the upper house motion, said it was inevitable that one day South Yarra and Melbourne Metro would need to be connected to meet growth in demand for public transport.

"It would be an historic blunder if the government was to design it in such a way as South Yarra could not be connected in the long term," Mr Davis said.

His motion would give the City of Stonnington power to ensure the tunnel's final design paves the way for a future South Yarra interchange.

"There needs to be a clear line in this to ensure that South Yarra, long term, is built," he said.
<a href="http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/liberals-make-another-attempt-to-include-south-yarra-station-in-melbourne-metro-20170207-gu7t9w"><cite>The Age - Liberals make another attempt to include South Yarra station in Melbourne Metro</cite></a>
</blockquote>

The primary reason, as has been reported elsewhere, for not building two new platforms at South Yarra to enable connectivity with Melbourne Metro and the existing station has been cost.  Many figures have been quoted (all of them more than $500 million) and they appear to be based on:

<ul>
<li>increased property acquisition in/around South Yarra: one of the most expensive places to buy land in Melbourne.</li>
	<li>the need for current tracks which take Pakenham/Cranbourne trains to cross over the Frankston line tracks in order to enter the tunnel (and therefore proceed to the new underground platforms at South Yarra).</li>
</ul>
The current track design that's been in the public domain for Melbourne Metro has the crossover occur by having the Pakenham/Cranbourne tracks enter the surface-to-tunnel dive structure at/near William Street and the South Yarra siding reserve.

This requires the new underground station platforms to be located further west, directly under properties to the south of Toorak Road and most importantly there'd likely not be any meaningful platform-to-platform connection, passengers looking to transfer would need to exit paid areas of the station, walk down Toorak road and then re-enter the paid areas of the station.  Not ideal at all.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/mm_sy_options_assessment_1.png" rel="gallery-all" title="New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 1"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="360" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mm_sy_options_assessment_1.png?itok=3mmf9ZK9" title="New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 1" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 1</figcaption></figure>The Melbourne Metro business case options assessment had an alternative layout at South Yarra which would have seen the platforms for the Sandringham line extended south under Toorak Road and the new underground platforms located directly beneath them.

 Less acquisition would be required south of Toorak Road (as much of the station platforms would be located under the reserve or existing rail corridor) and the connection from the surface to the tunnel would be made directly to the current Frankston track pair. 

This has the effect of requiring the crossover to be located further east, on the other side of Chapel Street which would have likely required property acquisition at the Jam Factory and / or a major reconfiguration of the Chapel Street bridge (and the adjoining retail properties which hang off both sides of the street where it crosses the rail corridor).

Option 2 is superior from a passenger perspective because it would directly link the two lines, presumably by escalator and lifts, that would not have been linked in the current scenario with no station at South Yarra - the Pakenham/Cranbourne and Sandringham lines.  (Pakenham/Cranbourne and Frankston connections can be made at Caulfield regardless of scenario).

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/mm_sy_options_assess_2.png" rel="gallery-all" title="New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 2"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="390" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/mm_sy_options_assess_2.png?itok=fzHXsmtr" title="New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 2" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>New South Yarra underground platforms, Melbourne Metro options assessment 2</figcaption></figure>Former SKM, now independent transport planning, engineering and economics practitioner William McDougall delivered a report on the South Yarra Question in August last year.  The screenshots above and below have been taken from the report, currently sitting on the State Government's website (<a href="http://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/4889/MM257_Stonnington_Transport-planning_-William-McDougall.pdf">PDF</a>).

In his report, McDougall posits an alternative to the costly South Yarra crossover by moving it further out - to Caulfield.

<blockquote>
If it were possible to cross the tracks over elsewhere, substantial property and cost savings would result at South Yarra. With MMRA option B, assuming the existing rail reserve would remain unchanged east of Chapel Street, the following works could be avoided:

<ul>
<li>acquisition and removal of about 25 individual properties;</li>
	<li>widening of the rail reserve and construction of about 500 metres of double track; and</li>
	<li>two road overbridges (Chapel Street and Surrey Road) replaced with longer structures.</li>
</ul>
I expect that this might save of the order of $2-300 million (subject to engineering assessment and costing), excluding the cost of establishing the crossover elsewhere.
<cite>Effect of Melbourne Metro Project at South Yarra - Expert's Report Prepared by William McDougall, <a href="http://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0029/4889/MM257_Stonnington_Transport-planning_-William-McDougall.pdf">page 28</a></cite>
</blockquote>

The report includes a diagram how moving the crossover to Caulfield could work.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/william_mc_dougall_caulfield_crossover.png" rel="gallery-all" title="Potential cost-saving crossover option at Caulfield - William McDougall"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="487" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/william_mc_dougall_caulfield_crossover.png?itok=lP9JEz02" title="Potential cost-saving crossover option at Caulfield - William McDougall" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Potential cost-saving crossover option at Caulfield - William McDougall</figcaption></figure>Regardless of how the Melbourne Metro authority might implement a new set of platforms at South Yarra to enable connectivity with the station, we're now a long way down the garden path.  Early works have started, calls for tenders for the major tunnelling works have begun. 

You can imagine the state government doesn't want to cop the egg-on-face if it capitulated and went ahead with a re-design - which I'd like to point out, the scope change appears to be limited only to the south-eastern end of the project; re-working the construction schedule to include inevitable delays at the South Yarra end whilst continuing with the body of work elsewhere as planned could be possible (and palatable).

As McDougall notes in his report, his assumptions need further testing. Should we delay one part of the Melbourne Metro project and further explore options, assuming the public is happy with a higher pricetag?

<h2>Here, have another spanner to throw into the works</h2>

Governments of both colours are quite happy to pursue freeway expansion projects - just look at the Monash FWY project to widen it around the interchange with Eastlink; a widening project that's happening less than a decade of the most recent one.

The combination of level crossing removals on the Dandenong and Watergardens/Sunbury corridors with the Melbourne Metro project will result in passenger carrying capacity improvements from South East to West/North West and vice versa: the inner-city will be better connected, commuters from the middle-ring and outer suburbs will receive a frequency increase: all good.

But Hazelwood happened.  And more to the point, it's sharpened the state government's focus on the area.  

Just yesterday <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-07/minister-suggests-funding-possible-to-fix-gippsland-rail-issues/8246758">the ABC reported</a> the Federal Transport Minister promised to work with his Victorian counterpart to improve Gippsland's V/Line passenger services; they're reportedly 'the slowest and most unreliable in the state'.  Gippsland V/Line services are entirely dependent on the Pakenham line - the very same line that is set to see frequency increases and be diverted through the city.

(Although the current Melbourne Metro / South Yarra portal design allows for services to connect existing tracks which run from South Yarra through Richmond and Flinders Street).

The Federal Minister's comments in the ABC report relate to the Gippsland Rail Needs Study, which highlights infrastructure changes that would be required to increase services both within the Valley to begin a "La Trobe Valley metro" service - similar to the announced Bendigo Metro - and connecting the region better with Melbourne.

Outside Melbourne the report highlights how single track sections should be duplicated as far as Traralgon and calls for fully upgrading both tracks to allow for 160kph services to run in both directions (the Bracks/Brumby era Regional Fast Rail project only saw partial upgrades on the Gippsland (and Bendigo) line).

The biggest ticket on the list however, naturally deals with train congestion within Melbourne.  

<blockquote>
The central issue is that the rail infrastructure serving Gippsland and southeast Melbourne remains essentially the same double track that reached Dandenong in 1891 and the mixed double and single track beyond Dandenong that was implemented to support briquette traffic from the Latrobe Valley in the 1950s.

The 2005- 2006 Regional Fast Rail project undertook partial upgrading of the track as far as Traralgon and the new VLocity trains enabled service frequency to be enhanced (see 3.3, above). However neither planning nor investment in added track capacity has occurred since then. Meanwhile, billions have been spent in adding and widening freeways serving the region. 
<a href="http://www.wellington.vic.gov.au/files/b85845e6-2a84-4cda-9ebd-a6cf010a6e00/Gippsland-Rail-Needs-Study-Report.pdf"><cite>Gippsland Rail Needs Study - page 36</cite></a>
</blockquote>

Quadruplication of the track between South Yarra and Dandenong would provide V/Line &amp; freight services (and new express services on the metro network) with clear paths to enter/exit the metro area quickly, reducing travel times both outside metro Melbourne and within.

And yes, note: South Yarra - where the current Melbourne Metro project will orphan a track pair by diverting metro services in a different direction - to Dandenong, which includes the area seeing the most resistance to the Herald-Sun dubbed 'skyrail' project between Caulfield and Oakleigh.  

That small section of the wider rail corridor is where it is at its most narrow, and the diagrams on the level crossing removal authority site don't inspire much confidence that quadruplication could occur without massive property acquisition.

<figure><a class="colorbox colorbox-insert-image" href="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/pictures/article-images/area-1_03.jpg" rel="gallery-all" title="Elevated structure diagram around Carnegie - Level Crossing Removal Authority"><img alt="" class="image-article-full-width-580px" height="282" src="/sites/urban.melbourne/files/styles/article_full_width_580px/public/pictures/article-images/area-1_03.jpg?itok=yyoGFOT6" title="Elevated structure diagram around Carnegie - Level Crossing Removal Authority" width="580"></a>

<figcaption>Elevated structure diagram around Carnegie - <a href="http://levelcrossings.vic.gov.au/crossings/poath-road-hughesdale">Level Crossing Removal Authority</a></figcaption></figure>Something will have to give sooner or later.  

A South Yarra station could possibly &amp; negatively impact a future project to add another track pair between South Yarra &amp; Caulfield (most likely a tunnel for express services) - this would be needed because having six tracks merge into four between South Yarra and Caulfield is a recipe for disruption and flies in the face of the main aim: capacity increases.  

Likewise, quadruplication with large-scale property acquisition between Caulfield and Oakleigh would be unpalatable for either flavour of politics and therefore a new opportunity could arise by sending a new track pair from Grange Road down the Dandenong Road median all the way to Eastlink and then back to the Dandenong corridor in future. This also would have the added benefit of being able to add rail services to Chadstone S.C. and Monash University.

As a migrant from the south-of-the-river to north-of-the-river, I've been fully indoctrinated(!) and am a big supporter of focusing the city's growth to the west; however as the renewed focus on the La Trobe Valley after the announcement of Hazelwood's closure shows, south-of-the-river is still going to require careful rail planning and investment if it's to be a win-win for people both in the growing city and regional areas.

Lead image credit: <a href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:South_Yarra_railway_station_entrance.jpg">wikipedia</a>
</body></html>

The South Yarra station circus: old and new hoops to jump through

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developments/broadbeach-qld-4218">Broadbeach</a> offers plenty of reasons to live vertically, but moving from a substantial family home into an apartment can expose the compromises of high-density living. Privacy, room for guests and usable living space tend to matter more when an apartment is intended as a permanent home rather than an occasional coastal base.

A typical residential floor at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/the-eveleigh-broadbeach-7-9-surf-parade-broadbeach-qld-4218">The Eveleigh</a>, on Surf Parade,&nbsp;contains just four apartments. The 94-residence development by <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/hirsch-faigen">Hirsch &amp; Faigen</a> is predominantly made up of expansive three-bedroom homes, with a limited collection of half-floor penthouses above.

Across the apartment floors, <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/architects/rothelowman">Rothelowman</a> has used the relatively limited number of residences to give each home greater access to natural light and outlook. Living spaces extend towards full-height glazing, while a series of bay windows frame selected views across the Pacific Ocean, city and hinterland rather than treating the building edge as a continuous wall of glass.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360965]

“The apartment floors deliver a collection of homes that embrace controlled outlook via a series of bay windows deliberately framing moments of view,” Rothelowman Director Kim Lowman said.

From outside, those projecting forms contribute to the tower’s faceted profile. Strong horizontal and vertical elements establish its proportions, while the changing position of the sun alters the light, shadow and reflection across the façade throughout the day.

The same attention moves inside the apartments, where the material palette combines warm timber, natural stone, metallic detailing and softer curved forms. Kitchens sit within the main living zone, with stone island benches, integrated joinery and European appliances, before the living areas extend towards the glazing and the outlook.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360981]

Three genuine bedrooms provide room to accommodate family and guests, while two secure car spaces and storage address some of the practical considerations that can become more noticeable when moving from a larger home. Feedback from the display suite has centred on the warmth and restraint of the interiors, with buyers commenting that the residences feel like homes rather than conventional coastal apartments.

A limited collection of half-floor penthouses occupies the upper levels, increasing the scale of the living spaces and adding private balconies and elevated finishes. From this position, the outlook extends between the ocean and hinterland.

Outside the private residences, The Eveleigh separates its shared spaces between the podium and rooftop. The podium is centred on wellness, with subtropical landscaping surrounding a swimming pool and pool terrace, yoga garden, private gymnasium, sauna and hot and cold plunge facilities. Landscaped retreats and pavilions provide additional places to sit away from the main recreation areas.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360966]

Higher in the building, a rooftop pavilion and private dining suite sit alongside resident lounge, barbecue and outdoor dining areas, opening towards panoramic views across the ocean, city and hinterland.

“Buyers are no longer just looking for an apartment, but a lifestyle where they can relax, reset, and enjoy a balanced way of living,” Hirsch &amp; Faigen Director of Sales Matt George said.

Interest to date has come from established owner-occupiers and interstate lifestyle purchasers, including buyers planning a future move to the Gold Coast. Many are coming from larger homes and want to reduce ongoing maintenance without giving up space for family and guests, privacy, two car spaces or the ability to entertain at home.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=149670 project_image_fid=360969]

Much of that daily life can also take place beyond the building without requiring a drive. Kurrawa Beach and Pratten Park are an easy walk from Surf Parade, while Pacific Fair, Oracle Boulevard, The Oasis, restaurants, cafés, entertainment and public transport are also within walking distance.

The Eveleigh is Hirsch &amp; Faigen's fourth Gold Coast development since entering the market in 2021, following The Hemingway at Palm Beach, The Emerson at Kirra and Yves at Mermaid Beach. Each of the preceding projects sold out before completion.

“Broadbeach had been on our radar throughout our time operating on the Gold Coast,” the developer said. “Following our projects in Palm Beach, Kirra and Mermaid Beach, Broadbeach represented the natural next step for the business.”

The Surf Parade site brought together proximity to the beach, protected coastal outlooks and walkability to dining, shopping and recreation. Hirsch &amp; Faigen also identified the street as an emerging premium residential address, with enough separation from Broadbeach's busier destinations to retain a quieter environment at home.

The Eveleigh is now under construction by Maxcon, with completion forecast for mid-2028. Three-bedroom residences are currently available from $2.87 million.

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=149670]

Joel Robinson

The Eveleigh brings house-like apartments to Broadbeach

A long-stalled Campbelltown development site is back in play, with new plans for 139 apartments set to supersede a mixed-use scheme approved almost a decade ago but never built.

The new proposal for 28 Cordeaux Street would deliver 116 market and 23 affordable apartments in a part 14-storey building, bringing a substantial new project into a Campbelltown market where new apartment supply remains limited.

Plans have been filed over the 3,092 sqm corner site at Moore-Oxley Street, around 600 metres from Campbelltown Railway Station and the city-centre retail core.

The site already carries a mixed-use residential approval dating to 2016. Doroch Architects has now been engaged on a larger replacement scheme, which is progressing as a State Significant Development Application following a Housing Delivery Authority determination in August 2025.

The apartment mix comprises 39 one-bedroom, 72 two-bedroom and 28 three-bedroom residences. Two-bedroom apartments make up just over half of the project, while three-bedroom homes account for 20 per cent.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="136dd5b9-3791-4da6-9e31-76f533f5b4de" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da2.png?VersionId=LgOSy9nwf5u.MGswBBwaGGxuX8QpHSl_" />

Of the 139 apartments, 23 will be delivered as affordable housing under the in-fill affordable housing provisions of the Housing SEPP. The affordable component represents 15 per cent of the residential gross floor area and will be managed by a registered Community Housing Provider.

Doroch has sought to break the scale of the building into two distinct elements, with a masonry podium of around four storeys establishing the street edge before the residential tower steps back above.

The corner position has shaped that approach. Cordeaux Street faces toward the commercial and civic centre, while Moore-Oxley Street leads into the lower-scale residential neighbourhood to the south, and the design verification report describes the site as "bridging the commercial core to the north and established residential areas to the south."

The podium will be expressed predominantly in face brick, while the upper levels shift to brushed and grooved concrete cladding with darker metal detailing. Recessed sections, deep balcony edges and landscaping break down the upper form, with an approximately 11.8-metre setback to the northern boundary addressing the adjoining St Peters Anglican School.

<img alt="First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="c8b3d2d3-c561-4bfc-a5d9-a68c0c10dac1" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Campbelltown%20da1.png?VersionId=AeAEyJU02Gk2k5noUj2StziCvdQ7fW4B" />

Campbelltown has been starved of new residential developments in the last decade.

The only other notable development set to come to market this year is ALAND's Queen Square, a mixed-use precinct on over two hectares that will comprise apartments above a vibrant ground-level retail and hospitality dining precinct.

First look: New 139-apartment plans revive long-stalled Campbelltown city centre site

First Look: Sherlock Construction pitches apartments for low-rise Deception Bay

Queensland builder-developer MAYD has revealed the first look at its major North Kirra beachfront development, lodging amended plans that reduce the number of apartments and increase the proportion of larger residences.

The project is planned across a substantial 4,742 sqm amalgamated site spanning seven lots at <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/2-6-pacific-parade-bilinga-qld-4225">2-6 Pacific Parade</a> and 27-33 Golden Four Drive in Bilin​ga, directly opposite Nor​th Kirra Beach.

<a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/developers/mayd-group">MAYD</a> secured the site for $32.5 million in 2025, in what was one of the Gold Coast's largest property transactions of the year.

The development will be delivered across two stages, with the first stage carrying an estimated gross realisation value of around $360 million.

The latest amendments seek to reduce the overall apartment count and shift the project further toward the owner-occupier market, with larger residences designed for buyers wanting considerably more space than traditionally offered in a beachfront apartment.

The residential mix will include townhomes, oversized two-bedroom apartments, substantial three-bedroom residences and four-bedroom homes.

MAYD has appointed Cera Stribley to lead the architecture and interiors, with the Melbourne-based design practice drawing on the beachfront setting through a series of ocean-facing terraces and heavily landscaped balconies.

Strong horizontal forms and curved balconies will define the exterior, with subtropical landscaping integrated throughout the building to soften the built form and increase the connection between the residences and the beachfront.

The project will also include an extensive collection of resident wellness and lifestyle facilities, continuing the broader shift across the Gold Coast's luxury apartment market toward larger homes supported by resort-style amenity.

<img alt="MAYD" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="d1bcbb05-e659-4b47-8bd4-1e595315e2ad" src="https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/www.urban.com.au/s3fs-public/inline-images/Screenshot%202026-08-27%20at%202.05.03%E2%80%AFPM.png?VersionId=jj0XEud1X1DuLt7_KyElhjMdZGOXmLHP" />

MAYD Founder Todd Mould said North Kirra was increasingly appealing to buyers attracted to the more established, lower-density character of the southern Gold Coast.

"North Kirra presents one of the most compelling luxury residential opportunities currently emerging in Australia, combining absolute beachfront with the character and authenticity that buyers are increasingly seeking, and the same sense of tight-knit community that defined Burleigh and Currumbin perhaps 10 or 15 years ago," Mould said.

"With Gold Coast Airport on its doorstep, it also offers a level of accessibility that broadens its appeal across almost every market demographic."

The project comes as the southern Gold Coast continues to attract an increasing share of high-end apartment development and buyer activity.

Kirra in particular has emerged as one of the region's more tightly held beachfront markets, with its relatively low-density character, established surf and hospitality scene and proximity to Gold Coast Airport differentiating it from the higher-density markets further north.

Mould said those characteristics had informed the approach MAYD and Cera Stribley had taken to the project.

"We've worked closely with Cera Stribley to create a vision that is deeply connected to its surroundings," he said.

"Inspired by the coastline itself, the architecture has been shaped around space, privacy and resort-style living, creating a collection of homes that reflects the next generation of luxury on the southern Gold Coast."

MOTIV Managing Director Carly Cottam, who has been appointed to market the project, said buyer attention had continued to move south along the Gold Coast.

"Purchasers who may once have defaulted to Broadbeach, Main Beach or Surfers Paradise are increasingly recognising the value of a genuine beachfront location that offers lower density, strong amenity and a more established sense of community," Cottam said.

"Kirra has a powerful combination of growing demand and genuine scarcity. Beachfront supply is inherently constrained, the area remains relatively low density, and buyers are increasingly placing a premium on locations that feel established, uncrowded and authentic rather than heavily developed."

Cottam said the proximity to Gold Coast Airport was also proving increasingly important for interstate and second-home buyers.

"Being minutes from Gold Coast Airport makes it particularly compelling for interstate buyers, frequent travellers and second-home purchasers who can access an authentic coastal lifestyle almost immediately after stepping off a flight."

The acquisition takes MAYD's active development portfolio to more than $500 million, with the North Kirra project representing one of its largest undertakings to date.

MAYD is targeting an early 2027 launch.

First look at MAYD's North Kirra mixed-use precinct

<main data-perf-region="main">
Castle Hill, the longtime hub of the Hills District, has been one of the major beneficiaries of Sydney's Metro expansion, with improved connectivity helping drive continued population growth, development and buyer demand across the Hills District.

But despite that growth, the suburb has seen relatively few major new apartment projects brought to market over the past 18 months.

Hills District developer Reve Group is looking to fill that gap with <a href="https://www.apartments.com.au/new-apartments/nova-r-ve-castle-hill-2-garthowen-crescent-castle-hill-nsw-2154">Nova Rêve</a>, a major new mixed-use precinct on the corner of Garthowen Crescent and Old Castle Hill Road, a short walk from Castle Hill Metro Station and Castle Towers.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377679]

The project will comprise three residential towers alongside a hotel, restaurants, cafes and a skybar, more than 1,600 sqm of ground-floor retail and almost an acre of landscaped gardens.

It represents the largest project undertaken by Reve Group, the development arm of the Kassis family, which has been building across the Hills District for more than 30 years through Kassis Homes.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377675]

Nova Rêve also represents a significant step up from the family's first apartment development, Grand Rêve, which was delivered nearby on Garthowen Crescent.

Grand Rêve introduced larger, house-like apartment layouts and premium inclusions including Wolf and Sub-Zero appliances to the Castle Hill market.

Nova Rêve takes that approach to a precinct scale, combining the residential component with hospitality, retail and substantial public and resident landscaping.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377685]

Reve Group Managing Director Sam Kassis said the project reflected the family's three decades of building in the Hills, which has evolved from trophy homes on quarter-acre blocks to larger-scale apartment development.

"Grand Rêve was our first apartment project here and it showed us what this pocket of Castle Hill could be. Nova Rêve is the refinement of that idea: not just apartments, but a place the whole suburb can use," Kassis said.

A key part of that approach is the hotel, which has been designed to operate as an amenity for the wider Castle Hill community rather than solely hotel guests.

It will include restaurants, cafes, skybars and all-day dining, alongside conference and event facilities catering to business functions, community groups and private events.

At ground level, more than 1,600 sqm of shops and cafes will open onto the surrounding streets and landscaped areas.

Almost an acre of gardens designed by Land and Form Studios will run through the precinct, incorporating pathways, seating, barbecue areas and children's play spaces.

[smartcode_project:default project_id=152737 project_image_fid=377680]

Reve Group's Romio Georges said creating an active ground plane had been central to the planning of Nova Rêve.

"There are gardens with pathways, barbecues, seating and play areas, shops and cafes opening onto the street, and a hotel with restaurants and a skybar that anyone in Castle Hill can walk into," Georges said.

The project's elevated position on one of Sydney's highest ridgelines will also provide apartments with outlooks toward the Sydney skyline, surrounding parkland and the Blue Mountains.

More than 80 per cent of the apartments will occupy corner positions, with Turner responsible for both the architecture and interiors.

&nbsp;

[smartcode_project_cta:default project_id=152737]

<h3 data-end="3697" data-section-id="q3n5ak" data-start="3672">&nbsp;</h3>
</main>

Alastair Taylor

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Alastair Taylor

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News