Pictured above are members of the St Kilda Architects Collective who have volunteered to offer their experience and knowledge because of their longstanding connection with and love for St Kilda. They are (l-r) Toby Reed, Roger Nelson, Suzannah Waldron (with yellow top), Anna Nervegna and Grant Amon. James Brearley is also in the collective but was overseas when the photo was taken.
A question mark hangs over The Vineyard (71A Acland Street) with council set to start consultation on the venue’s future before embarking on an Expression of Interest campaign.
Fans of The Vineyard need not fret yet, although their lease has expired, the Iodice brothers are likely to run the venue until at least the next EOI process is concluded – and then may be again chosen as the best operator for the future.
If council accepts Thomann’s suggestion, the architects’ ideas will be used to kick off the next phase with practical, local design inspiration.
Anyone familiar with the facts knows this is a saga of vintage proportions. A set of design plans were canvassed and publicised pre-COVID only to be abruptly abandoned with barely a whimper during the pandemic. More recently, another EOI process for a new long-term lease of the site was terminated without awarding a winner. Approximately $49,000 was spent on that EOI process alone.
[Without disturbing the murky waters of Council confidentiality, TWISK understands some of the unsuccessful recent EOI participants have signed NDAs – presumably in return for some financial recognition for their unrequited effort.]
Now history could be repeating itself. Another round of consultation, another round of EOI and another outcome that’s NQR with a cost that’s OTT.
Fearing the worst, St Kilda ward Cr Thomann wanted some fresh eyes on the project and reached out to six award-winning St Kilda architects for their input up to help guide the quest for the next iteration of the building also known as 71A Acland Street.
The Future of The Vineyard – Let’s Get This Right
Serge provided this statement to kick off the discussion about his ideas.
“Many locals have asked what’s happening with The Vineyard in St Kilda. Here’s what we know – and what we should demand next.
The current lease expired at the end of April. Council ran an Expression of Interest for a new operator, but current councillors didn’t support the outcome, so the process is being restarted.
On one view, that’s messy. On another, it’s a warning light: The Vineyard isn’t a routine leasing matter. It’s a community place with history, culture and a rare mix of people – exactly the kind of venue St Kilda has been losing, one ‘upgrade’ at a time.
So the question isn’t whether council can pick an operator quickly. It’s whether we rush a decision to meet a deadline or take the time to get the fundamentals right – and avoid locking the community into outcomes that can’t be unwound.
Two issues are being conflated: who runs The Vineyard and what we do with the building itself. The operator procurement may need confidentiality, but the future of the building should not be decided behind closed doors.
What I am proposing does not address the future EOI or the selection of operators going forward.
Yes, the building needs work. But ‘works’ can mean careful repair, or it can be a tragedy that turns something distinctive into something generic. Before any long lease is signed, council should publicly define what must be preserved: the venue’s character, affordability, music culture and community access.
That’s why the offer from the St Kilda Architects Collective to work pro bono with the community is worth taking seriously. Local, award-winning architects bringing options, constraints and costs into the open is the opposite of a tick-the-box engagement exercise. It’s practical transparency.
Council should pause, publish a plain-English statement of the building’s condition, release the objectives for preservation and renewal, and run an open community workshop process alongside the operator selection.
The aim isn’t to micromanage a venue; it’s to set guardrails so the next operator inherits a place the community still recognises.
St Kilda has seen what happens when decisions are rushed: good intentions, glossy plans, and disappointing results that feel disconnected from local sentiment.
If The Vineyard becomes just another ‘redevelopment’, we won’t simply lose a building – we’ll lose one more shared space where St Kilda’s identity is lived, not marketed.
Council can still get this right. But it has to slow down, open up, and listen.“
TWISK spoke to Toby and Grant from the collective
TWISK spoke to Toby Reed and Grant Amon about their approach to sketching a framework for a place that means many different things to different people.
It turns out they shared a rich appreciation for St Kilda and The Vineyard, its history and the important location by the gardens, Acland Street and Luna Park.
‘What we need is an “anti-vision”, something not overly grandiose,’ said Toby Reed from Nervegna Reed. ‘We don’t want change for the sake of it, and we certainly don’t want a box ticking exercise.’
‘It must be “interesting” – that’s the essence of St Kilda. It could be imagined as a collage, if you like, of the old and new, past and future. Part of everyday St Kilda life, but different at the same time.
‘The Vineyard represents the heart of St Kilda night life. We don’t want to wipe that away, we want to keep it and encourage it, but we need to sketch a future vision of hospitality, music, a kind of guerrilla urbanism to design something which has significant benefits and improvements but which you almost don’t realise is there.
‘With this approach the site feels the same but has extra spatial ideas slipped into it which make the urban experience that much better, while it still feels like it was always part of st Kilda,’ he said.
Clearly the brainstorming meetings with this architects collective are going to be interesting – and that’s a good thing!
TWISK also spoke with Grant Amon (who was part of the Pride Centre design team), and found he was concerned with place and scale.
‘It’s a humble old building that needs to respect its surrounds and not dominate them. It needs to stay true to its entertainment value with a variety of moods, day and night.’
‘It’s got a 3 am licence. That means transition from daytime to nighttime uses. Importantly we need to watch the scale, it must stay in proportion.’
‘As a group, we can help set up a sensitive local response that provides a useful framework for the next step.’
Interesting.
What would a next-generation Carlo Catani want for this site? He was certainly a person who understood and respected both place and varying moods.
He would likely want a place for promenading during the day and excitement at night. Just how much excitement at night, we’ll never know.
Prior to this story, Port Phillip Council CEO Chris Carroll supplied this statement on the process to determine the future of 71A Acland Street.
“The current tenant’s lease agreement is set to expire at the end of [April]. To keep the site active, the tenancy will continue pending the outcome of a future Expression of Interest (EOI) campaign.
“At the 2 September 2025 Ordinary Meeting of Council, it was decided to conclude the earlier EOI process for a new long-term lease of the site without awarding a successful tenant. Approximately $49,000 was spent on the EOI process.
“Any consideration of financial matters formed part of a confidential Council report and remains confidential.
“Councillors and staff are bound by section 125 of the Local Government Act 2020, which prohibits unauthorised disclosure of confidential information, including details contained in the report. Council may formally resolve to release a confidential report if the reason for confidentiality no longer applies or the matter has been finalised. This is not currently the case; however, we expect to be able to release this information once a future EOI process is concluded.
“A future EOI process will be undertaken after targeted community consultation is held to test priorities for this site.
“While anyone can respond to the consultation, it will be focussed on seeking feedback specifically from individuals, groups or stakeholders directly affected by the EOI.
“This means we will specifically look to those from the St Kilda area who use the site and are invested in the future of Acland Street, with focus groups and on-site pop-ups likely with targeted interest groups.
“At this stage, the consultation will commence in June 2026. An allowance of $10,000 has been made in the project budget for FY 2026/27 to cover engagement costs.
“To date, approximately $105,000 has been spent by Council on the project, comprised of approximately $87,000 in consultant fees, $10,000 for procurement costs and $8000 in legal fees. Much of the completed work can be utilised for the future EOI.”
