After decades of planning, consultation, and two rounds of design proposals, the council has resolved to go back to the proverbial ‘drawing board’ after another round of community consultation.
Last week they announced that a new lease would not be awarded and a new EOI will be undertaken after targeted community consultation. This will take six to 12 months.
Council confirmed that the current lease expires in April 2026 and they ‘are working to secure short-term arrangements to maintain activation and ensure this much-loved site continues as a vibrant part of St Kilda during the new EOI process.’ (Source)
The decision to revisit the process was made in a confidential session at the last council meeting. It signals the failure of the most recent expression of interest and selection process—a process that cost the council tens of thousands of dollars and bidders many times more.
However, perhaps the most exasperating part of the failed process is that the public are expected to believe it will be different next time.
Talk of a revamp started over 20 years ago
Long-time locals will recall that plans to revamp The Vineyard were being discussed over 20 years ago. After a concerted public backlash, the changes were left to the operators to implement as part of their lease.
Pre-pandemic, the council conducted extensive public consultations on a proposed renovation, only to turn away when survey works revealed that underground utilities thwarted the plans.
Post-pandemic, the process became bogged down in a debate between the current tenant/operator and the council about who was obstructing the changes.
The EOI attracted serious interest
Now, after a public call for expressions of interest, it is thought (but not confirmed) that up to five serious bids were submitted.
The EOI process started in July of last year and closed as the council went into caretaker mode before elections in November. At the time, then-Mayor Cunsolo told TWiSK that the renewal of 71A Acland Street aligns with the council’s commitment to champion live music and their declaration of St Kilda as Victoria’s first Live Music Precinct.
TWiSK understands that bidders received detailed briefings and were required to adhere to specific instructions and make rounds of adjustments. This level of detail and effort typically involves a consortium of skills and can cost many thousands of dollars, if not hundreds of thousands.
Now, looking at the aftermath of the competitive process, bidders are understandably reluctant to share their creative ideas or frustrations. TWiSK fears that bidders are constrained by non-disclosure agreements that make even discussing the NDA a breach.
TWiSK invites any bidder who wants to chat in confidence to reach out.
Questions directed to the Mayor and CEO
In the meantime, we sent a swag of questions to the Mayor and CEO. Here is the Mayor’s response in full and without comment.
Cost to council of assessing the current EOI proposals, including external consultants, legal and probity fees?
Approximately $49,000 was spent on the EOI process. Much of the work completed will be able to be utilised for the future EOI process which, in accordance with Council policy, will have appropriate independent probity oversight.
How many completed bids were received?
We will not be releasing the precise number of submitters while we are completing a new procurement process. However, there was good interest, with a high number of proposals received.
Assuming that bidders went to significant effort and expenditure to meet the terms of the EOI, will there be any consideration for that effort and will there be any associated NDA or other similar restrictions? If so, what is the estimated budget for this?
Council extends its thanks to all participants for their efforts in responding to the EOI. In recognition of the efforts of the short-listed respondents, and to help set up the next EOI process for success, we are in discussions with short-listed respondents. These conversations are ongoing and involve commercially sensitive matters so we can’t provide additional information at this time.
In the request for EOI, was a monetary contribution to the project from council indicated, and if so what $ range was that?
Yes, the EOI allowed respondents to put forward proposals that could include a landlord contribution, such as funding towards capital investment, and/or rent free or rent reduction periods. As is common practice for these types of leases, a limit on landlord contribution and rent was not set. It was left to the market to present compelling and financially feasible proposals that the delivered on the vision for the site. The assessment of submissions was based on multiple factors, of which the commercial components were just one.
What efforts will council take to mitigate reputation damage amongst prospective bidders in future projects?
Our Council has commenced engaging with parties short-listed in the EOI process to obtain their feedback on the process to ensure that the next EOI is successful. We extend our thanks to those that have already provided helpful feedback.
What is the budget for the next stage of consultation and EOI?
Council has allocated $25,000 in the 2025/26 budget towards the project. The scope of engagement of the new EOI, and any budget implications, will be determined over the coming months.
Was the voting in council unanimous, if not what was the margin?
This item was considered confidentially. Councillors and staff are bound by section 125 of the Local Government Act which prohibits unauthorised disclosure of confidential information, including voting on the item. 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.
