Controversial Exhibition St tower returns with major changes, as residents demand answers

Contentious plans for a tower rising above Melbourne’s heritage-listed Comedy Theatre are back before the City of Melbourne, with councillors set to consider the revised proposal at their December 2 Future Melbourne Committee meeting.

The proposal for 222–240 Exhibition St first drew public anger in 2022 when CBD News revealed resident concerns about overshadowing, loss of sunlight, and a lack of consultation. At the time, locals said their voices had been “totally ignored” as developers sought approval for a 32-storey office tower cantilevered over the 1928-built theatre.

Now new plans have emerged – this time for a 27-storey tower with a significant change of use, incorporating hotel and commercial components. And once again, residents of Punch Lane, the narrow bluestone laneway abutting the development to the east, say they have been blindsided.

Punch Lane resident and former EastEnders president Jenny Eltham told CBD News she and fellow neighbours only became aware of the revised plans very recently, despite the proposal’s “material and far-reaching” changes.

“The most troubling issue is the complete absence of community engagement,” Ms Eltham said. “No-one from the developer, the architect or the City of Melbourne has contacted residents at any stage. We have had no opportunity to understand, question or respond to the impacts on our homes.”

In a detailed submission to the state’s planning department, Ms Eltham outlined a list of serious concerns raised by residents after viewing the new documents.

The most significant change is the introduction of a hotel, which she said dramatically increases operational impacts compared with the original office-only proposal. Residents anticipate 24-hour activity, late-night arrivals, idling rideshare vehicles and substantially more deliveries and waste services.

“This fundamental change requires a full reassessment,” Ms Eltham said, adding that no hotel-specific traffic, acoustic or servicing analysis had been provided.

Residents are also alarmed by the removal of the existing loading bay and a 1.9-metre car park height limit, which they argue makes standard hotel servicing “unviable”.

Punch Lane, a heritage laneway with tight sightlines, is already heavily pedestrian-oriented. Locals fear the proposed hotel entrance position will funnel taxis and rideshares into the laneway plaza, creating safety hazards and noise impacts late into the night.

The revised design also shows multiple hotel rooms facing directly onto existing townhouses with minimal setback, raising concerns about privacy, enclosure, light spill and overshadowing.

Ms Eltham said the development is made even more complex by disputed boundaries, a shared concrete slab linking Punch Lane townhouses and 222 Exhibition St, and a registered easement running through the site.

“These are technical matters that require expert analysis. Yet residents have been given no time and no information,” she said. “All we are asking for is adequate time and meaningful engagement.”

While residents acknowledge development is inevitable in the CBD, they say the process must be transparent and respectful.

“Punch Lane has a combined residential investment of more than $20 million,” Ms Eltham said. “We fully accept change – but not without consultation, and not without fairness.”

Councillors will consider the proposal on December 2 before providing their formal comments to the Planning Minister, who will ultimately decide whether the tower proceeds. The meeting papers will be made available on the council’s website on November 27, and submissions can be made here •