Gallery: Kath & Kim house is being demolished

"Chateau Kath" is about to vanish from "Fountain Lakes" as a demolition crew moves in.


“Chateau Kath” -the famed “Fountain Lakes” house used in Kath & Kim – is being demolished.

Workers from Dig Dig Demoliton are on site today at 4 Lagoon Place, Patterson Lakes, south east of Melbourne, as demolition on the once-famous house begins.

It is expected to be fully demolished within two weeks, consigned to TV history.

Originally rented by ABC for the hit sitcom, the home was chosen for its likeness to Sylvania Waters and sold in 2016 for $1,485,000.

Not much remains of the comedy, with the famed ‘wine time’ backyard a shadow of its former self, but the small kitchen is largely intact save, for some repainting.

Glitter adorns one wall, perhaps in a nod to some karaoke nights….

You can catch news stories on the demolition tonight on 10 News First and Nine News.

Bonus photo:

Buckingham Motor Inn, Highett, where a romantic getaway once rocked Room 40.

26 Responses

  1. i always wondered what the deal was with street locations like this & Neighbours etc. Do the show producers have to get permission from any and all property owners who’s facades feature on the show, or maybe only if outdoor scenes are filmed on location in the street? Or is it up to council?

    1. A public street requires local council approval, so what’s in the background doesn’t need permission unless it was unusually featured. Broadly speaking producers will try to secure the goodwill of neighbours if only for the inconvenience of crews, vehicles, noise.

      1. I’m somewhat surprised by the lack of legal approval from owners. Guessing ‘securing goodwill’ might include a meet & greet with the stars if the residents/owners were fans or perhaps $ payments if they’re not hah. And that they would have some legal recourse to object if they really didn’t want their place on tv.

        1. It’s in the best interest of the production company and the film crew there on the day to keep the local residents happy. For a show like Kath & Kim the Location Manager would personally door knock the residents immediately in the area surrounding the house to form a relationship with them weeks before the first crew and cameras arrive. Most people are happy if you take the time to talk to them and include them. If someone really didn’t want their house shown in the background the Location Manager would let the production team know and every effort would be made to accommodate that. Residents can complain to council if the film crew break any bylaws such as excessive noise just the same as if builders turn up before 7am or someone is having a loud party. Council would then instruct the film crew to abide or the filming permit would be cancelled. Look closely at Kath’s Wedding scene and you can see residents across street being used as extras. If you want money start up a leaf…

      2. For Kath & Kim a location fee was only paid to the house owners to compensate them for moving out for 3 months for each series. No one else in the area was paid or permission sought except for “Mandy’s House” next door when access was needed to their front door. For any filming, permission has to to be sought from the local council and a fee paid to them too. The fee paid to council also included the use of a vacant block of land a few doors away from the house that is owned by council that was used to park all the filming vehicles to keep them out of sight from cameras. A condition of the council permit is that all residents in the local area are “letter dropped” with a letter that tells them what dates and times the filming is to take place and a contact person and number they can call for any further information or if they wish to complain. No one ever complained. Noice. A real shame the house is being pulled down.

  2. Are you sure this isn’t just the mass renovations the owner said was happening three years ago? Seems like COVID has caused some delays. Also what does it mean for these rumours? hit.com.au/story/just-in-kath-kim-is-reportedly-getting-a-reboot-1-200255

  3. In terms of housing stock, it’s not very old and probably from the 90s era going by the materials and decor. I suppose it’s very conspicuous. It’s kind of like the so called Bluey house, in which the house had to be extricated by the show production. This is quite reminiscent of the Dreamworld Big Brother house loss. Some of The Block houses are quite popular too and the value can be higher because they’re related to the TV show.

  4. There’s article going around internet websites posted 2 hours ago that kath and Kim is getting a reboot. Is this a coincidence same day the house is demolished

  5. If anyone ever needed proof of the level of wealth inequality in Australia they need look no further than this… a perfectly good home with nothing wrong with it is knocked down while people stay homeless or can’t get a roof over their head they can afford. How nice it must be to have money…

    1. It’s an issue with the social housing departments with waiting lists and lack of available properties. In 2005 there was a documentary titled Reversal of Fortune. Oprah Winfrey called it “a fascinating social experiment” and despite a homeless person named Ted receiving $100,000, presumably American dollars, the money was squandered. When asked by Oprah how much of the $100,000 he still had, Ted replied “none.” and that he was homeless again. Charity and inequality is multifaceted and I only give physical donations now instead of monetary.

      1. Inequality is multi-faceted and yet you’re using the example of an old Oprah episode as an excuse to look down on low income earners? Sounds pretty one dimensional to me.

        1. I’m more multifaceted than to look down on low income earners per se. Knowing these things about social housing, charities and inequality are from real life experiences. I’m just using an experience from the television to stay relevant to TV Tonight.

  6. I’m sure current or future owners of Pin Oak Court will be looking to do the same thing or make major alterations once Neighbours wraps. It’s a great way of gaining back privacy if you remove the attraction.

    1. Council meeting next week on heritage listing Pin Oak Court and sections on Weedon St, so there *might not* be the scope available you think …

  7. A real shame, managed to make the pilgrimage to see it late last year, very glad I did! I feel like the owners must of kept this under wraps to prevent any heritage listings preventing their redevelopment plans.

Leave a Reply