Public Housing for Whitten Oval

[LostDoggy]

On page 20 of today's Herald Sun, there is an article about a $90 million housing plan the Bulldogs are pursuing.

Apparently the club has formed a partnership with HomeGround Services and developer Saracen Properties.

I can't seem to find the link online, but what do people know about this?

It's actually the first i have heard of it.

[azabob]

Bulldogs plan tackles affordable housing
MELISSA FYFE, ROYCE MILLAR - THE AGE
October 11, 2009


http://www.theage.com.au/national/bulldogs-plan-tackles-affordable-housing-20091010-grmo.html


Some of the western suburbs' most vulnerable residents - including the homeless - could find themselves living in new apartments on the edge of Footscray's Whitten Oval, under an ambitious plan spearheaded by the Western Bulldogs.

The Sunday Age can reveal the Bulldogs are asking for $90 million of federal Nation Building funds to develop 251 affordable and social housing units at the Geelong Road end of the club's home ground.

But the proposal provoked an angry rebuke from the Maribyrnong City Council. .

''We have ample space to embed social housing in the general community - why create an enclave?'' said Mayor Michael Clarke.

But the Bulldogs, in partnership with housing provider HomeGround Services and private building company Saracen, say they are trying to improve the chronic shortage of affordable housing in the west.

''We think this is part and parcel of what we, as a community club, need to provide to our community, a place that has greater needs than all other parts of Melbourne,'' said club president David Smorgon.

The proposal allows for between 50 and 100 units based on the Common Ground model, where the most vulnerable and chronically homeless are provided with on-site support. These apartments will also be available to low-income earners.

The balance of the apartments will be affordable accommodation for people such as nurses and hospitality and essential services workers who are being priced out of the inner city. The proposal has not made the first cut of approved projects under the federal Nation Building fund, but the State Government, which approves the Victorian projects seeking Commonwealth funds, remained open to ''continuing discussions'' on an affordable housing development on the site, a spokesman said.

[hujsh]

But the proposal provoked an angry rebuke from the Maribyrnong City Council.

Big ****ing surprise.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I'll stay in the Eastern suburbs, thanks.

I might venture over for a Pimms or a G&T if we win the premiership.

[ledge]

Doesnt matter how good the idea is if its related to the Western Bulldogs the council is all against it.

[AndrewP6]

Sounds like a good idea in theory. But I thought that the idea of public/social housing being grouped in one area had gone by the wayside...as the Mayor seems to be saying.

[KT31]

I'll stay in the Eastern suburbs, thanks.

I might venture over for a Pimms or a G&T if we win the premiership.

The way you drink you better stick to the light stuff and leave the Pimms and G&T to the Misses.

[AndrewP6]

I'll stay in the Eastern suburbs, thanks.

I might venture over for a Pimms or a G&T if we win the premiership.

If we were to win the premiership I'd definitely be heading west for a drink or 12!

[KT31]

Sounds like a good idea in theory. But I thought that the idea of public/social housing being grouped in one area had gone by the wayside...as the Mayor seems to be saying.

I would have thought the only way possible to make money from public housing would be through Goverment grants etc.
I understand they will need a grant to start but would this be benificial to the club in the future, surely a retirement village or nursing home would be a better assett to the club.

Especially considering our forward line.

[AndrewP6]

I would have thought the only way possible to make money from public housing would be through Goverment grants etc.
I understand they will need a grant to start but would this be benificial to the club in the future, surely a retirement village or nursing home would be a better assett to the club.

Especially considering our forward line.

Nice one...

[AndrewP6]

I would have thought the only way possible to make money from public housing would be through Goverment grants etc.
I understand they will need a grant to start but would this be benificial to the club in the future, surely a retirement village or nursing home would be a better assett to the club.

Especially considering our forward line.

Or a psychiatric hospital for the big bald bloke.

[Bulldog4life]

Or a psychiatric hospital for the big bald bloke.

I'll tell him you said that.:)

[BulldogBelle]

Went to the Past Players lunch on Sunday.

David Smorgon had a bit to say about the local council and the crap they carry on with every time the Dogs try and do something.

Always ends up in court.

The Dogs are hoping to have a court ruling on the Edgewater development by Xmas.

[macca]

publich housing a bad idea. It will blead money. Better off leaving the government and DHS to deal with it. DHS are trying to sell the old, run down and torn up houses by their tenants. If you want the whitten oval to cop the social stigma and toilet bowl facade of public housing go ahead.

[LostDoggy]

publich housing a bad idea. It will blead money. Better off leaving the government and DHS to deal with it. DHS are trying to sell the old, run down and torn up houses by their tenants. If you want the whitten oval to cop the social stigma and toilet bowl facade of public housing go ahead.

Hi Macca.

What you have posted is an understandable layperson's reading of the term 'public housing', but you will find that the stereotype you present is an anachronism of a 50s - 70s model of public housing (the 'projects' that we have in many parts of our city).

More recently, however, there are many examples of exemplary medium-density public housing projects from all around the world (some right here in our own backyard! See the architectural award winning refurbishment of the Port Melbourne RSL into public housing by the City of Port Philip as an example, also some great projects by the City of Monash), based on best-practice research into community architecture (mostly based on public/private partnership models) that works really well (and are value-add -- some of these well-designed projects have been growing equity-wise at greater than market rates), which I believe the Whitten Oval proposal is based on.

[LostDoggy]

I would have thought the only way possible to make money from public housing would be through Goverment grants etc.
I understand they will need a grant to start but would this be benificial to the club in the future, surely a retirement village or nursing home would be a better assett to the club.

Especially considering our forward line.

Not necessarily. Firstly, they are rent-earning properties. The Victorian public housing rental model work on a means-tested basis (which is open to fraud, of course, but that's another issue), so that people pay what they can afford and there is a price-point pressure to move people out as they start earning higher wages (to allow lower-income earners in). If you are earning decent wages but don't want to move, the rent will be prohibitive.

Secondly, well-designed public housing properties (and I can give you several very good examples right here in Melbourne) are equity-hogs -- because they are cheap to build (in general), well-designed units in great -- often inner-city -- locations means that they are rarely over-capitalised and have great resale value. This does not apply to the old model of public housing ie. the huge granite blocks of the 50s - 70s, but to the very attractive and innovative medium-density models of recent times, which as far as I know, the Whitten Oval proposal is predicated on.

[comrade]

Not necessarily. Firstly, they are rent-earning properties. The Victorian public housing rental model work on a means-tested basis (which is open to fraud, of course, but that's another issue), so that people pay what they can afford and there is a price-point pressure to move people out as they start earning higher wages (to allow lower-income earners in). If you are earning decent wages but don't want to move, the rent will be prohibitive.

Secondly, well-designed public housing properties (and I can give you several very good examples right here in Melbourne) are equity-hogs -- because they are cheap to build (in general), well-designed units in great -- often inner-city -- locations means that they are rarely over-capitalised and have great resale value. This does not apply to the old model of public housing ie. the huge granite blocks of the 50s - 70s, but to the very attractive and innovative medium-density models of recent times, which as far as I know, the Whitten Oval proposal is predicated on.

Thanks for the insight Lantern - are there any topics you're not knowledgable of? I think you'd be a killer at Trivial Pursuit (not that your insights are trivial, just that they're quite broad in scope!) :D

[Prince Imperial]

I spent a few years of my teenage years living in public housing and I can well understand the undesirability of the old style developments that had ghetto and stigma written all over them. From the little we know about this proposal, however, it seems to have a good balance with around 20-40% public housing and between 60-80% for private tenants. Our "friend" the mayor seems off the mark again with his "enclave" argument. The Rudd government is funding these type of private/public developments all around the country and this could be a win for everybody.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Not necessarily. Firstly, they are rent-earning properties. The Victorian public housing rental model work on a means-tested basis (which is open to fraud, of course, but that's another issue), so that people pay what they can afford and there is a price-point pressure to move people out as they start earning higher wages (to allow lower-income earners in). If you are earning decent wages but don't want to move, the rent will be prohibitive.

Secondly, well-designed public housing properties (and I can give you several very good examples right here in Melbourne) are equity-hogs -- because they are cheap to build (in general), well-designed units in great -- often inner-city -- locations means that they are rarely over-capitalised and have great resale value. This does not apply to the old model of public housing ie. the huge granite blocks of the 50s - 70s, but to the very attractive and innovative medium-density models of recent times, which as far as I know, the Whitten Oval proposal is predicated on.

That's all well and good for the next 15-20 years, but what happens when things start to get a bit run down?

[GVGjr]

Some of the guys at work today thought the Bulldogs should be looking at a retirement village to house our aging "Dads Army" list. This was after Max Hudgton confirmed that the Hawks and Dogs had inquired about him potentially being drafted if he wanted to play another season.

[macca]

Hi Macca.

What you have posted is an understandable layperson's reading of the term 'public housing', but you will find that the stereotype you present is an anachronism of a 50s - 70s model of public housing (the 'projects' that we have in many parts of our city).

More recently, however, there are many examples of exemplary medium-density public housing projects from all around the world (some right here in our own backyard! See the architectural award winning refurbishment of the Port Melbourne RSL into public housing by the City of Port Philip as an example, also some great projects by the City of Monash), based on best-practice research into community architecture (mostly based on public/private partnership models) that works really well (and are value-add -- some of these well-designed projects have been growing equity-wise at greater than market rates), which I believe the Whitten Oval proposal is based on.

Lantern, have you ever had to live in a public housing estatae ? I have, and sooner than later, the area will be littered with shopping trolleys, vb cans, and run down houses. You can quote whatever "sucessufly" project or great examples of public housing, in your idealist world. It is not a "laypersons" terminology of public housing I experess. its my experience from living in collingwood, and living in a privately owned house in heidelberg west. You will see the antics and dramas that public housing provides.

The club should leave these social services to DHS, as they have experience and capabilities to run it. You will see, it will become a liability for the club. If you speak to anyone who owns a house next to a public housing tenant, they would wish it to be privatised. Go own, see if you can live with these people.

[strebla]

Lantern, have you ever had to live in a public housing estatae ? I have, and sooner than later, the area will be littered with shopping trolleys, vb cans, and run down houses. You can quote whatever "sucessufly" project or great examples of public housing, in your idealist world. It is not a "laypersons" terminology of public housing I experess. its my experience from living in collingwood, and living in a privately owned house in heidelberg west. You will see the antics and dramas that public housing provides.

The club should leave these social services to DHS, as they have experience and capabilities to run it. You will see, it will become a liability for the club. If you speak to anyone who owns a house next to a public housing tenant, they would wish it to be privatised. Go own, see if you can live with these people.

Sorry Macca I grew up in Braybrook living in the concrete jungle so I know where you are comming from.I have a commision house next door to me in manor lakes and another accross the road the Somali family living next door are very well behaved even though they are without their father who is still in Somalia this is the type of housing lantern is talking about. as for what happens in ten or twenty years if the commision house is in a state of disrepair they demmolish and rebuild.I don't know whats right and whats wrong here but for my money the more public housing the better we all can live I for one don't want to hear of whole families without a home.

[alwaysadog]

Some of the guys at work today thought the Bulldogs should be looking at a retirement village to house our aging "Dads Army" list. This was after Max Hudgton confirmed that the Hawks and Dogs had inquired about him potentially being drafted if he wanted to play another season.

Max is too young for us.

[alwaysadog]

Doesnt matter how good the idea is if its related to the Western Bulldogs the council is all against it.

Yes that seems to be the case, they don't seem to like not being front page themselves.

Given that you'd think Smorgo would smooze them, cause they're not going to go away. Their reaction to this proposal appears to be one of shock as if we didn't even consult them. Not very smart if you need planning permits etc. down the track.

On another point, there used to be a book called How to get money out of the government. It seems the current administration are rewriting it.

[Keepa Movin' Griff]

Yeh i don't know if i really like this idea, we need to attract people to WO, don't think PH is the best image. Although many a passionate Doggy supporter reside in 'Dunrootin' Castle' just up Gordon St.

[LostDoggy]

That's all well and good for the next 15-20 years, but what happens when things start to get a bit run down?

These models tend to have a mix of public/private housing so there would be a body corp. just as you would have in the million-dollar apartment complexes that you and I live in SS (haha).

Also, if it's the type of housing model that I'm thinking of (and from all indications it is) they tend to have a longer-term plan of putting the public apartments on the market.

[LostDoggy]

Lantern, have you ever had to live in a public housing estatae ? I have, and sooner than later, the area will be littered with shopping trolleys, vb cans, and run down houses. You can quote whatever "sucessufly" project or great examples of public housing, in your idealist world. It is not a "laypersons" terminology of public housing I experess. its my experience from living in collingwood, and living in a privately owned house in heidelberg west. You will see the antics and dramas that public housing provides.

The club should leave these social services to DHS, as they have experience and capabilities to run it. You will see, it will become a liability for the club. If you speak to anyone who owns a house next to a public housing tenant, they would wish it to be privatised. Go own, see if you can live with these people.

Hi Macca, in a previous career I was an architect (ocassionally consulting with the more progressive local councils such as Melbourne and Monash), but currently work in international aid development with an NGO while also volunteering with my local church in the projects in Richmond, and thus am well aware of the type of housing you are talking about, and the problems they perpetuate. I am NOT a fan of it at all, and your points are very valid about their shortcomings.

However, this is not the type of housing that is being proposed -- the new public housing projects are more based on a medium-density model (the ones that you're talking about are high-density) which means that there will be fewer people, for one, and better designed 'shared' spaces (like courtyards etc.). The new models also tend to have a mix of public/private housing, meaning that the only difference between them and a normal apartment block is that some of the houses will be owned by the state in order to provide housing as necessary.

There are also more and more state-owned houses (technically public housing also) to provide for special needs such as disability or other illnesses, and these are generally impeccably maintained.

This type of housing will become more and more necessary to meet the needs of our growing population (which is another debate). I just wanted to make the point that the term 'public housing' today does not mean what we tend to think (the large concrete blocks) -- there's probably public housing on your very street! So while your points are very valid, Macca (and believe me, the state government would love to be rid of the projects of the 50s - 70s which are a legacy of a failed European 'modernist architecture' model), that is not the type of housing we are talking about here.

[LostDoggy]

Thanks for the insight Lantern - are there any topics you're not knowledgable of? I think you'd be a killer at Trivial Pursuit (not that your insights are trivial, just that they're quite broad in scope!) :D

Haha -- love Trivial Pursuit!!!

In this case though, have to confess that I know a little bit about it because I used to be an architect and worked around the world specifically on high and medium-density housing and part of my post-grad research (going back about 10 years now) at Melbourne Uni was working with the City of Melbourne on developing regulations for high and medium-density housing (both public and private) as we don't have a legacy of this type of housing in Australia (other than the not-great projects that macca and others have talked about). As it is, I currently work with an NGO and one of my areas of work is urbanisation and urban poverty (mostly in the Asia Pacific and South America though, not Australia, although we have started doing some work in the Northern Territory with indigenous communities), so I can claim a little bit of knowledge, I suppose.

[chef]

Is it wrong of me to want that land to be used for something that will profit the Dogs financially?

[LostDoggy]

Is it wrong of me to want that land to be used for something that will profit the Dogs financially?

If they've done their financial modelling properly, there should be some short-term rental returns as cash-flow, and equity returns as a long-term investment (if well designed and maintained). There are also government grants to organisations that provide this type of housing.

From a brand equity standpoint, it will generate goodwill and credibility for our brand of being a 'community club', and if marketed properly, can be a really powerful lever for our image going forward, especially in reaching into new migrant markets. (Not saying that we are Coke or anything, but the 'goodwill' element in their brand was priced a few years ago at around US$20 billion, which shows that you CAN put a monetary value on something seemingly intangible.)

I'm not for or against the project (don't know enough about it), just putting forward information that may hopefully be helpful.

[Sockeye Salmon]

- there's probably public housing on your very street!

OMG! OMG! OMG! Poor people in my street!!!!

Get them away from me!!!! GET THEM AWAY FROM ME!!!!

[The Coon Dog]

Open Letter to All Members (http://www.westernbulldogs.com.au/season2009/news/newsarticle/tabid/4112/newsid/85990/default.aspx)

The following is an open letter to Western Bulldogs Members from HomeGround Services CEO Stephen Nash and Western Bulldogs Chief Executive Campbell Rose, in relation to a proposed social housing initiative at the Whitten Oval.

The Western Bulldogs Football Club have teamed up with leading Melbourne housing provider HomeGround Services, to develop an innovative social housing initiative known as the Bulldogs HomeGround, to be built at the ‘new’ Whitten Oval in West Footscray.

The Western Bulldogs are committed to our local community and this commitment has been demonstrated in so many ways . Whether it is through the operation of our community services arm, SpiritWest Services, the inclusion of new community facilities such as a not-for-profit child care centre or accommodating Victoria University at the ‘new’ Whitten Oval.

As the Community Club of the AFL, we see that community organisations like ourselves and HomeGround Services, can make a difference in supporting those most vulnerable in our community of the western suburbs, who don’t have a home.

We believe that the power of football has the ability to empower, motivate, inspire and ultimately change lives, while HomeGround Services have the simple mission of ending homelessness.

The meeting of our two organisations in a unique partnership means that we can develop a genuine community asset that will make a fundamental difference to the lives of many.

The problem of homelessness and lack of housing affordability is well documented.

It is estimated that in the west, encompassing Flemington, Footscray, Braybrook, Maidstone, Sunshine, Werribee and Melton, there are about 5000 people on a waiting list for public housing.

The waiting list for individuals, in some of these cases, can be indefinite. In a modern, prosperous community like Melbourne, this situation is unacceptable.

So, in February 2009, when the Australian Government released its $43 billion stimulus package, including $1.5 billion to provide about 5000 social housing units across Victoria, we saw a unique opportunity to open up our home of 126 years, to those who need one.

We plan to build two low rise buildings (no more than five stories high) to provide a mixture of accommodation types, with a capacity of up to 250 housing units to be used for a variety of purposes including:

• supported social housing for people who would otherwise be homeless
• affordable housing for low income workers in key industries such as health, community services and emergency services and;
• high quality, supported housing for older people.

To ensure the community benefits from this project, it is also proposed that we include a new indoor public swim centre and new public gymnasium.

As part of this proposal, HomeGround Services will provide the management, tenancy and support services associated with the social and affordable housing elements of the initiative, using its renowned Common Ground model.

This means that people are not merely housed and then abandoned, but they receive intensive, hands on support, to turn their lives around in a safe and secure environment that will enhance the amenity of the area.

The total development cost of the Bulldogs HomeGround initiative is estimated at about $80 million. Its construction time frame will be about two years and it is estimated that this will provide and create in the order of 2000 direct and indirect jobs.

These jobs and the prosperity they bring will be of huge benefit in the west , a region which has been hit hard by the worst economic crisis the world has seen since the Depression.

This project represents a unique window of opportunity to do something meaningful to address one of the most entrenched social problems confronting our community – homelessness.

Despite the good intentions and endeavours of all tiers of government over many years, the scourge of homelessness remains. But dealing with the problem is beyond the capacity of government alone – it requires a whole of community response.

That is why the Bulldogs HomeGround proposal has emerged. It is a creative, innovative response to the opportunity provided by the Australian Government’s stimulus package and is driven by the stated objectives of all local, State and Federal Government’s to end homelessness.

We believe the ‘new’ Whitten Oval will be an excellent place to live. The Geelong Road end of the ground where the Bulldogs HomeGround is to be built is currently just a contaminated mound of dirt.

The site is just 50 metres from West Footscray Railway Station and less than 10 kms from the central Melbourne, in the inspirational and aspirational setting of the Western Bulldogs Football Club.

It must be stressed that this project is still only a proposal and has many more hurdles to overcome before it will become a reality. It will also undoubtedly evolve, based on consultation with the community and key stakeholders.

The Western Bulldogs and HomeGround Services look forward to receiving your feedback to help shape this proposal, to contact the Club email godogs@westernbulldogs.com.au

[Remi Moses]

Fancy wanting to put people in homes . The council should just concentrat on picking up drivers for having the tamerity for parking in bus and No standing zones for longer than 90 seconds. Then telling us this is all in the aid of ''road safety'' :rolleyes:

[bornadog]

What a great initiative by the club and shame on the council for rejecting the idea.

[Prince Imperial]

It will soon become irrelevant what the Council thinks of the proposal as a Bill introduced into Parliament (the Land (Revocation of Reservations and Other Matters) Bill 2009) relieves them (at their request) over managment of the Western Oval with the responsibility to be given directly to the State Government (presumably the Department of Sustainability & Environment). This means the Council will have no power to block any development.

It is true, however, that the land on which the child care centre is being built is freehold owned by the Council and this Bill will not affect the situation there.

The goverment made it clear in the Second Reading Speech that accompanied the Bill that the land will be available for affordable housing indicating their support in principle for what our Club is proposing:


Western Oval reserve

This bill will help facilitate a $30 million redevelopment of the Western Oval reserve, also known as the David Spurling or Whitten Oval reserve, in Footscray, which is being undertaken through a partnership between the state, federal and local governments, the AFL and the Western Bulldogs Football Club.

This redevelopment will establish a range of new sporting and community facilities for Footscray, as well as providing affordable housing.

The development will include establishment of the Victoria University Learning Centre on the reserve, which will offer activities such as sports performance analysis, sports psychology, sports administration and sports science.

Currently, the Western Oval reserve is permanently reserved for recreation purposes under the Footscray (Recreation Ground) Lands Act 1968. However, the 'recreation' reservation is too limited to provide for the broad range of activities that will be undertaken following the redevelopment. This bill will revoke the permanent reservation and temporarily reserve the site for 'recreation, social and community services', which will allow the land to be used for a broad range of purposes.

The committee of management currently looking after the reserve, the Maribyrnong City Council, no longer wish to have management responsibility for this site.

This bill will remove the council as managers of the reserve, which can only be done by legislation. In addition, the bill will revoke redundant legislation in the form of the Footscray (Recreation Ground) Lands Act 1968 and the Footscray (Western Oval Reserve) Act 1981.

In conclusion, the amendments made by this bill will facilitate a number of government-supported projects, including large-scale redevelopments at Caulfield, Kardinia Oval and Western Oval, which will have wide-ranging social and economic outcomes for local communities.

http://tex.parliament.vic.gov.au/bin/texhtmlt?form=VicHansard.dumpall&db=hansard91&dodraft=0&house=ASSEMBLY&speech=5911&activity=Second+Reading&title=LAND+%28REVOCATION+OF+RESERVATIONS+AND+OTHER+MATTERS%2 9+BILL&date1=17&date2=September&date3=2009&query=true%0a%09and+%28+activity+contains+'Second+Reading'+% 29%0a%09and+%28+hdate.hdate_3+=+2009+%29%0a%09and+%28+hdate. hdate_2+contains+'September'+%29%0a%09and+%28+hdate.hdate_1+ =+17+%29%0a%09and+%28+house+contains+'ASSEMBLY'+%29%0a

An article appeared today in the Maribyrnong Leader re this Bill and the Mayor's objections:

http://maribyrnong-leader.whereilive.com.au/news/story/dogs-home-game-at-whitten-oval/

This article confirms that it is planned the State Department of Education will become a tenant in the new offices at the Oval.

[AndrewP6]

This article confirms that it is planned the State Department of Education will become a tenant in the new offices at the Oval.

Really? My employer! Perhaps they'll offer special deals to teachers who are Bulldog members....****wishfully thinking***

[bornadog]

This article confirms that it is planned the State Department of Education will become a tenant in the new offices at the Oval.

The council is only pissed off because they weren't consulted and weren't part of the decision making.

[The Coon Dog]

The council is only pissed off because they weren't consulted and weren't part of the decision making.

What annoys me is that the Mayor comes out in the local media from time to time to bag the club, then fronts up on the family day as though he's the number one ticket holder!

[LostDog]

From what i have seen of that tool i don't like him
will probably put those parking cameras in the Whitten Oval Car park

[LostDoggy]

OMG! OMG! OMG! Poor people in my street!!!!

Get them away from me!!!! GET THEM AWAY FROM ME!!!!

:D dickhead.

[AndrewP6]

What annoys me is that the Mayor comes out in the local media from time to time to bag the club, then fronts up on the family day as though he's the number one ticket holder!

Pardon my ignorance (I'm not a western suburb local!) - is the Mayor that bloke at the family day who was almost shouting into the mic, calling everyone "friends"??? IIRC, a very over-the-top kind of character... and he bags the club every other day of the year?

[LostDoggy]

???? Clarke is his name

[LostDoggy]

Good idea.

They will sell 15 of these on Day 1 to the 15 other clubs so they can watch closed training sessions.

We're half-way there already.

[BulldogBelle]

Hmmm, looks like Maribyrnong City Council is getting a little narky....

Charlene Gatt |Star News Group |27th October 2009 (http://www.starnewsgroup.com.au/story/81669)

MARIBYRNONG City Council is keen to be reinstated as the responsible authority for Whitten Oval, as the debate over a public housing development heats up.

The council will ask State Planning Minister Justin Madden to reinstate it as the responsible authority and is requesting a meeting with the full board of the Western Bulldogs to discuss plans for the proposed $80 million development, which is earmarked to occupy the southern end of Whitten Oval.

The development, which is currently being considered by the State Government, is expected to include a mix of affordable housing, social housing, transitional housing and crisis accommodation.

It is likely to be built in two high-rises, which would house up to 250 units over five floors.

Click HERE (http://www.starnewsgroup.com.au/story/81669) to read the remainder of the article....

[comrade]

Hmmm, looks like Maribyrnong City Council is getting a little narky....



What's new?

[LostDoggy]

This is the line that kills me:

She also questioned whether a football club was the best organisation to look after the homeless.

If that doesn't demonstrate the pre-historic conceptual grasp of the council I don't know what will. Being only able to handle things in neat boxes and inability to think laterally is a sure sign of a limited intellect.

Besides, her question damns the council anyway, as the real answer to it is:

"No, the council should naturally be the best organisation to take care of the homeless, but since you are doing **** all, it's left to other community organisations with a heart and a nose for profit (two things which, despite popular belief, are not mutually exclusive) to pick up the slack."

I wouldn't have thought the council would want to bring so much attention to their own incompetence and inaction on the issue, and would be grateful that someone else is doing their work for them.

[boydogs]

This is the line that kills me:

She also questioned whether a football club was the best organisation to look after the homeless.


Apparently the club has formed a partnership with HomeGround Services and developer Saracen Properties

Hence why we teamed up with another mob... :confused:

[LostDoggy]

It is likely to be built in two high-rises, which would house up to 250 units over five floors.
I would like to inform Ms Gatt that five floors is hardly high rise!

Cr Cumming said the council and the community had had a “gutful” of the Bulldogs antics. She said the Bulldogs were tugging on people’s heartstrings while stealing valuable public open space.

Yes Cr Cumming and giving it back to the public!

I think it's time we put someone on the council, anyone prepared to stand against Mr Clarke?

[alwaysadog]

The council is only pissed off because they weren't consulted and weren't part of the decision making.

And strange as it at seem this is a justifiable complaint.

If the club is keen to get into areas like child care and public housing that are traditionally under local govt's planning or control then we need to adopt a mature attitude and have the council on board as partners.

The hold up over the new pokies venue should have taught us that at lesson, but the club seems to have ignored their likely negative resonse to learning about such proposals through the media.

Imagine if the boot was on the other foot and the council had decided to build the same public housing at the WO without telling the club.

IMHO neither the club nor the council come out of this smelling of roses, pun intended.

[Sockeye Salmon]

And strange as it at seem this is a justifiable complaint.

If the club is keen to get into areas like child care and public housing that are traditionally under local govt's planning or control then we need to adopt a mature attitude and have the council on board as partners.

The hold up over the new pokies venue should have taught us that at lesson, but the club seems to have ignored their likely negative resonse to learning about such proposals through the media.

Imagine if the boot was on the other foot and the council had decided to build the same public housing at the WO without telling the club.

IMHO neither the club nor the council come out of this smelling of roses, pun intended.

I can't wear that.

The council have shown peviously that there is no circumstance where they will work with the club. The state government have acknowledged this by removing the from the process.

They have rendered themselves redundant by their history of acting like prats.

The club should use their influence to ensure the dissenters get the flck next election.

[alwaysadog]

I can't wear that.

The council have shown peviously that there is no circumstance where they will work with the club. The state government have acknowledged this by removing the from the process.

They have rendered themselves redundant by their history of acting like prats.

The club should use their influence to ensure the dissenters get the flck next election.

Apart from the bit about the club intefering in local govt elections SS I don't think we disagree in our analysis except they might be prats but they aren't going to go away, furthermore I acknowledge that they still have power in areas that are important to us and continue to have a capacity to throw a spanner in the works everytime we build up momentum.

The state govt plays ducks and drakes to suit its own ends not necessarily those of fact or principle.

Eventually we are going to have to rebuild a working relationship with the council, in my view this would be better done sooner than later, purely as a pragmatic move not because I hold them in any regard.

[Remi Moses]

It is likely to be built in two high-rises, which would house up to 250 units over five floors.
I would like to inform Ms Gatt that five floors is hardly high rise!

Cr Cumming said the council and the community had had a “gutful” of the Bulldogs antics. She said the Bulldogs were tugging on people’s heartstrings while stealing valuable public open space.

Yes Cr Cumming and giving it back to the public!

I think it's time we put someone on the council, anyone prepared to stand against Mr Clarke?

No we've had a gutful of the council using the Footy club as apunching bag!Then they have the complete and utter cheek to hang on to the coat tails when we're travelling okay! I.E that crackpot mayor at the family day. yeah I bet Cumming and Clarke are there on GF day {if we made it] with their hand out looking for a freebie!For christ sake council just concentrate on pinging poor local rate payers for having the tamerity to park in a no standing zone for longer than 90 seconds.

[LostDoggy]

And strange as it at seem this is a justifiable complaint.

If the club is keen to get into areas like child care and public housing that are traditionally under local govt's planning or control then we need to adopt a mature attitude and have the council on board as partners.

.

It's the council that has to grow up in this case.

The sole purpose of local government should be the betterment of their communities -- and it shouldn't matter a whit where the initiatives come from, as long as they are good ones.

In this case, the local council has not shown any sign that they actually understand the project, only that they are throwing a tanty that they've been 'usurped' -- they are more concerned about power plays and politics than they are of any meaningful result for the homeless under their jurisdiction.

A progressive local government would be GLAD that such a powerful lever of community goodwill such as their local AFL football club was willing to get involved in such initiatives, and work with them to ensure the best outcome for the community. This council has shown no such intelligence or foresight, and is more interested in wresting back power at all costs -- I haven't seen a single statement from them regarding what THEIR alternative proposals are regarding their plans for public housing, more their indignance at not having total control.

In case they've forgotten, they exist solely to serve the community, not themselves, and as SS said, you can't blame the club for not being able to work with the council here, as this council has never shown themselves able to work with ANYONE effectively (they are notorious for it, actually). They are incompetent small-minded people who have no real grasp of any of the issues at hand here, and the less heed paid to their campaign of misinformation (we're building on "public" land? pull the other one), the better.

[hotdog]

This is also a topic of interest in my local community which just so happens to border Footscray (Sunshine). Some interesting debate here http://www.sunshine.asn.au/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,71/func,view/catid,12/id,1131159/#1131159. Politics in the western suburbs of Melbourne is a dirty business. The state government is driving a public housing initiative and conveniently lobbing it in labour strongholds that they know they have no chance of losing even with voter backlash. My concerns are these areas are already lacking services and infrastrusture. By creating more social housing by removing parkland that can never be reclaimed in essence they are creating future ghettos. Sorry Mr Rose I would much prefer some well maintained open space in my suburb than more social housing.

[hotdog]

http://www.homeground.org.au/nwi-2-36-42-BulldogsHomeGroundSocialHousingInitiative.htm


Bulldogs HomeGround Social Housing Initiative

Date: Thursday 15/10/09

The Western Bulldogs Football Club and HomeGround have developed an innovative social housing initiative known as Bulldogs HomeGround, to be built at the Whitten Oval in West Footscray.

The problem of homelessness and Melbourne's affordable housing crisis are well documented. It is estimated that in the west, encompassing Flemington, Footscray, Braybrook, Maidstone, Sunshine and further west to Werribee and Melton, there are about 5000 people on a waiting list for public housing.

The waiting list for individuals, in some of these cases, can be indefinite. In a modern, prosperous community like Melbourne, this sort of situation is unacceptable.

The current proposal is for two low rise buildings to provide a mixture of accommodation types, with a capacity of up to 250 housing units to be used for a variety of purposes including:


Common Ground supportive housing for people escaping from chronic homelessness
Affordable housing for low income workers in key industries such as health, community services and emergency services
High quality supported housing for older people.

To increase the community benefits of this project, it is also proposed to include a new indoor public swim centre and public gymnasium.

As part of this proposal, HomeGround Services will provide the management, tenancy and support services associated with the Common Ground, social and affordable housing elements of the initiative.

This means that people are not merely housed, but they receive intensive, hands on support, to turn their lives around in a safe and secure environment that will enhance the amenity of the area.

The total development cost of the Bulldogs HomeGround initiative is estimated at about $80 million. Its construction time frame will be about two years and is estimated will provide and create in the order of 2,000 direct and indirect jobs.

These jobs and the prosperity they bring will be of huge benefit in the west - a region which has been badly impacted on by the worst economic crisis the world has seen since the Depression,

This project represents a unique window of opportunity to do something meaningful to address one of the most entrenched social problems confronting our community – homelessness.

Despite the good intentions and endeavours of all tiers of government over many years, homelessness remains. Dealing with this problem is beyond the capacity of government alone – it requires a whole of community response.

That is why the Bulldogs HomeGround proposal has emerged. It is a creative, innovative response to the opportunity provided by the Australian Government’s stimulus package and is driven by the stated objectives of local, state and federal governments to end homelessness.

The site is just 50 metres from West Footscray Railway Station and less than 10 kms from the CBD, located in the inspirational and aspirational setting of a football club.

It must be stressed that this project is still only a proposal and has many more hurdles to overcome before it will become a reality. It will also undoubtedly evolve, based on consultation with the community and key stakeholders.

The Bulldogs and HomeGround Services look forward to receiving community feedback to help shape this proposal.

[Mofra]

Lantern, have you ever had to live in a public housing estatae ? I have, and sooner than later, the area will be littered with shopping trolleys, vb cans, and run down houses. You can quote whatever "sucessufly" project or great examples of public housing, in your idealist world. It is not a "laypersons" terminology of public housing I experess. its my experience from living in collingwood, and living in a privately owned house in heidelberg west. You will see the antics and dramas that public housing provides.

The club should leave these social services to DHS, as they have experience and capabilities to run it. You will see, it will become a liability for the club. If you speak to anyone who owns a house next to a public housing tenant, they would wish it to be privatised. Go own, see if you can live with these people.
Have you ventured past the shared-arrangement public housing project in Kensington (opposite the pool & fitness centre)?

It works fantastically well due to the mix of residents living there - crime rates are down by over 90%, the gardens and public areas are clean & tidy and it remains a rather quiet place to live.

I'm not doubting your experience, but times (and public housing management) have/has changed in many areas.

[LostDoggy]

Have you ventured past the shared-arrangement public housing project in Kensington (opposite the pool & fitness centre)?

It works fantastically well due to the mix of residents living there - crime rates are down by over 90%, the gardens and public areas are clean & tidy and it remains a rather quiet place to live.

I'm not doubting your experience, but times (and public housing management) have/has changed in many areas.

Nice example Mofra.

Nowadays, public/private projects may actually be so good that you don't realise that they are 'public housing' because you just assume they are 'normal' houses. In my street, for example, in a relatively affluent suburb, the houses opposite my compound are actually a mix of public housing and private housing, but most people would assume that they were all just 'normal' privately owned houses, because it is a well integrated and serviced project.

[LostDoggy]

I don't like this development... Is this the home of our football club or is it just a big community centre now?

[Dazza]

To be fair this is a pretty small building in terms of public housing. The problem areas are generally the highrise buildings. An example would be the Prahan flats. The highrise areas of the flats tend to gather large groups of troublemakers but the ones opposite the skate park are mixed with elderly people/immigrants/low income families and it generally doesn't have any dramas.

[alwaysadog]

I don't like this development... Is this the home of our football club or is it just a big community centre now?

Arkie are the two mutually exclusive? After all the hours that the club needs use of the site are not that many in the usual 24 hour day. I'd be concerned if I thought it would compromise our use of the facilities, on the other hand if it guarantees we will be there for the long haul, then it has more of an upside that possible likely negative consequences.

Besides this might be considered to be at the core of our understanding of what a community club means. Is it alright to have the VUT students there all day but not the disadvantaged, or do the balance each other?

Some might feel that it's a bit late to be complaining now, the club made it clear from the start that the redevelopment of the WO was intended to turn it into a revenue source to guarantee the long term future of the club.

My betting is that this development, if it proceeds and we might still end up in the courts over it, is as much driven by dollar concerns as it is by concerns for the well being of the less well off.

Whatever one's personal regard is for the current club administration they have the runs on the board when it comes to advancing the bottom line.

[LostDoggy]

My betting is that this development, if it proceeds and we might still end up in the courts over it, is as much driven by dollar concerns as it is by concerns for the well being of the less well off.


Believe it or not, these aren't mutually exclusive either. In fact, it is the best way to get socially/culturally/environmentally necessary things done in a market economy!

[Remi Moses]

Have you ventured past the shared-arrangement public housing project in Kensington (opposite the pool & fitness centre)?

It works fantastically well due to the mix of residents living there - crime rates are down by over 90%, the gardens and public areas are clean & tidy and it remains a rather quiet place to live.

I'm not doubting your experience, but times (and public housing management) have/has changed in many areas.

Good call . The way we perceive people in this country just astounds me at times. Stereotyping people is the norm

[Twodogs]

The car park area that the club are building in has tradionally had housing on it anyway. Up until 25-30 years ago it was all terrace housing.

[alwaysadog]

Believe it or not, these aren't mutually exclusive either. In fact, it is the best way to get socially/culturally/environmentally necessary things done in a market economy!

They certainly aren't mutually exclusive, that was not the point. However it is far from universally accepted as being the best way to get things done.

[BulldogBelle]

The latest article on the subject....

Search for common ground (http://www.starnewsgroup.com.au/story/82490)
The Star News Group | BY Charlene Gatt | 17th November 2009

The Western Bulldogs and Maribyrnong City Council are at loggerheads over a planned housing development.

In plans seen by Star, the Western Bulldogs and HomeGround development will provide 54 Common Ground supportive housing units with “tailored” on-site support services and 36 one-bedroom, 120 two-bedroom and 41 three-bedroom affordable housing units across three buildings.

Each building is expected to stand five storeys high.

The development, which is based on the Common Ground model, will have CCTV and will be staffed by a round-the-clock concierge who will control access to the Common Ground building and monitor access to the affordable housing units.

At least two staff will carry out concierge duties after hours. Entry to the building will be through the concierge and by access card only after hours.

The development will include on-site medical, counselling, therapeutic, recreational and vocational services.

The development will also include a social enterprise café, a 1.2 km ‘Tan of the West’ running track, a community Learn to Swim and hydrotherapy centre and community fitness centre that will supplement the separately funded community sports/multi-purpose hall, which is due for completion in early 2011.

Saracen Properties, who will be the property development manager for the project, is contributing $5 million to the development. The Bulldogs and HomeGround have applied for a Federal Government grant to cover the remaining amount.

The bill to change the use of Whitten Oval has already been passed in the Lower House and was due to be debated in the Upper House yesterday, at the time Star went to print.

Bulldogs CEO Campbell Rose said construction was likely to start in the first half of 2010 if the proposal got the nod from the state and federal governments.

The development has received overwhelming support from the community and stakeholders, including the AFL, Early Childhood Management Services, Grocon Constructors, ME Bank, Tweddle Child and Family Health Service, Magistrate John Doherty, Common Ground and affordable housing and support service Wintringham.

However, the $88.5 million project has become fraught with controversy since Maribyrnong City Council voiced its objections against the development in early October.

Concerns include a loss of public open space, the development being placed on a parcel of land the size of a “postage stamp” and creating an enclave of some of the area’s most disadvantaged.

Click HERE (http://www.starnewsgroup.com.au/story/82490) to read the remainder of the article...

[Topdog]

The development has received overwhelming support from the community and stakeholders, including the AFL, Early Childhood Management Services, Grocon Constructors, ME Bank, Tweddle Child and Family Health Service, Magistrate John Doherty, Common Ground and affordable housing and support service Wintringham.

However, the $88.5 million project has become fraught with controversy since Maribyrnong City Council voiced its objections against the development in early October.

I love these 2 paragraphs right next to each other. Supported by a multitude of corporations and "important" people, opposed by the Maribyrnong Council :rolleyes:

[hotdog]

http://www.sunshine.asn.au/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,71/func,view/catid,2/id,1131900/#1131900

[Topdog]

http://www.sunshine.asn.au/component/option,com_fireboard/Itemid,71/func,view/catid,2/id,1131900/#1131900

um... yes?

[bornadog]

more news

http://www.theage.com.au/national/bulldogs-ready-to-play-ball-on-housing-20091120-iqyp.html