Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
All that anyone has contribute on this debate is the stereotypical victim mentality "we're poor, we get discriminated against,
That's insulting Stefcep!
By & large, you & Lantern & had a reasonable crack & getting your opposing points of view across, no problems there. No one has to agree with each other on every issue.
I haven't gotten into any stereotypical victim mentality at all.
My concern is all about people running the 'we don't need anymore poker machines in our suburb' argument when infact it's a reloaction of existing poker machines a few kilometres up the road.
How is that stereotypical victim mentality?
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Councillors are wannabe politicians and learn spin doctoring as a councillor, what TCD pointed out is just that.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Coon Dog
That's insulting Stefcep!
By & large, you & Lantern & had a reasonable crack & getting your opposing points of view across, no problems there. No one has to agree with each other on every issue.
I haven't gotten into any stereotypical victim mentality at all.
My concern is all about people running the 'we don't need anymore poker machines in our suburb' argument when infact it's a reloaction of existing poker machines a few kilometres up the road.
How is that stereotypical victim mentality?
I got fed up with the juvenile name-caleing eg"Mayor" insults by several people here, none of which actually acknowledged the points I was making.
What most have ignored are these facts:
1. That the proposal is MORE than just a relocation of existing pokies, the Club wants to sell liquor 20 out of 24 hours per day. Would you want a gambling drunk/gang of drunks pissed off at his/their losses walking past your house throwing a bottle into your car's windscreen/walking past your house at 3 am in the morning?
2. That under our by-laws, EVERYONE has a right to object to ANY development (Bulldogs or not) about what gets built in THEIR neighbourhood. One factor is " Does it fit with the character of the area?". I believe in the rights of the locals to argue what that might mean for them. No-one living in Footscray or Maribrynong or Sunshine or Deer Park has any right to cry sour grapes that just because pokies got put in their neighbourhood then they should go into Edgewater as well. They all had an opportunity to object and argue their case, but they probably didn't, so whose fault is it? Thats the victim mentality that I'm talking about.
3. Everyone is clouding the issue because its their footy club thats bank-rolling it. Would they honestly feel so passionate about it if it was just some faceless corporation? Right lets deny the rights of the locals so that our club can earn more money off gambling and selling alcohol.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ledge
Councillors are wannabe politicians and learn spin doctoring as a councillor, what TCD pointed out is just that.
As regards to local planning, a Councillor- especially a Ward Councillor's- duty is to protect the interests of the locals they represent, not the business interests of corporations or even (blasphemy, dare I say it)............ a football club. How exactly does the Councillor "win" by denying the bulldogs what they want? OH I get it: he represents the interests of his constituents, which means he may get their Council votes again (or maybe if he/she later runs for State or Federal seat). In other words the Councillor gets rewarded because -wait for it- HE DOES HIS JOB.
Unless you've fought a developer who wants to put something up that will make a heap of money for him AT THE EXPENSE OF YOUR LIVING QUALITY you don't know just how important the local planning laws and Council is. This is no different.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
Than you for your opinion Mr Marx.
Elitist? Your post smacks of the victim-mentality if some of those who find themselves at the lower end of the soci-economic ladder: Lets blame the better-offs who were all born with a silver spoon in their mouths for all of our failures, lets stick these pokies in to get their money so that we can drag them down to our level and make them pay. I grew up in Yarraville (Severn St), my old man worked for 12 hours a week for 25 years in Borthwicks, Smorgans meats, and later Arnott's biscuits driving a forklift, my old lady was a cleaner, we never had a phone or a car until I was 14, or a color tv. But i took a job at the Coles in Footscray when i was 16, studied hard-and worked- during my time at Uni, and yeah i've got a good job now but I've paid $350,000 in income tax in 16 working years (which has found its way to the unemployed, the single mums, the disabled, the less well to do) and I STILL have a $200,000 mortgage and I now work 50 hours per week raising a family. I don't live in Edgewater, but I thought about doing it, and most of the people there aren't ex-Toorak Toffs, they are people like myself who thought they would buy into an inner-city locality with good facilities, a good environment to raise a family, even if it cost more.
You seem to have such a chip on your shoulder that it makes Tom Williams look fit and ready to play this weekend.
I can't comment on the rest of your post, partly because I have no knowledge of Melbourne geography and demographics and partly because I'm grimly amused (as a Sydney resident) at outrage over a few pokie machines.
We're very familiar with NIMBYs up here.
Having said all that, I'm dead against pokies in general and any small victory against them, anywhere, is welcome.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sockeye Salmon
Adam Smith was cool.
As a single guy, the invisible hand comes in useful sometimes.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
More news on the subject...
Battle lines drawn
Star News Group
29th July 2008
MARIBYRNONG’S Edgewater residents are gearing up for a long battle after a controversial $23 million development has been taken to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).
Prizac Development and George Adams – the respective landowner and developer of 31 Edgewater Boulevard – last week lodged an appeal against Maribyrnong City Council’s decision to refuse a planning permit in May.
The original application included a four-storey hotel, bistro, café, and a pokies venue with 65 machines – which has now been increased to 70.
A liquor licence that ran from 7am to 3am was also on the cards. The appeal is based on seven grounds.
The council refused to grant a permit in May and said it was an inappropriate development for the area.
The decision was met with applause from more than 100 residents.
Enzo De Fazio, spokesperson for the Edgewater Community Association (ECA) subcommittee Residents Against Inappropriate Development in Maribyrnong (RAIDM), said the appeal was not unexpected.
He said the group was concerned by VCAT’s growing reputation for approving applications that councils opposed – but vowed the residents would give it their all.
“Of course it worries us, and that’s why we’re continuing to work hard and throw everything at it,” he said.
“(We’re) not resting on our laurels. From our point of view, its just all systems go.
“The momentum’s still there, and the fight is still on.”
Mr De Fazio said the residents did not want situations like the recent assault outside Angler’s Tavern happening on their doorsteps.
The City of Maribyrnong had the second-highest poker machine expenditure for the 2006-07 financial year, with $1148 per adult.
The Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation has yet to grant a permit for the poker machines. A hearing date has not been set.
Fellow resident and president of the ECA Ian Tippet said the residents had not ruled out taking class action against Delfin Lend Lease, which sold the site to Mr Adams.
“Delfin never ever made anybody aware that this type of development would be in our midst, and there’s a lot of anger from practically all of the residents,” he said.
Meanwhile, the Western Bulldogs have wiped their hands of the ruckus.
A spokesperson said the Bulldogs would only be interested in taking up a lease on the development if the VCAT application was successful.
Maribyrnong City Council declined to comment, saying it did not want to jeopardise the outcome of the appeal.
A date for the appeal has not been set.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Just saw this later post
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
I got fed up with the juvenile name-caleing eg"Mayor" insults by several people here, none of which actually acknowledged the points I was making.
What most have ignored are these facts:
1. That the proposal is MORE than just a relocation of existing pokies, the Club wants to sell liquor 20 out of 24 hours per day. Would you want a gambling drunk/gang of drunks pissed off at his/their losses walking past your house throwing a bottle into your car's windscreen/walking past your house at 3 am in the morning?
Is the proposed development in a commercial or residential area?
If the latter and I lived there, then I'd oppose it too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
2. That under our by-laws, EVERYONE has a right to object to ANY development (Bulldogs or not) about what gets built in THEIR neighbourhood. One factor is " Does it fit with the character of the area?". I believe in the rights of the locals to argue what that might mean for them. No-one living in Footscray or Maribrynong or Sunshine or Deer Park has any right to cry sour grapes that just because pokies got put in their neighbourhood then they should go into Edgewater as well. They all had an opportunity to object and argue their case, but they probably didn't, so whose fault is it? Thats the victim mentality that I'm talking about.
There are NIMBY limits to this. Where do we draw a reasonable line?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
3. Everyone is clouding the issue because its their footy club thats bank-rolling it. Would they honestly feel so passionate about it if it was just some faceless corporation? Right lets deny the rights of the locals so that our club can earn more money off gambling and selling alcohol.
I'm not - I have a very, very dim view of our club as an organisation.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dry Rot
You seem to have such a chip on your shoulder that it makes Tom Williams look fit and ready to play this weekend.
I can't comment on the rest of your post, partly because I have no knowledge of Melbourne geography and demographics and partly because I'm grimly amused (as a Sydney resident) at outrage over a few pokie machines.
We're very familiar with NIMBYs up here.
Having said all that, I'm dead against pokies in general and any small victory against them, anywhere, is welcome.
No chip, just trying to make a point about the attitude of some here towards the Edgewater residents ie that they didn't earn it, that they exploit the less well off and must be chopped down.
NIMBY"S= Nimban=hippies? right?
If supporting the rights of the locals to have a say about what gets built in their neighbourhoods that they've paid a shitload of money for makes me a Nimby then I guess i am.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
No chip, just trying to make a point about the attitude of some here towards the Edgewater residents ie that they didn't earn it, that they exploit the less well off and must be chopped down.
Fair enough and it's not my attitude.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
NIMBY"S= Nimban=hippies? right?
No, but I don't hold it against you living well away from Australia's true capital = Sydney.
NIMBY = Not In My Backyard, happens all the time up here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
If supporting the rights of the locals to have a say about what gets built in their neighbourhoods that they've paid a shitload of money for makes me a Nimby then I guess i am.
Kind of, but depends upon the circumstances.
You reckon you have problems? Hell, someone up here paid several million for a Hunters Hill mansion built on a poisonous cancerous 1916 uranium dump.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dry Rot
Just saw this later post
Is the proposed development in a commercial or residential area?
If the latter and I lived there, then I'd oppose it too.
There are NIMBY limits to this. Where do we draw a reasonable line?
I'm not - I have a very, very dim view of our club as an organisation.
I enquired about Edgewater at stage 1. It was promoted as a new inner city community with strict restrictions on design and even builder choice, promoting a family focused environment with restaurants, boutique shops, parks, kids playgrounds within walking distance of most homes. There is no way they would've openly promoted a pokies venue/ 20 hour per day alcohol joint because it would have been at odds with what they were trying to achieve and would have affected sales of those properties closest to that venue.
Reasonable line: you ask the questions:
1. what's the likely impact on the locals if the venue is built? Were the locals misled by the developer to the point that it affected their decision to purchase?
2. whats the likely impact on the surounding area if the venue is not built.
3. what alternative locations are there for the developer?
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
The only point im making is that the councillor said that they didnt want anymore pokies in the area, the fact is there wont be any MORE pokies in the area, they already exist.
The councillor saying we dont want anymore is insinuating more poker machines are coming, that is not true but will fool some people into thinking more pokies are being added.
Thus getting peoples backs up in support of something that just is not true.
That is spin doctoring.
Why cant the councillor just say we dont want the pokies to be moved to Edgewater?
On a personal note I dont have an opinion on it as i dont live in Edgewater.
Whether the pokies are there or not is not what I or TCD are alluding to, its the statement made that is wrong.
Of course residents should decide on things like this but its the councillors job to tell the truth also, not mislead.
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dry Rot
Fair enough and it's not my attitude.
No, but I don't hold it against you living well away from Australia's true capital = Sydney.
NIMBY = Not In My Backyard, happens all the time up here.
Kind of, but depends upon the circumstances.
You reckon you have problems? Hell, someone up here paid several million for a Hunters Hill mansion built on a poisonous cancerous 1916 uranium dump.
Interesting. i opted not to go into edgewater because its built on landfill because the original site was the Australian Defense Industries site: where they made explosives using toxic chemicals that had leached into the soil..most people living there now don't know this either..
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ledge
The only point im making is that the councillor said that they didnt want anymore pokies in the area, the fact is there wont be any MORE pokies in the area, they already exist.
The councillor saying we dont want anymore is insinuating more poker machines are coming, that is not true but will fool some people into thinking more pokies are being added.
Thus getting peoples backs up in support of something that just is not true.
That is spin doctoring.
Why cant the councillor just say we dont want the pokies to be moved to Edgewater?
On a personal note I dont have an opinion on it as i dont live in Edgewater.
Whether the pokies are there or not is not what I or TCD are alluding to, its the statement made that is wrong.
Of course residents should decide on things like this but its the councillors job to tell the truth also, not mislead.
Fair enough, they're not telling it 100% straight then. There's still the lengthy alcohol trading hours though. Agreed the Councillor SHOULD say that the residents at edgewater don't want this, its THEIR neighbourhood, we agree with them that its not what they bargained for when they bought there, and the Council has a duty to uphold their democratic rights on their merits, just like evreyone else. What's gonna happen to the current venue?
Re: Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stefcep
Interesting. i opted not to go into edgewater because its built on landfill because the original site was the Australian Defense Industries site: where they made explosives using toxic chemicals that had leached into the soil..most people living there now don't know this either..
And who has hid the fact of it being a toxic dump
Why wasnt the council out protesting about it if they care about peoples health and other problems?
Wouldnt be because of the almighty dollar would it?
So council cares about 40 poker machines but doesnt care if they all get cancer?
Not having a go at you stefcep just asking the question.
Wouldnt that have been a more important issue?
