Fight brews over 'Bulldog Hilton'

[ledge]

Well in all of this, do we have an update on what is happening lately?
It is worrying and no matter what we all think, for and againsts, it is turning into a bit of a mess.
We all want it settled and do we have a date when a meeting is happening between who it matters with to fix it?
Or is the Hilton gone completely? Are the Bulldogs fighting it?
If not how will the pokie problem be solved as far as the university are concerned?

[strebla]

One question i want answered can anyone tell me of the 300 objectors how many actually live in edgewater as the few people i have spoken to that objected do NOT live in that estate but within the city limit.
I will also have to say a 3 am bottle shop licence is not on anywhere if you can't your grog by 11 pm stiff shit.

[Stefcep]

Stef.

C'mon. I 'took my bat and ball and went home' because I'm sure it's clear to all and sundry who knows what he's talking about and who doesn't, and I didn't think it was necessary to put you down any further. The only reason I worked on the so-called 'minor points' was because if I took your arguments to pieces it would be humiliating, and I didn't think that was really necessary. Some people know when to stop, but obviously you don't, even though everyone can see that you don't really know what you're talking about, and the more you write, the more your ignorance shines through. You know the saying 'I thought he was stupid, until he opened his mouth and removed all doubt'.

Briefly,

- If my comments were 'one-eyed', it would be silly to expect otherwise. If you want to debate economic theory (which you are ill-equipped to do, believe me), then there are plenty of other places you can do it, and if you wanted a 'balanced approach', you are hardly going to find it on a forum dedicated to the Bulldogs, are you. There are plenty of places you can vent your vendetta, but I don't think this is the right place, do you?

- The heritage listing that my abode now enjoys hadn't always existed. When I first bought the place it was a dump, and it still cost a mint. However, I was involved in its development and subsequent application for a heritage listing, which is what creates true economic advantage -- a creative approach to your surroundings instead of complaining about every old thing. That is what the residents of Edgewater who are protesting clearly lack -- they have a 'victim' mentality that seeks to shut everything out rather than an attitude of being able to use the circumstances to their advantage.. a classic 'new rich' approach to life. Why do you think the Dogs are applying for Edgewater? Because it is not just a pokies venue, is it? It's a high class hotel as well, which should even things out, in your theory, "all things being equal".. If, as you say, you make more money from poor suburbs, why wouldn't the Dogs just move the pokies to another, less affluent suburb, where the residents, in your words, aren't as well organised?

Of course, ideally there wouldn't be pokies (and believe me, I'm as anti-pokies as they come). However, the economic reality is that you have to balance the fact that either: you MOVE EXISTING pokies so that a university can locate its faculty at the Whitten Oval, creating education opportunities that will have a longer-term impact on the economic wellbeing of the Western Suburbs, or block the move for to satisfy the whim of a few homeowners, stopping a development at the Whitten Oval, blocking Victoria University's plans for a sports faculty, and tying up ratepayers money for years and years.

You need to have some humility about the fact that maybe, just maybe, your tiny, narrow, self-centered perspective on the world isn't all there is.

--

Now I really AM taking my bat and ball and going home -- I think we've all wasted enough time on this pointless thread. Oh, don't worry -- you win the debate on a football forum, if that's what's really important to you. Meanwhile, leave the rest of us get some real work done while you rant against the world in your jocks.

Actually there's at least two other people Pembleton and GVGJr, the moderator who like me suspect the Club's management is not blameless. http://www.woof.net.au/forum/showthread.php?t=3140

You rant on for another 3 -4 paragraphs and basically say nothing. If you really believe that having a gambling house that serves alcohol 20 out of every 24 hours next door to your home is good for your quality of life and property values then really you need to go and get another job if that indicates the sort of advice you give to your clients.

The Dogs are applying for Edgewater because its closer to their home base allowing them to maintain a connection to their support base, and also because they wrongly assumed that it would be relatively easy to get the permit given the fact they are not increasing the number of gambling machines in the area. They didn't count on the residence objecting. It highlights how inept they've been that they didn't survey the residence earlier to guage the feeling there.

And regarding your economic analysis: do your sums. The WO development/Pokies development is worth, what $25 million? We have 300 objections, say half of which live in the same property= 150 properties, times $500,000 each (conservative property valuation) equals $75 million (conservatively) worth of properties at risk of devaluation. Its a $75 million "whim" that the residents are fighting to protect. And the economic benefits to the area of having PE students study at the WO are spurious, (but good for the Club because they can rent the space out to the Uni).

[Stefcep]

So your opinion is that political imperitives never impinge on planning decisions? OK we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm not saying that the planning department is out and out corrupt but IMO they do what they can to please their political masters.





Just so we are straight, you do realise that the above relates to the Whitten Oval development and has no impact on The Bulldog Hilton which was what you were objecting to in the first place, wasnt it?




BTW I'm still waiting for an answer to my question about the earlymorningbottleinthewindscrenn. Where does your drunken offender get it from? IIRC A/ Liqour licensing laws prevent the carriage of alcohol from licensed premises and B/ If there's even a bottleshop planned, it'd be closed at 3am or whatever time you were (non hysterically of course) going on about.

I've already acknowledged with the Brimbank Council's example to accept a $1 million "donation" from Bunnings management to rezone parkland along the Keilor-Melton Hwy that Council's sometimes make less-than-honourable decision. i don't believe the Maribyrnong Council did that when it knocked back the Bulldog Hilton.

I'm very straight on it: Just so that YOU are straight:

1. VUT requires NO pokies at WO development, otherwise VUT won't move there NOR contribute funds to the WO development.

2. As a result of 1 (above) the Dogs decide to relocate Pokies to Edgewater. But Planning permit permit for Bulldog Hilton rejected.

3. The VUT rooms at the WO requires space for 150 students and the Dogs knew this 10-12 months ago, but only applied for a permit in April, meaning they had to wait till September for community consultation before THIS permit can be issued. The builders can't wait that long. Rose says Council refused this permit, Council says there is in fact NO decision on the permit because the period for community consultation hasn't elapsed. The Dogs then get the State government to over-rule local by-laws, so that the usual period for community consultation is denied

4. Even if the rooms can now be constructed at WO, the dogs still have to find a place for the pokies to go to or VUT pulls out.

[ledge]

One question i want answered can anyone tell me of the 300 objectors how many actually live in edgewater as the few people i have spoken to that objected do NOT live in that estate but within the city limit.
I will also have to say a 3 am bottle shop licence is not on anywhere if you can't your grog by 11 pm stiff shit.

Here you go Step, I thought you said they checked the addresses of objectors Strebla has just alluded to the fact the ones he knows dont even live in the area!
So to me this seems as i said a councillor, councillors or the council trying to just stop something for there own satisfaction.
All goes back to the million dollars and power.

Question, is it a bottle shop or something like Watergardens Hotel where you cant even buy takeaway beer?
If thats the case there are no bottles to throw at cars etc.

And also as a person who runs a bar and has done bar courses, it is the Hotels responsibilty to make sure people do not get drunk, if they do the Hotel can lose its licence, its that strict nowadays.

Sorry i forgot its the poker machines they are not wanting not the drunks, isnt that why it was rejected?
Poker machines do not cause drunks, its night clubs that do.
Fact remains they are moving pokies not having more as said by the Mayor.

[Stefcep]

One question i want answered can anyone tell me of the 300 objectors how many actually live in edgewater as the few people i have spoken to that objected do NOT live in that estate but within the city limit.
I will also have to say a 3 am bottle shop licence is not on anywhere if you can't your grog by 11 pm stiff shit.

You'd have to look at the addresse of the objectors on the Council records.

Agreed. With all of the recent controversy about serving/selling alcohol late in the CBD you'd think they'd have enough brains to realize that they'd have a hard time getting a permit till 3 am for a hotel in a suburb.

[Stefcep]

Here you go Step, I thought you said they checked the addresses of objectors Strebla has just alluded to the fact the ones he knows dont even live in the area!
So to me this seems as i said a councillor, councillors or the council trying to just stop something for there own satisfaction.
All goes back to the million dollars and power.

There's no contradiction. Yes they DO check addresses, and weigh up what effect the development would have on that that particular objectors property. So if someone lives further away from the site, they can object, but the Council may not attach the same significance to that objection.

And we still have not had anyone say exactly how the Council would achieve satisfaction? What, just to be bloody-minded? Or because someone's bribing them to reject the Dogs application? Or because the Council wants to hold on to the $1 million that its already in the budget publically known. Ok its possible. But isn't maybe-just maybe- more likely:

1. the Dogs didn't put the in the permit for the student rooms soon enough and

2. that the Dogs underestimated the residents opposition at Edgewater?

[Stefcep]

Here you go Step, I thought you said they checked the addresses of objectors Strebla has just alluded to the fact the ones he knows dont even live in the area!
So to me this seems as i said a councillor, councillors or the council trying to just stop something for there own satisfaction.
All goes back to the million dollars and power.

Question, is it a bottle shop or something like Watergardens Hotel where you cant even buy takeaway beer?
If thats the case there are no bottles to throw at cars etc.

And also as a person who runs a bar and has done bar courses, it is the Hotels responsibilty to make sure people do not get drunk, if they do the Hotel can lose its licence, its that strict nowadays.

Sorry i forgot its the poker machines they are not wanting not the drunks, isnt that why it was rejected?
Poker machines do not cause drunks, its night clubs that do.
Fact remains they are moving pokies not having more as said by the Mayor.

i forgot. Getting back to the bottle issue. it doesn't matter where they get. they could pick it up from the street gutter, they don't need a bottle to kick in a car door, they don't need a bottle to rip out your letter box. or set up on innocent kid and kick his skull in. all they need to be is pissed and have a few losses, at 3 am in the morning.

The Council quote BOTH pokies and alcohol trading for 20 out of 24 hours per day.
i know drinking laws are tougher but there's enough evidence out there that pubs still serve drink to people that are drunk. and if the drunk is refused and chooses to "debate" the issue what does the hotel do? throw him out on the street, which pisses him off even more than his gambling losses. and you can guess at what might happen next..

[ledge]

1. Only the Bulldogs and the council know the truth on that one but we have all seen councils put them through when it suits them.
2. Now its coming out some dont even live in Edgewater, just how many "real" residents did reject it?

[Stefcep]

Well in all of this, do we have an update on what is happening lately?
It is worrying and no matter what we all think, for and againsts, it is turning into a bit of a mess.
We all want it settled and do we have a date when a meeting is happening between who it matters with to fix it?
Or is the Hilton gone completely? Are the Bulldogs fighting it?
If not how will the pokie problem be solved as far as the university are concerned?

My understanding is that the Dogs have lodged an appeal with VCAT to overturn the Council rejection of the Hilton application.

Its a gamble: If the Dogs win, problem solved. If they lose...they'll have to find a place for the pokies elsewhere or lose VUT's money.

[hujsh]

What's your agenda Stefcep?

Not a hostile question just curious as to why you're so seemingly passionate about this council. I doubt I'd ever really defend my council. And almost all of your posts in this forum are related to this one topic.

[Stefcep]

1. Only the Bulldogs and the council know the truth on that one but we have all seen councils put them through when it suits them.
2. Now its coming out some dont even live in Edgewater, just how many "real" residents did reject it?

Don't know. But 300 objections is A LOT- even if 35% don't live there thats still over 200 that do. My parents objected and won their dispute against a developer with the support of only two other neighbours at Moonee Valley Council.

[ledge]

Good question Hujsh,
Seeings as your asking Step, I will put in my side, I probably come across anti council, but in fact I have a really good respect for the Melton council, I am only a committeee member of a cricket club but the things they have done over the last 5 years have been absolutely brilliant for the Sydenham Hillside area, they have bent over backwards
.
But go back 10 years and the Melton council was so corrupt, they eventually had the government step in.
Brimbank I believe is heading the same way, I worry Maribyrnong is the same, remember people in council are people off the street, a lot of people are money and power driven, thats why some join councils.

So I am not anti council i just want the truth and am putting up questions i think need to be answered or discussed.
For it to get like this obviously a serious breakdown has happened communication wise and some councillors take things personal.

[Stefcep]

What's your agenda Stefcep?

Not a hostile question just curious as to why you're so seemingly passionate about this council. I doubt I'd ever really defend my council. And almost all of your posts in this forum are related to this one topic.

no agenda. Don't give a fig about Maribyrnong Council in particular. But how they have handled it is right by me.

Its the principle: I believe in upholding the fundemental right of residents to have a say as to what happens in their community. This right protects against developers with with deep pockets steam rolling the interests of the "ordinary" folks.
Except now its our club who is the developer with the big pockets steam rolling the interests of the ordinary folks at Edgewater, getting the State govt to let them get away with it.

If it was anyone else, and we lived in Edgewater we wouldn't stand for it but because its our club, we don't live there, then bugger the principles, this is about money.

Given our club'c history and origins i thought our club was better than that. A community Club. Its deep down why I've supported them. But i feel really let down. And don't think Rose feels deeply about the Club. He's just a business man thats covering his arse at the moment.

The people in Edgewater aren't a bunch of toffs, despite what everyone thinks. They have a right to have their community develop in the way that its suits them, because they live there. I respect that right, and so does the Council. But people don't wanna see it.

I only intended to post once on this but I got dragged into it by some hostile and what I believe were ill informed remarks. I've posted on several other threads though.

[Stefcep]

Good question Hujsh,
Seeings as your asking Step, I will put in my side, I probably come across anti council, but in fact I have a really good respect for the Melton council, I am only a committeee member of a cricket club but the things they have done over the last 5 years have been absolutely brilliant for the Sydenham Hillside area, they have bent over backwards
.
But go back 10 years and the Melton council was so corrupt, they eventually had the government step in.
Brimbank I believe is heading the same way, I worry Maribyrnong is the same, remember people in council are people off the street, a lot of people are money and power driven, thats why some join councils.

So I am not anti council i just want the truth and am putting up questions i think need to be answered or discussed.
For it to get like this obviously a serious breakdown has happened communication wise and some councillors take things personal.

Now you're getting to the crux of it all.
Wouldn't you be able to accuse the Council of being corrupt if they ignored 300 objections against a gambling and 20- hour a day drinking joint in an area full of young families? Wouldn't you do the same if they approved a development without even giving the locals an opportunity to express an objection as happened with the State governments interventions re: the permit for the VUT rooms at WO? No? why? Becxause its our footy club doing it so that makes it ok?