Public Housing for Whitten Oval

[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!)

[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!)

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.