Public Housing for Whitten Oval

[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...

[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...31159/#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-2-3...Initiative.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.