Demons Grand Plan for Yarra Park Training HQ

[DV8 2,271]

11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Jolimont suits the well-heeled but Toorak, Bentleigh, Elsternwick etc doesn't 

No one has proposed to build a training complex H/Q's at these suburbs Gonzo. You know that, anyway.

We are talking about Gosch's, and Jolimont.  And the need for Taxi trips to Jolimont from the southern suburbs.

11 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Too close to the northern stand swyl, need to get a place SOUTH of the G.

 

And with a social club.

another coward.

[DV8 2,271]

3 hours ago, dpositive said:

Like some of this. Build over the already ugly Swan Street . Open up views over Punt rd and Goshs.

Covered walk way beside rail line to the existing footbridge direct entry to the G . You can even wander through the trees if you wish.

Land and air space in Richmond probably cheaper than East Melb.

Covered walkway over the Richmond Rail lines...  the promenade I believe covers the Rail lines and joins up the the Mcg at around Gate7,,,  walk straight into the ground.

Our Swan street building would join onto the promenade, from OUR 2nd floor.

[Skuit 10,030]

For someone who hasn't lived in Melbourne or spent much time around the MCG/Yarra precinct - what is public access to Punt Road Oval like? Is it completely fenced off? If so, where do kids go to kick a footy between some sticks around that area of the city? Also, can someone explain what four consecutive commas signify in terms of punctuation? It wasn't covered during my writing degree for some reason.

Cheers. 

 

[Cards13 9,117]

2 hours ago, Skuit said:

For someone who hasn't lived in Melbourne or spent much time around the MCG/Yarra precinct - what is public access to Punt Road Oval like? Is it completely fenced off? If so, where do kids go to kick a footy between some sticks around that area of the city? Also, can someone explain what four consecutive commas signify in terms of punctuation? It wasn't covered during my writing degree for some reason.

Cheers. 

 

Punt rd oval is completely fenced off and no access to the public, i don’t recall it ever being accessible. 

They have maybe half th ground as grandstand and the other half as a grass hill with a high fence. 

[CBDees 3,167]

3 hours ago, DV8 said:

No, our H/Q's should be here  >>>  opposite 112 Olympic Blvd, Melbourne, Vic 3004

Across Swan Street from Gosch's Paddock.  To be built backing up against the Richmond Railway Station...  a 4 Story building, with underground & ground level parking...   >>>  we have to build over and across Swan Street, and the Tram Lines, and the footpath on Swan St up to the edge of Gosch's.

Here > https://www.google.com/maps/place/112+Olympic+Blvd,+Melbourne+VIC+3004/@-37.8243568,144.9865561,261m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x63575fd647a0b2f9!2sMelbourne+Cricket+Ground!8m2!3d-37.8199669!4d144.9834493!3m4!1s0x6ad642943affc621:0x23259ce926eaf48e!8m2!3d-37.8245886!4d144.9868238

 

It’s a nice map link but I’m not sure how many times you have been to training?

The MFC trains at the Southern half of Gosch’s Paddock (not abutting Swan Street). There is a series of soccer fields in between which are heavily used and an effective barrier between the AFL oval and any mooted administration/training  HQ mooted over Swan Street. 

Also, make no mistake, the buerocratic and logistic hurdles involved trying to gain approvals and then build over Swan Street and the tram lines vs taking a 99 year lease over rail lines (already sunk within a culvert) makes it a much inferior option.

And for what? With the Yarra Park proposal we have a potential HQ with street frontage, immediately abutting rail and tram, overlooking our training oval and 100 metres from the MCG. In your option, we would have a costly elevated HQ overlooking soccer fields, further from the MCG and essentially equidistant from our current training oval than current facilities are.

[Copuchas 758]

1 hour ago, CBDees said:

It’s a nice map link but I’m not sure how many times you have been to training?

The MFC trains at the Southern half of Gosch’s Paddock (not abutting Swan Street). There is a series of soccer fields in between which are heavily used and an effective barrier between the AFL oval and any mooted administration/training  HQ mooted over Swan Street. 

Also, make no mistake, the buerocratic and logistic hurdles involved trying to gain approvals and then build over Swan Street and the tram lines vs taking a 99 year lease over rail lines (already sunk within a culvert) makes it a much inferior option.

And for what? With the Yarra Park proposal we have a potential HQ with street frontage, immediately abutting rail and tram, overlooking our training oval and 100 metres from the MCG. In your option, we would have a costly elevated HQ overlooking soccer fields, further from the MCG and essentially equidistant from our current training oval than current facilities are.

Your total bias clearly on display CBDees!!    

- there is precisely one soccer field between the area flagged by DV8 and the AFL oval in Gosch's Paddock that's currently used by the MFC and the distance is all of 120m to the goal square of the AFL oval

- it is not at all heavily used, no more heavily used than the AFL oval, which is barely used

- you continue to rabbit on about building over Swan Street, even though DV8 has explained that his concept is to use the under utilised area in front of the southern entrance of Richmond Station

- you dismiss the very valid point made by DV8 that underground car parking could be incorporated in this site which is not available at the Jolimont site due to the railway "culvert"  - that would be railway cutting but even though you're an architect you clearly have limited engineering knowledge

- there will be bureaucratic (as opposed to buerocratic) issues to deal with for any proposal put forward.  It's called planning law.

[CBDees 3,167]

1 hour ago, Copuchas said:

Your total bias clearly on display CBDees!!    

- there is precisely one soccer field between the area flagged by DV8 and the AFL oval in Gosch's Paddock that's currently used by the MFC and the distance is all of 120m to the goal square of the AFL oval

- it is not at all heavily used, no more heavily used than the AFL oval, which is barely used

- you continue to rabbit on about building over Swan Street, even though DV8 has explained that his concept is to use the under utilised area in front of the southern entrance of Richmond Station

- you dismiss the very valid point made by DV8 that underground car parking could be incorporated in this site which is not available at the Jolimont site due to the railway "culvert"  - that would be railway cutting but even though you're an architect you clearly have limited engineering knowledge

- there will be bureaucratic (as opposed to buerocratic) issues to deal with for any proposal put forward.  It's called planning law.

We are all biased! I admit that. The only valid disadvantage that you raise in my view is the car parking potential on the alternative Swan Street site (for players and administration/support staff)! This could be covered by constructing a car park also over the rail cutting, immediately to the East of the Yarra Park option which the Club is exploring.y

Let’s continue to workshop the options to arrive at the best outcome for the Club, players and members!

p.s. thanks for the spellcheck (I always have trouble with bureaucratic)!

p.s. Although I have limited engineering expertise, l am familiar with planning law as an ex building surveyor /statutory planner and director of a construction company (with a Master of Business in Property)! I am just suggesting that we should not discount any option at this stage and I am sure that the Melbourne board has done their due diligence on all short-listed scenarios.

Edited June 20, 2018 by CBDees

[DeleteUser 638]

6 hours ago, DV8 said:

No one has proposed to build a training complex H/Q's at these suburbs Gonzo. You know that, anyway.

We are talking about Gosch's, and Jolimont.  And the need for Taxi trips to Jolimont from the southern suburbs.

 

No, but you mentioned Bentleigh, Moorabbin, Sandy, Cranbourne etc. Why mention them if you don't think they're options.

So, where do you think it should be built?

[DeleteUser 638]

Can you imagine this thread on the Collingwood boards? I feel the dissection of options - delving into planning, change management, staff accommodation, traffic considerations, marketing, revenue, community value add, community engagement, future planning, etc - it really is a cut above.

Bravo, all.

[hells bells 2,023]

6 hours ago, DV8 said:

Covered walkway over the Richmond Rail lines...  the promenade I believe covers the Rail lines and joins up the the Mcg at around Gate7,,,  walk straight into the ground.

Our Swan street building would join onto the promenade, from OUR 2nd floor.

DV8 have you been involved in the planning/concept of this option?  The details on where different floors would sit in relation to proposed promenades etc leads me to think that you have looked at this option in great depth. 

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,687]

14 hours ago, Rod Grinter Riot Squad said:

 

12 hours ago, Roost It said:

Matthew Guy today said we had more chance of winning a Premiership than getting this project up. His words.

Out of context I don't know what to make of this. Did he mean:

(1) he's in favour of it but because the ALP is scared of the Greens, and the Greens hold the seats where this is to be situated, the Premier won't support the proposal so it won't happen; or

(2) he's against it.

The most likely scenario, though, is that he hasn't made up his mind because he hasn't had a chance to see what the opinion polls tell him.

 

NB: Forget the Rod Grinter Riot Squad reference. I was going to make a comment on his earlier post but have changed my mind but been unable to delete the original reference.

[Copuchas 758]

59 minutes ago, CBDees said:

We are all biased! I admit that. The only valid disadvantage that you raise in my view is the car parking potential on the alternative Swan Street site (for players and administration/support staff)! This could be covered by constructing a car park also over the rail cutting, immediately to the East of the Yarra Park option which the Club is exploring.y

Let’s continue to workshop the options to arrive at the best outcome for the Club, players and members!

p.s. thanks for the spellcheck (I always have trouble with bureaucratic)!

p.s. Although I have limited engineering expertise, l am familiar with planning law as an ex building surveyor /statutory planner and director of a construction company (with a Master of Business in Property)! I am just suggesting that we should not discount any option at this stage and I am sure that the Melbourne board has done their due diligence on all short-listed scenarios.

tkx CBDees.   On a day when news breaks about active planning work to eliminate cars from the CBD / slow them to 30kmh / increase cycle times for pedestrians, I have to express doubt that a multi story car park on the fringe of an inner Melbourne park is going to get up in this day and age.  

And I'm sorry, as passionate as I am about the Dees and cognisant of the need for a true home, an option that is the "best outcome for the Club, players and members" but which doesn't fully consider the wishes of the community and residents is frankly going nowhere.

Collingwood can make the Holden Centre work away from their spiritual home of Vic Park so it's dismissive to say that Gosch's Paddock can't be expanded upon in what already is a clearly designated sporting precinct.

[DeleteUser 638]

21 minutes ago, Copuchas said:

tkx CBDees.   On a day when news breaks about active planning work to eliminate cars from the CBD / slow them to 30kmh / increase cycle times for pedestrians, I have to express doubt that a multi story car park on the fringe of an inner Melbourne park is going to get up in this day and age. 

going to pack this apart - the plan for the CBD is just that, the CBD. The proposed positioning is what, 1.1km from the Spring St Wellington Pde corner. I doubt that the proposed 30km/h pedestrian overlay would extend there, so in reality this could be a very good spot for a car park.

The way Australian society is, and with the delays in/lack of proper public transport, there's still going to be a lot of car traffic looking for parking and driving around especially in that corridor.

 

(your other points about consultation etc are obviously apt)

Edited June 21, 2018 by timbo

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

1 minute ago, timbo said:

going to pack this apart - the plan for the CBD is just that, the CBD. The proposed positioning is what, 1.1km from the Spring St Wellington Pde corner. I doubt that the proposed 30km/h pedestrian overlay would extend there, so in reality this could be a very good spot for a car park.

Correct. The council's imagined paradise of a car-free CBD would involve people parking "near" the city and them tramming it or bussing it or walking. A car park there might seem attractive, in that anything to do with cars can seem in any way attractive to them.

The car-free CBD (which we are told will gain financially from all these pedestrians, but somehow not suffer from lack of vehicles bringing in punters) is all well and good except for the inconvenience of King St being the only north-south artery in cooee. A 30 kph limit would not impact much given that it's rarely possible to do more than that anyway. And car-free completely? Only someone detached from reality could even consider it. King, Exhibition, Lonsdale, LaTrobe, even Flinders are all ways of people getting from A to B who would otherwise have no intention of going in the CBD. (Swanston too once upon a time, until they made a mall out of the wrong street. Elizabeth St is the natural mall and cul de sac, not the windswept wasteland of Swanston.)

[daisycutter 29,600]

whilst parking is obviously part of the mix, i don't think parking should be one of the major factors in determining whether a particular location is acceptable. to me it is just a minor consideration and shouldn't be unduly conflated

[Copuchas 758]

28 minutes ago, timbo said:

going to pack this apart - the plan for the CBD is just that, the CBD. The proposed positioning is what, 1.1km from the Spring St Wellington Pde corner. I doubt that the proposed 30km/h pedestrian overlay would extend there, so in reality this could be a very good spot for a car park.

The way Australian society is, and with the delays in/lack of proper public transport, there's still going to be a lot of car traffic looking for parking and driving around especially in that corridor.

 

(your other points about consultation etc are obviously apt)

Timbo, in addition to living in East Melbourne, I'm also fortunate enough to have a home in W1 in Central London (not the business district).  If you look at what's playing out in London in terms of the congestion charge etc and you look at the growth projections for Melbourne, it's pretty clear where things are headed from a public transport versus car point of view.    You're missing my point on today's news re CBD - it's the same people who are in charge for planning in the area we're talking about ie Melbourne City Council. And don't get me wrong, I'm a mining industry guy, not some inner urban latte sipping socialist greenie!

Edited June 21, 2018 by Copuchas

[DeleteUser 638]

56 minutes ago, Copuchas said:

Timbo, in addition to living in East Melbourne, I'm also fortunate enough to have a home in W1 in Central London (not the business district).  If you look at what's playing out in London in terms of the congestion charge etc and you look at the growth projections for Melbourne, it's pretty clear where things are headed from a public transport versus car point of view.    You're missing my point on today's news re CBD - it's the same people who are in charge for planning in the area we're talking about ie Melbourne City Council. And don't get me wrong, I'm a mining industry guy, not some inner urban latte sipping socialist greenie!

OKie dokes.

The growth issue is something else altogether - appears as though opposition to the population ponzi may be growing but the property/housing ponzi has much power so who knows how that plays out. Also too, most of the growth is West and SE of the city and I'd be interested to understand what proportion of that growth uses the city (as opposed to driving to train stations to commute in).

I take the broader point about PT/cars etc and don't disagree people will still want/need cars.  Be awesome to see some bike parking facilities/showers etc there too maybe (they may be better placed in the city).

Anyway, all very interesting!

Not finding the labels particularly useful FWIW.

 

[david_neitz_is_my_dad 4,083]

8 hours ago, DV8 said:

No, our H/Q's should be here  >>>  opposite 112 Olympic Blvd, Melbourne, Vic 3004

Across Swan Street from Gosch's Paddock.  To be built backing up against the Richmond Railway Station...  a 4 Story building, with underground & ground level parking...   >>>  we have to build over and across Swan Street, and the Tram Lines, and the footpath on Swan St up to the edge of Gosch's.

Here > https://www.google.com/maps/place/112+Olympic+Blvd,+Melbourne+VIC+3004/@-37.8243568,144.9865561,261m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m12!1m6!3m5!1s0x0:0x63575fd647a0b2f9!2sMelbourne+Cricket+Ground!8m2!3d-37.8199669!4d144.9834493!3m4!1s0x6ad642943affc621:0x23259ce926eaf48e!8m2!3d-37.8245886!4d144.9868238

 

What so we can [censored] of Melbourne Storm and Melbourne Victory, not a smart move

[daisycutter 29,600]

i think it clear that the club is looking at a new location that can also include revenue generating assets. with this in mind the yarra park/wellington pde nexus is vastly superior to the more isolated goschs paddock/punt rd nexus from a commercial point of view 

[trout 385]

Lots to like about this plan but still concerns for me. Is this site really big enough for us? The most successful club of the modern era and one of the best run football clubs in Australia are currently developing a 28ha site with an MCG and Etihad sized training grounds on it and they don't currently have an AFLW team. Meanwhile it feels like where trying to shoehorn one oval into a park with little room for growth. Yes the location is great but just hope that if it goes ahead in 10 to 15 years where looking for another location because its not big enough.

[Copuchas 758]

32 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i think it clear that the club is looking at a new location that can also include revenue generating assets. with this in mind the yarra park/wellington pde nexus is vastly superior to the more isolated goschs paddock/punt rd nexus from a commercial point of view 

2 or 3 stories of the Jolimont site would need to be dedicated to car parking (unless a separate car parking building gets up).  A higher building would likely be approved for the Richmond station site given the already elevated railway and the other buildings in the area and parking would be underground.  Way more commercial space, jeez we could even open an alternative scan clinic to compete with the monopoly over at AAMI.   Car Sales.com.au don't seem to go all that badly being run out of the Punt Rd precinct!

Edited June 21, 2018 by Copuchas

[DeleteUser 638]

10 hours ago, DV8 said:

Hi timbo.   Not sure If you understood my post earlier.  Our corridor (Malvern, Moorabbin, Bentleigh, Oakleigh, etc), is/was our strong hold from years gone-by,  Re supporters.

But that's Not my training location, suggestion.

I'm suggesting we stay at Gosch's paddock,,, and build our H/Q (a 4 or 5 story complex),  between Swan St and Richmond Railway Station,,, which should be built over Swan Street, across to the edge of Gosch's.  Overseeing Gosch's and our training ground there.

 

This is a big deal;,,, building over Swan St and the tramlines,,, but not as big a challenge as building over the Jolimont Railway lines.

The thing is, we would be right on the doorstep of the Major Rail lines servicing the East of Melbourne,

the Sth-East of Melbourne, and the South of Melbourne, all the way to Hastings/Finders, the Mornington Peninsular,  and Eastern Victoria.

The building at this locale would open onto the Richmond Station Promenade from the 1st or 2nd floor.  This Promenade would take us along to the Mcg, City end,,, without having to negotiate ramps or steps/stairs.

 

We can do this.

.

Oh, cool. That makes sense. Interesting alternative.

[hells bells 2,023]

42 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

i think it clear that the club is looking at a new location that can also include revenue generating assets. with this in mind the yarra park/wellington pde nexus is vastly superior to the more isolated goschs paddock/punt rd nexus from a commercial point of view 

And residential...

[Roost It 1,434]

2 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Out of context I don't know what to make of this. Did he mean:

(1) he's in favour of it but because the ALP is scared of the Greens, and the Greens hold the seats where this is to be situated, the Premier won't support the proposal so it won't happen; or

(2) he's against it.

The most likely scenario, though, is that he hasn't made up his mind because he hasn't had a chance to see what the opinion polls tell him.

 

NB: Forget the Rod Grinter Riot Squad reference. I was going to make a comment on his earlier post but have changed my mind but been unable to delete the original reference.

Word is the plan is somewhat advanced. However it’s plan A, plan B and C are open for discussion. The idea is to have a stand alone training and admin ground within the decade. Apparently land is available in the dock lands precinct however the club is pushing for something closer to the MCG. The ball is now rolling and the club intends to keep pushing until its satisfied. 

[binman 42,615]

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

i think it clear that the club is looking at a new location that can also include revenue generating assets. with this in mind the yarra park/wellington pde nexus is vastly superior to the more isolated goschs paddock/punt rd nexus from a commercial point of view 

Absolutely. In addition to things such as apartments and gym i think a bar would do super well in that location.

My thinking is less a dees social club, more a commercial bar that we own and operate. There is bugger all in that area, particularly since the pub directly opposite closed. That pub was heaving pre and post games. 

The Hilton/pullman is a woeful place for a drink. Expensive and awful atmosphere.

I went to Nixons (what a shocking name) after the doggies game. It is in a crap location and is a pretty crappy pub but it was packed full of dees fans singing he song and celebrating as i'm sure it is after every game (obviously with other supporters). 

Jolimont would attract even more people and not be a dead area during the week - well not as dead.  A half decent pub/bar with decent food  would make an absolute killing.