Training Ground?

[dpositive 1,646]

1 hour ago, D Rev said:

Not loving the idea of Caulfield, it's a lot better than Casey but hardly as central as it should be.  The plusses include multiple train lines to get there, as well as a major arterial, and even trams for those that don't mind a walk at the end of it.

Also, it's a lot bloody closer than Cranbourne.

I'd certainly accept it as a short-term thing, but wouldn't it suit St Kilda or Hawthorn better (location-wise)?

My ideal would be for us to do some sort of deal with Port Melbourne to take over / share their facility.  Half the players seem to live around there (that's subjective, I know and am willing to be way off), it's bloody easy to get to (by car), central and in a far more vibrant area than the Caulfield Race Course.

Would be awesome if we could set up some sort of flotilla to provide transport for fans to/from Port Melbourne to the MCG.

i think you are right DRev.

i have been promoting the idea of Fishermans Bend Port area for some time.

Would like to get a working group of DLanders with specific project management skill and experience to prepare a proposal for the board. It would include an entartainment, community centre for the potential thousands who are being attracted to the area by the various agencies now set up.

A football centre as major tenant with a boutique stadium for training, administration health etc, where supporters could gather on away games, alternative finals overflow and wathc live stream on screens etc. the options are broad and i think we have on Dlanders who have knowledge of how to set up and maintain some of the specific areas..

An initial investigation shows how there are some large areas owned by a large diversity of owners which might be considered for development. BUt also initial discussion would need to be made with the FB development group.

please contact me if you would consider joining or adding some advice for such a group.

[whatwhat say what 21,866]

curious why you think caulfield is out of the way @D Rev - generally assumed these days that it's very much inner city these days...certainly in comparison with cranbourne

st. kilda it wouldn't suit at all - they're further out in moorabin - while hawks are spending a small fortune (mostly in govt grants) to move to dingley

gimme caulfield over any of those options

 

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,066]

Sheez. It looks like we're back to debating this again now that the Claz & Smithy threads have been taken down. If Caulfield is the preferred option it would be good to include the facilities required to play pre-season AFLM and in season AFLW games here as well as you'd think it would see a sizeable increase in gate figures on the back of it's far superior transport links when compared to Cranbourne. 

[58er 5,841]

1 hour ago, D Rev said:

Not loving the idea of Caulfield, it's a lot better than Casey but hardly as central as it should be.  The plusses include multiple train lines to get there, as well as a major arterial, and even trams for those that don't mind a walk at the end of it.

Also, it's a lot bloody closer than Cranbourne.

I'd certainly accept it as a short-term thing, but wouldn't it suit St Kilda or Hawthorn better (location-wise)?

My ideal would be for us to do some sort of deal with Port Melbourne to take over / share their facility.  Half the players seem to live around there (that's subjective, I know and am willing to be way off), it's bloody easy to get to (by car), central and in a far more vibrant area than the Caulfield Race Course.

Would be awesome if we could set up some sort of flotilla to provide transport for fans to/from Port Melbourne to the MCG.

Well really Rev. Caulfield would be as close as you could get to being “ central” with road rail and tram, where enough land exists. Your choice FBend is let’s face it is transport and other facilities very shy. The fact is you want a MFC to substitute  for the transport. This could easily be fine for Caulfield really is  not necessary. 

Much is needed at FB other than the Port Oval which is very crowded and may not be the size of the G. Infrastructure for FB area would be needed far more as additional facilities such as admin and huge Gym area etc. 

You obviously have not lived in the inner SE but Caulfield is far more vibrant and and alive than Port Melbourne. 

If any one is going to prepare a  proposal who is going to fund this? These documents don’t appear on the backs of oily rags or newspapers.

You would need to consult with the Club to check so that you are not going off half cocked and wasting your time and money reFBend as a location unless you have already done some research. 

I feel that we are getting closer in some respects or even being more positive that some locations could be being counted out as alternatives.

Bentleigh area is supposed to be one if the SE suburbs in the SE of Melb that has a degree of Dees support but would need checking. 

Club hopefully can fill in some gaps for those interested on some fronts.

 

[daisycutter 29,168]

2 minutes ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

Sheez. It looks like we're back to debating this again now that the Claz & Smithy threads have been taken down. If Caulfield is the preferred option it would be good to include the facilities required to play pre-season AFLM and in season AFLW games here as well as you'd think it would see a sizeable increase in gate figures on the back of it's far superior transport links when compared to Cranbourne. 

i can just see you up in the racecourse grandstand watching a game through your binocs, rab 🤣

[poita 3,871]

2 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not if we don’t own the land, that could be absolutely diabolical in years to come….

How many clubs own the land their training facilities are built on? I know St Kilda lease Moorabbin from City of Kingston. 

[samcantstandya 1,029]

37 minutes ago, whatwhat say what said:

curious why you think caulfield is out of the way @D Rev - generally assumed these days that it's very much inner city these days...certainly in comparison with cranbourne

st. kilda it wouldn't suit at all - they're further out in moorabin - while hawks are spending a small fortune (mostly in govt grants) to move to dingley

gimme caulfield over any of those options

 

Caulfield is a brilliant option, you've got the train right there and it's close to restaurants and shops. There are so many students nearby that can adopt us as their team. It's in our heartland. It's better than Dingley etc.....which has no transport and further out etc...

[Rab D Nesbitt 8,066]

There's no reason to think that Fishermen's Bend won't end up as the same soulless, windswept, high-rise concrete wasteland occupied by short term overseas students that have little or no interest in our indigenous game, just like the Docklands precinct currently is. Anyone that doesn't think this is giving too much credit to urban planners,  developers and politicians. 

[Sir Why You Little 36,460]

30 minutes ago, poita said:

How many clubs own the land their training facilities are built on? I know St Kilda lease Moorabbin from City of Kingston. 

Yes. Kingston have f$&@ the Saints over many times, because they own the land. 
I wouldn’t build a Multi $Million Complex on someone else’s land

[No. 31 939]

3 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not if we don’t own the land, that could be absolutely diabolical in years to come….

Well MFC wouldn't be signing a 10 year lease. I would be thinking of something closer to a 99 year lease.

[Sir Why You Little 36,460]

3 minutes ago, No. 31 said:

Well MFC wouldn't be signing a 10 year lease. I would be thinking of something closer to a 99 year lease.

Sure. But a Lease can still be broken, it is a dangerous thing to do

[No. 31 939]

31 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Sure. But a Lease can still be broken, it is a dangerous thing to do

It wouldn't be your typical lease. The land in the centre of the racecourse is Crown Land. For instance, Carlton FC have been leasing Princes Park (Ikon Park) since 1896 and there is an Act of Parliament that also sits behind the lease.

[Demonstone 21,497]

19 minutes ago, Soidee said:

The owner and moderators of this site can run it as they see fit. 

There is no entitlement to "free speech" here or anywhere else.

Start your own site if you have a problem.

Edited October 23, 2023 by george_on_the_outer

[old55 22,625]

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes. Kingston have f$&@ the Saints over many times, because they own the land. 
I wouldn’t build a Multi $Million Complex on someone else’s land

Doesn't seem to worry Collingwood at the Holden Centre - owned by Melbourne and Olympic Parks Trust.

City of Melbourne owns Punt Road and Princes Park.

 

Edited October 23, 2023 by old55

[Stiff Arm 4,419]

8 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Not if we don’t own the land, that could be absolutely diabolical in years to come….

Does Coll own the Olympic ground or the old swimming pool? Richmond? Carlton? North Melb? Saints? Brisbane? No, of course they don't 

A long lease is fine and common practice. 

"Diabolical" is a tad hysteric, even for you, WYL!

Edited October 23, 2023 by Stiff Arm

[Stiff Arm 4,419]

5 hours ago, Sir Why You Little said:

Yes. Kingston have f$&@ the Saints over many times, because they own the land. 
I wouldn’t build a Multi $Million Complex on someone else’s land

The funding would largely come from govt and private contributions. Community inclusion would be necessary. Whatever the Club puts in would be depreciated over time anyway.

Keep doubling down, but you're not gonna win this battle

Edited October 23, 2023 by Stiff Arm

[Diamond_Jim 12,314]

5 hours ago, poita said:

How many clubs own the land their training facilities are built on? I know St Kilda lease Moorabbin from City of Kingston. 

North lease the ground at Arden Street. The problem is if you sink club money into the facilities and more importantly how much. Hard to sell a grandstand on leased land.

The problem of grandstands etc may limit the use of Caulfield as a match day venue for AFLW etc. Assuming the race club wants to protect line of sight views of the back straight for punters.

[Stiff Arm 4,419]

5 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

North lease the ground at Arden Street. The problem is if you sink club money into the facilities and more importantly how much. Hard to sell a grandstand on leased land.

The problem of grandstands etc may limit the use of Caulfield as a match day venue for AFLW etc. Assuming the race club wants to protect line of sight views of the back straight for punters.

Most, if not all, of the money would be public money from govts, so if we were to eventually leave, the facility would have to stay in public ownership

Unless we fund the majority, who are we to claim rights?

Edited October 23, 2023 by Stiff Arm

[Redleg 39,839]

28 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

North lease the ground at Arden Street. The problem is if you sink club money into the facilities and more importantly how much. Hard to sell a grandstand on leased land.

The problem of grandstands etc may limit the use of Caulfield as a match day venue for AFLW etc. Assuming the race club wants to protect line of sight views of the back straight for punters.

A low rise grandstand would be fine for some AFLW games and given the new huge Video screen now at Caulfield, it would hide a small grandstand from view behind it.

[Dee Zephyr 19,124]

With all the [censored] MFC supporters are copping  from other supporters ( yeah… cause their teams are so clean), I suggest the new training ground head to Columbia. They’d welcome us with open arms.

[Deebauched 1,220]

6 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

There's no reason to think that Fishermen's Bend won't end up as the same soulless, windswept, high-rise concrete wasteland occupied by short term overseas students that have little or no interest in our indigenous game, just like the Docklands precinct currently is. Anyone that doesn't think this is giving too much credit to urban planners,  developers and politicians. 

Spot on. Urban planning in Melbourne is tradtionally the sole domain of morons.

Caulfield is the best option due to its proximity to facilities and fan base.

Get it done.

[Demons1858 1,706]

1 hour ago, Dee Zephyr said:

With all the [censored] MFC supporters are copping  from other supporters ( yeah… cause their teams are so clean), I suggest the new training ground head to Columbia. They’d welcome us with open arms.

We will have similar issues in Columbia. I hear locals are quite fond of certain plants over there and don't take to kindly to others cutting them down

[bandicoot 1,395]

12 hours ago, D Rev said:

Not loving the idea of Caulfield, it's a lot better than Casey but hardly as central as it should be.  The plusses include multiple train lines to get there, as well as a major arterial, and even trams for those that don't mind a walk at the end of it.

Also, it's a lot bloody closer than Cranbourne.

I'd certainly accept it as a short-term thing, but wouldn't it suit St Kilda or Hawthorn better (location-wise)?

My ideal would be for us to do some sort of deal with Port Melbourne to take over / share their facility.  Half the players seem to live around there (that's subjective, I know and am willing to be way off), it's bloody easy to get to (by car), central and in a far more vibrant area than the Caulfield Race Course.

Would be awesome if we could set up some sort of flotilla to provide transport for fans to/from Port Melbourne to the MCG.

Caulfield is 8km from the CBD. You aren’t likley to get anything closer. Is Essendon fields or hawthorns dingley vibrant? If Caulfield bid succeeds then it will be a phenomenal outcome 

 

[dpositive 1,646]

11 hours ago, Rab D Nesbitt said:

There's no reason to think that Fishermen's Bend won't end up as the same soulless, windswept, high-rise concrete wasteland occupied by short term overseas students that have little or no interest in our indigenous game, just like the Docklands precinct currently is. Anyone that doesn't think this is giving too much credit to urban planners,  developers and politicians. 

Perhaps so Rab I am dpositive for a reason.

any project requires the passion that a footy club can bring. Perhaps thats an additional feature that Docklands lacks,  an engaged community will also help. 

[dpositive 1,646]

5 hours ago, Deebauched said:

Spot on. Urban planning in Melbourne is tradtionally the sole domain of morons.

Caulfield is the best option due to its proximity to facilities and fan base.

Get it done.

careful. you will probably have to deal with those same planners for any Caulfield project, same govt , same or similar bodies. Good luck with that. 

Its why im calling on Dlanders with knowledge , skills or experience, who can scope FB project.