9 hours ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

I think Farmer's point is that the MRC can stir up trouble if they think it is in their interests - see the VCAT comment. The CRRT clearly wanted two gorillas to deal with, rather than one - if the CRRT were ever to get funding to develop the space they are responsible for. The CRRT were never going to get significant funding out of the MRC. The question is whether the two gorillas can live on the same turf, or will the old gorilla fight the new one....?

Your scraping the barrel here Hawk, wasting your time sewing discontent it’s a done deal.

Reality is Hawks have orchestrated 2 home bases in the last 25 years & we have been going around in circles, what is Perts plan B if Caulfield fails??  So possibly another 5 years up in smoke .. sorry based on past history confidence isn’t great! 

28 minutes ago, Demonsone said:

Reality is Hawks have orchestrated 2 home bases in the last 25 years & we have been going around in circles, what is Perts plan B if Caulfield fails??  So possibly another 5 years up in smoke .. sorry based on past history confidence isn’t great! 

So would you like us to be running two plans simultaneously, getting two feasibility studies done, then two business plans done and then we choose the best option once both are approved? Not sure what the alternative is to going through the full process with a site, even if it isn’t guaranteed to go through.

16 hours ago, whatwhat say what said:

one difference btw dingley and caulfield racecourse is that the ground doesn't have to treated for hazardous materials

i seem to recall that that caused some delay there

Looking at some of the names on their list, Horethorn will be dealing with HAZMAT long after they've moved to Ding-a-Ling-ly.

23 hours ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

I agree - but at least there is a plan; we'll be at Casey/Gosch's for the next few years. Good news for Kev! Maybe we will get more clarity when the Strategic Plan is "revealed" to us......?

Yes, I get more time to stroll around the great inner city area, and view the training. I am for the Caulfield home, plenty of suburban homes for the players to lodge in, and space for the entire MFC structure. Close to MCG would have been great, but has too many complications, especially getting enough space for us. Out manoeuvred by Pies. Perhaps, the Tigers will get to use Gosch’s as their second oval, since Pies already have Collingwood. 

Thanks for the call out Harvey.

Edited December 23, 2024Dec 23 by kev martin

From architectureau.com:

'Hawthorn will be the only club in the league to own its own facility and the land on which it is situated.

'The project was allocated $30 million by the Victorian and federal governments, with additional funding received by Hawthorn Football Club, Kingston City Council and the Australian Football League.'

How do they get to own the facility and land with all that 'other people's money'??!!😠

 

1 hour ago, Demonsone said:

Reality is Hawks have orchestrated 2 home bases in the last 25 years & we have been going around in circles, what is Perts plan B if Caulfield fails??  So possibly another 5 years up in smoke .. sorry based on past history confidence isn’t great! 

Always proposed Fishermans Bend Port Melbourne as a plan B at feasibility stage. With two sites you can leverage off competing options at business plan stage.

Pert is locked in and subject to other users, will have to compromise as he had no plan B. Am watching with interest.

1 hour ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

So would you like us to be running two plans simultaneously, getting two feasibility studies done, then two business plans done and then we choose the best option once both are approved? Not sure what the alternative is to going through the full process with a site, even if it isn’t guaranteed to go through.

As before two options provides leverage, CRRT now have that advantage with Mt Scopus and MFC.

3 minutes ago, dpositive said:

As before two options provides leverage, CRRT now have that advantage with Mt Scopus and MFC.

I’m not so sure about that. We are trying to get stakeholders on board, if they feel like we are only half in and could choose not to proceed, they are going to be less inclined to provide support.

27 minutes ago, dpositive said:

As before two options provides leverage, CRRT now have that advantage with Mt Scopus and MFC.

The CRRT have nothing to do with the school project, as that is freehold land that is being purchased.

Can posters please understand that the MRC is and the MFC will be, on Crown Land.

Crown land and Freehold land are two different categories of land ownership.

Edited December 24, 2024Dec 24 by Redleg

I’m wondering whether people are really confused re difference between private property and Crown Land or are just throwing in “Red Herrings” to show their discontent. To my mind Caulfield ticks all our boxes, elite training facilities combined with our Admin HQ on the same site, provides access to the extra two ovals we require to service MFC and the site is well serviced by public transport within easy walking distance to our facilities.😁👍❤️💙

29 minutes ago, DeeZone said:

I’m wondering whether people are really confused re difference between private property and Crown Land or are just throwing in “Red Herrings” to show their discontent. To my mind Caulfield ticks all our boxes, elite training facilities combined with our Admin HQ on the same site, provides access to the extra two ovals we require to service MFC and the site is well serviced by public transport within easy walking distance to our facilities.😁👍❤️💙

We just have to make sure we have clear access from Booran Road, through the Mt. Scopus site, to where our new home will be.

40 minutes ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

We just have to make sure we have clear access from Booran Road, through the Mt. Scopus site, to where our new home will be.

I’m guessing we’ll enter through the existing tunnel under the track

4 minutes ago, Roost it far said:

I’m guessing we’ll enter through the existing tunnel under the track

Only if we get to put up a sign that says "Welcome to Hell" at the entrance ... :-)

Edited December 24, 2024Dec 24 by Red and Bluebeard

1 hour ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

We just have to make sure we have clear access from Booran Road, through the Mt. Scopus site, to where our new home will be.

Nice try but no cigar. If the MFC dont have access through the tunnel, the major vehicle access point to the inside of the course, then neither will the MRC.  Furthermore the Trust leasing out a piece of land that no one can access is an interesting idea.

Whats next?

3 hours ago, Roost it far said:

I’m guessing we’ll enter through the existing tunnel under the track

That tunnel takes you INSIDE the track, potentially to the ovals. The planned building, gym etc.. are on the other side of the track, so you need access from Booran Road.

23 minutes ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

That tunnel takes you INSIDE the track, potentially to the ovals. The planned building, gym etc.. are on the other side of the track, so you need access from Booran Road.

I’m sure the Master Planners know what they are doing, so I’m not really sure why you are worrying about this. I’m more concerned about winning the toss on Boxing Day. Have a merry Christmas Harv.

28 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

I’m sure the Master Planners know what they are doing, so I’m not really sure why you are worrying about this. I’m more concerned about winning the toss on Boxing Day. Have a merry Christmas Harv.

It’s a strange thing to be worried about…‘we’ve got some good news and bad news. Good news is we have a home Base! Bad news is no one can access it.’

4 minutes ago, DistrACTION Jackson said:

It’s a strange thing to be worried about…‘we’ve got some good news and bad news. Good news is we have a home Base! Bad news is no one can access it.’

Are we moving to VFL Park?

Pert is not locked in it's a board decision not his, he was a CEO working on behalf of the board, he would have presented an opportunity or idea to the board and it goes from there, people should blaming him again a board decision pure and simple

2 hours ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

That tunnel takes you INSIDE the track, potentially to the ovals. The planned building, gym etc.. are on the other side of the track, so you need access from Booran Road.

I'm sure it will be fine? 

10 hours ago, Harvey Wallbanger said:

That tunnel takes you INSIDE the track, potentially to the ovals. The planned building, gym etc.. are on the other side of the track, so you need access from Booran Road.

20 hours ago, Redleg said:

The CRRT have nothing to do with the school project, as that is freehold land that is being purchased.

Can posters please understand that the MRC is and the MFC will be, on Crown Land.

Crown land and Freehold land are two different categories of land ownership.

Thanks Rl, but I assume there is still a body, or bodies,  that we are negotiating with and my point still applies.

I also recognise that Pert and the board are an experienced and astute lot and so am positive for a great outcome. 

I have shelved my regrets and support the Caulfield project, I await the progress reports for further information and hope that comes quickly.

31 minutes ago, dpositive said:

Thanks Rl, but I assume there is still a body, or bodies,  that we are negotiating with and my point still applies.

I also recognise that Pert and the board are an experienced and astute lot and so am positive for a great outcome. 

I have shelved my regrets and support the Caulfield project, I await the progress reports for further information and hope that comes quickly.

Dp I agree with you on the hope for info soon and as I have said for about 2 years now, this will happen, barring an unforeseen event, that has the power to stop it.

I am biased living close by, but have no doubts this will be a great project and precinct for the club to be based.

As i said in an earlier post, the inside of the track is a massive area, that is now unused and the CRRT understand that this is a disgrace, in a suburb crying out for green space use by the community.

Even with our ovals, I would estimate 2/3 of the inside track remaining for other uses probably still to be decided. The land is far too valuable to be a weed patch.  

21 hours ago, Fritta and Turner said:

Nice try but no cigar. If the MFC dont have access through the tunnel, the major vehicle access point to the inside of the course, then neither will the MRC.  Furthermore the Trust leasing out a piece of land that no one can access is an interesting idea.

Whats next?

By law we'd have a right of access by easement across others' land... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement