A Call to action - Rozelle Village

[Muffstar]

Rushed the development through???

What a joke. This proposal has existed in on form or another for years and has been shot down by the same narrow minded, self absorbed fools regardless of how sizeable or moderate the proposed development has been.

Rozelle immediatley west of Victoria Road is of zero architectural significance, is an utter eyesore littered with run down or failed businesses that have been left to waste by the community that is held up as a vision by this projects detractors. This is the same community that saw a slew of letters complaining about the traffic and noise eminating from what was the Mobil service station just down the road from the Rozelle club site. A community that in fact only has any semblance of community when even the slightest change or development is put forward.

For me this argument is less about the club, which by the way was the one major community asset west of Victoria Road that was ignored by the so called community of Rozelle, and more about town planning and moving forward as a modern city and surrounds and doing what is right for a population that continues to grow at a rate higher than even Sydneys vast urban sprawl can accomodate.

The largest amount of community activity I have seen in the area west of Victoria Road in recent times was two guys urinating on the wall of an empty shop last Wednesday evening

Great post Smeg - totally agree the place is an absolute eyesore. If the development actually goes ahead, it will generate more interest in the area and also may help some of the other businesses in the area with more people moving into the new development as well. Surely it is a win win for Rozelle ?

 

[dermo]

The irony (if I can slightly misuse that word) is that the Balmain/Rozelle of today is nothing like it was 30 or 40 years ago. The yuppie influx changed the area considerably - long established businesses closed and new trendier ones popped up. And now they are complaining that the character of the area will change when they changed it in the first place?!

x 10 trillion

 

[magpiecol]

I said months ago that the Greens will never pass this development. I guess that Barry O'Farrell will have to tell them where to get off and the State Government pass it themselves.

 

[Balmain_Supporter]

There will be a very big number number of apartments being built on the Anka site off Wellington Street. There doesn't seem to be controversy here. Also a revamped proposal for the old Nutremetics site will go ahead. I don't see Rozelle being unfavorable, just wanting a development thats in scale. Anka+Rozelle Village together, the taffic down Wellington Street wont be fair on anyone. Look at the points people are asking and objecting about. Thats why they are objecting. Most people like and support the Tigers as a team and as a club. If it wasn't Ian Wright and Rozelle Village it would be someone else. Both points of view need to be listened to and some sort of solution found. One thing I noticed last night at the meeting is that all council people voted against Rozelle Village. Labor,Liberal,Green and Independent. Not a great outcome when many of the people in the room including some council people are Tigers members.

 

[davedave]

To me, the Anka site is a respectful development, which has taken the recommendations of the council and area on board. Maximum height of 6 storeys, street front buildings at 3 storeys, car park entrance away from existing residents and a 1.5:1 FSR.
The Rozelle Village proposal, at more than 4 times that (6.7:1) and 32 storeys, is ludicrous.

 

[Yossarian]

Welcome to the reality living in the inner suburbs of a modern global city… 32 stories is the reality unless you want suburbs full of 3-4 story blocks. I'd be inclined to accept development on main roads at a level that will ease pressure on the neighbouring suburbs that are full of terraces.

 

[cktiger]

You can't put progress off forever.
Sydney needs hi rise living close to the city sooner rather than later.
Developers can (and should) do all required of them - but in the end it's up to government to provide the infrastructure that will be required long term.

 

[Kul]

exactly

meanwhile from another forum i frequent, I found this little gem: (my points in red)

How low can you go???? Another embarrassment last night at the council extra ordinary meeting, a handful stragglers and of the course the diehard NIMBY`s were in attendance to see the council roll out a few amateurs to take pot shots at the development and the development consultants. Council appointed economic impact consultant started his piece with “I've been paid to be a professional skeptic” …..Oh dear poor guy. Interestingly he went on to state that “this area is under serviced by retail” (exactly right! That stretch of Darling St is horrid) …hello….we have been saying this for years. The architectural commentator resorted to a form of stand-up comedy with references to Godzilla coming to Rozelle; this was a clever diversion from his obvious lack of understanding of design and architectural principles….. Oh and by the way ESD doesn’t stand for the eastern suburbs distributor it stands for ECOLOGICALLY SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. He even went on to criticise the Peer Review Panel appointed by the project which included the assistant government architect and 3 Gold Medal award winning architects……..sorry what was this guy’s name again?? Arup their traffic consultant had difficulty convincing the doomsdayers of his traffic modelling…good luck with that one Arup best leave it to the experts…oh and the guy in the 3rd row.
>
Then came question time…..deary me, the usual suspects approached the microphone for their 3 minutes of relevance, strangely the mayor seems to know all these people by their first names……obvious mutual love between the RRAG and council with RRAG giving them a big rap and <big>**thanking them for the financial support…….yes that’s right FINANCIAL SUPPORT and they even asked for more money last night…..oops….not sure if they were supposed to let that one out of the bag.**</big>
>
Out of left field Councillor Darcy Byrne anointed himself the spokesperson for the Tigers, see pic below…..probably not the most flattering photo, his right side is his best.
>
There was talk of a motion being passed late in the night, well they are full of it….. no doubt something along the lines of “we are the best council in the land” all those in favour say aye……..

oh dear

 

[Jackie_Chiles]

Yossarian you are reading it wrong. Look at the 'Total Comprehensive Loss'. That is what the business has lost in that year. If they made a profit, a line would be through that section. You are very wrong in what you are saying.

 

[Yossarian]

Yossarian you are reading it wrong. Look at the 'Total Comprehensive Loss'. That is what the business has lost in that year. If they made a profit, a line would be through that section. You are very wrong in what you are saying.

No, you once again have it wrong. Total Comprehensive loss includes the grants and non-operating losses champ. As you know we were talking OPERATING LOSS, that is the actual profitability of the league's club itself. Nobody is saying they made a profit, nobody is saying they made a profit when other non-club expenses are factored in. The discussion was whether the league's club could be profitable.

Now let's go through the figures one more time.

Operating loss = $34,271
Significant Expenses = $5,477,982 (the grant + Community expenditure + Loss on property etc held for sale)
Tax Expenses = $9895

The total of those three items is the total comprehensive loss, comprehensive meaning encompassing everything…

 

[galahs]

I guess the big question is, how much money does the Leagues club owe to banks / financiers?

 

[Jackie_Chiles]

And Galahs the next question is, how will they pay for the multi million dollar fit out of the club and how much rent per month will they be paying? How long will the lease be for ??

 

[magpiecol]

Sounds like another "Shire" has been created.

 

[Balmain_Supporter]

Regarding the meeting on Tuesday. Everyone should know fully, it was Rozelle Village Managing Director Ian Wright who took the photo of Darcy Bryne. Is that him, on your other blog site?

In our household, we are Liberal but if Ian Wright wants to take Darcy's picture, thats fine by us.

It's good to see Tiger members speaking out. Rozelle Village might have the time and money $$$ but it's our poor club which is missing out. The sooner Ian starts to negotiate with the various parties, the better it will be for the club. Also, what is the actual club leadership doing on behalf of the members to get us out of this?

 

[Muffstar]

And Galahs the next question is, how will they pay for the multi million dollar fit out of the club and how much rent per month will they be paying? How long will the lease be for ??

And really why do you care to be honest ? Are you worried they (Balmain) may ask you for a donation at the next Tigers game ? You have an agenda of some type, not sure what it is.

 

[dermo]

And Galahs the next question is, how will they pay for the multi million dollar fit out of the club and how much rent per month will they be paying? How long will the lease be for ??

And really why do you care to be honest ? Are you worried they (Balmain) may ask you for a donation at the next Tigers game ? You have an agenda of some type, not sure what it is.

I think Jackie is trying to argue there is no point putting so much money into such a major development for a club that wasn't even turning a profit (weather that is right or wrong)

 

[system]

The development is about much more than the club though, yes the Balmain leagues Club has alot to gain by the project going ahead but it is about so much more now.

 

[davedave]

This development is less bulky (which was one of the concerns of the last proposal), has made adjustments for traffic by acquiring more properties and with a larger size makes available more space for community use.

It is to be assessed as stage significant, hence why it does not comply with LEP or LMC commecial requirements, and it, as a development of its size or any reasonable one in the god-forsaken Greens local govt in Leichhardt, should be. It is simply offensive of the local member and council members to say they support a development at the site and the return of the leagues club after the way they have treated them. The club and developer has attempted to work with both for the whole process, has done everything that has been asked of them by the local member and council, only to be stabbed in the back at each turn. Finally, for the sake of the local and wider community, it has been taken out of their hands and into those who will make a decision for people other than those living in the streets surrounding it (a group of which I am actually a member).

This development is not less bulky, unless viewed from the slender side. Viewed from the oblique side, it's still of considerable bulk.
The traffic adjustments that were made still do not address the issue. In the rejection of the last proposal, it was stipulated that the developer use a council approved traffic consultant. This was also not done.
It's only being state assessed because of dodgy Tony "ICAC" Kelly. And the developer has not tried to work with anyone on this development, other than to refine the loopholes they exploit.
You say they have done everything that is asked of them, but as shown in [LMC's draft submission](http://www.leichhardt.nsw.gov.au/IgnitionSuite/uploads/docs/Item%201%20-%20Balmain%20Leagues%20Club%20Site.pdf) (particularly around page 35), these are a joke.

Also, here's a [good little article](http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/developers-show-their-stripes-all-over-town-20120606-1zwpu.html) in todays paper on it.

Smeghead: this development was never about the Leagues Club, other than to ride their supporters. You have your own opinion on whether the area needs this development, but let's not confuse the two issues of getting the Leagues Club back and the development it "may" reside in.

 

[sunshine_coast_tiger]

To me, the Anka site is a respectful development, which has taken the recommendations of the council and area on board. Maximum height of 6 storeys, street front buildings at 3 storeys, car park entrance away from existing residents and a 1.5:1 FSR.
The Rozelle Village proposal, at more than 4 times that (6.7:1) and 32 storeys, is ludicrous.

As I have stated before I work in a property releated field ( I am not a real estate sales person) and Leichhardt Council is the worst council in Sydney to deal with. They also have a very poor record at the Land and Environment Court.

My understanding is that a Development Control Plan was put in place for Balmain Leagues Club site by Leichhardt Council in 2008 that allowed for a FSR of 4.4:1 on the site. Council now of course want to drastically reduce this with the new LEP to come in. They should have approved the past application and there constant wasting of time has lead the developers to go above them to the NSW State Government.

I have said before I am very glad that Leichhardt Council will have no say in the planning process apart from being able to make a costly submission.

Trust me, the current NSW State Government will not lose any sleep over pi**ing off Leichhardt Council. The development will go ahead in my opinion on a slightly reduced scale but still much larger than Leichhardt Council would want and much bigger than the projcet they rejected, serves them right.

The development will be good for this part of Rozelle and the nearby shops in Darling street are an eyesore but will be revamped due to the increased pedesterian activity the development will bring.

The directors of Balmain Leagues want what is best for the area and the club a club that has helped the area for many years, long before the majority of residents moved intro the area.

I urge all Balmain and West Tigers fans to go to the below site and write a submission in support of the development, we all know the minority NIMBY would have written thousands of them whilst the majority of residents that support the club sit on their hands. I have never written a submission before hand but as a person who was brought up in Balmain, I wrote one supporting a good development and the return of my local club:

http://majorprojects.planning.nsw.gov.au/index.pl?action=view_job&job_id=4499

 

[sunshine_coast_tiger]

By the way as a rate payer who can I complain to about Leichhard Council wasting our money in fighting this development?