Tigers Leagues back on

Kul

Kul

Administrator
Staff member
Forum Leader
Source: The Inner West Courier (13/3/2012)
>
Tigers Leagues Club site back on agenda
Business
>
A CONTROVERSIAL development at the former Tigers Leagues Club site at Rozelle is back on the table as the state planning department considers an environmental assessment.
>
Balmain state Greens MP Jamie Parker said he has called for a departmental briefing to get a sense of any changes to the development application. ``No one has any idea what this proposal will be like.’‘
>
The original plans included two 16-storey towers and 50,000sq m of residential and retail space at a cost of more than $100 million.
>
Rozelle Residents Action Group spokesman David Anderson said residents had deep concerns about height, density and traffic conditions.
>
Mr Anderson said the original proposal was rejected by the Joint Regional Planning Panel for good reasons.
>
A planning department spokesman said the Tigers project was ``a transitional Part 3A proposal’’ and would ultimately be determined by the Planning Assessment Commission.
>
STORY SO FAR
■ Rozelle Village Pty Ltd bought the site from the Balmain Leagues Club in 2009.
■ The original DA for the former Tigers site was rejected in July, 2010.
>
Link: http://inner-west-courier.whereilive…ack-on-agenda/
 
Is this more about redevelopment of the land itself (now being owned by 3rd parties) rather than a new leagues club on the site?

I could be wrong but thats how i am reading it
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
I've seen nothing to indicate that a club won't be part of the redevelopment. The club itself though is a very small (and uncontroversial) part of the overall project.
 
Damn Greenies. Lucky there are people who actually do work in our society.

God help us if they ever become a majority.
 
@hammertime said:
Damn Greenies. Lucky there are people who actually do work in our society.

God help us if they ever become a majority.
Click to expand...

They already are they run the country senate majority Bob says jump Julia and Julia responds how High Bob!
 
Who is going to pay for the Re-furbishment of any proposed club and how much will the rent be ??

Will the owners sign a lease with Balmain DRLFC ?

Will the Banks give Balmain DRLFC a loan ?

Is it not correct that Balmain DRLFC are already $6 million dollars in debt and can not pay that off ??
 
@Snake said:
@hammertime said:
Damn Greenies. Lucky there are people who actually do work in our society.

God help us if they ever become a majority.

They already are they run the country senate majority Bob says jump Julia and Julia responds how High Bob!
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

This is the same Greens Party that are working with the Coalition to stop business tax cuts right?
 
@Bill Tringas said:
Who is going to pay for the Re-furbishment of any proposed club and how much will the rent be ??

Will the owners sign a lease with Balmain DRLFC ?

Will the Banks give Balmain DRLFC a loan ?

Is it not correct that Balmain DRLFC are already $6 million dollars in debt and can not pay that off ??
Click to expand...

I really don't know the facts (especially as it stands now) but my guesses for your questions are:

Yes, BDRLFC will be given a lease or even outright own the part of the development where the club is.

They won't need a loan, the developer will pay to build the project.

If it goes ahead and Balmain Football Club still own the land, $6 million is nothing…
 
@Bill Tringas said:
Who is going to pay for the Re-furbishment of any proposed club and how much will the rent be ??

Will the owners sign a lease with Balmain DRLFC ?

Will the Banks give Balmain DRLFC a loan ?

Is it not correct that Balmain DRLFC are already $6 million dollars in debt and can not pay that off ??
Click to expand...

Like with any proposed development in the Leichhardt LGA, council's draconian NIMBY'ism and BANANA'ism results in any project, big or small, private or public, good or bad, being heaped with pointless costs, red tape and short sightedness, ultimately leading to absolutely everything becoming financial unviable.

This though is the objective of Leichhardt Council
Always has been, always will be, regardless of the benefits

Take the Balmain Junior Soccer and Rugby Union clubs wanting to put $30k into the Balmain Road oval.
Their own cash purely for the benefit of the kids who use that oval each week.
But council objects saying that it's unfair that the oval be limited to two codes
:brick: :brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

meanwhile the oval remains a dilapidated, muddy mess

somebody please knock off Jamie fricken Parker :deadhorse:
 
Something needs to be done to the site - it really is an eye sore, so lets hope it goes ahead sooner than later.
 
@Kul said:
@Bill Tringas said:
Who is going to pay for the Re-furbishment of any proposed club and how much will the rent be ??

Will the owners sign a lease with Balmain DRLFC ?

Will the Banks give Balmain DRLFC a loan ?

Is it not correct that Balmain DRLFC are already $6 million dollars in debt and can not pay that off ??

Like with any proposed development in the Leichhardt LGA, council's draconian NIMBY'ism and BANANA'ism results in any project, big or small, private or public, good or bad, being heaped with pointless costs, red tape and short sightedness, ultimately leading to absolutely everything becoming financial unviable.

This though is the objective of Leichhardt Council
Always has been, always will be, regardless of the benefits

Take the Balmain Junior Soccer and Rugby Union clubs wanting to put $30k into the Balmain Road oval.
Their own cash purely for the benefit of the kids who use that oval each week.
But council objects saying that it's unfair that the oval be limited to two codes
\
\
meanwhile the oval remains a dilapidated, muddy mess

somebody please knock off Jamie fricken Parker
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Jamie Parker is not the Mayor. He is a Member of Parliament. The NSW State Govt are totally in control of the decision to approve the Tigers Club redevelopment - NOT the local council.
This was all set out in last weeks Inner West Courier.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
 
@Montague Street said:
@Kul said:
@Bill Tringas said:
Who is going to pay for the Re-furbishment of any proposed club and how much will the rent be ??

Will the owners sign a lease with Balmain DRLFC ?

Will the Banks give Balmain DRLFC a loan ?

Is it not correct that Balmain DRLFC are already $6 million dollars in debt and can not pay that off ??

Like with any proposed development in the Leichhardt LGA, council's draconian NIMBY'ism and BANANA'ism results in any project, big or small, private or public, good or bad, being heaped with pointless costs, red tape and short sightedness, ultimately leading to absolutely everything becoming financial unviable.

This though is the objective of Leichhardt Council
Always has been, always will be, regardless of the benefits

Take the Balmain Junior Soccer and Rugby Union clubs wanting to put $30k into the Balmain Road oval.
Their own cash purely for the benefit of the kids who use that oval each week.
But council objects saying that it's unfair that the oval be limited to two codes
\
\
meanwhile the oval remains a dilapidated, muddy mess

somebody please knock off Jamie fricken Parker

Jamie Parker is not the Mayor. He is a Member of Parliament. The NSW State Govt are totally in control of the decision to approve the Tigers Club redevelopment - NOT the local council.
This was all set out in last weeks Inner West Courier.
\
\
_Posted using RoarFEED 2012_
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The site will be decided ny the NSW Department of Planning after going through a process. I am sure Leichhardt Council will make a strong anti development submission but as I have stated before the current NSW Government don't care what Leichhardt council thinks.

I believe the developers are going for a larger development that the one that was previously rejected. I think in the end the development will be slightly scaled back but will still be large enough to piss off the greens or other nimby's and be large enough to be economical feasible.
 
Forgot to menition that the owners of the site are still very likely to get a large amount of compensation regarding the bundled Metro. The site was re-zoned just before the election to allow for a much larger development and I am sure the development will be larger than the previous rejected development. Re-zoning was probably done to lessen the amount of compenstaion over the Metro projct. The club shut early beacuse of the metro project and judging from some of the compo paid to companies that were tendering to build the metro I think that the owners of the site will eventually get a nice pay day that the current government can blame the previous government for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 273 (members: 3, guests: 270)
Back
Top