RE the Victoria Quay Development: Are we really proposing to erect warehouse-like structures on the harbour without real consultation of the residents and the general public who love our port.
What about considering that dreadful eyesore, the South Fremantle Power House, as a film industry headquarters?
It would keep a number of our many unemployed in the restoration process and certainly has surrounding space that is not available in the harbour area.
The Ed says: It is disgraceful that the McGowan government is ploughing ahead with this process without a single state politician or bureaucrat asking the residents of Fremantle if they really want 30-metre sheds surrounded by ringlock fences blighting their historic quay. The Herald now hears the number of interested film parties has grown to eight – the lure of those millions, eh? But beware the empty power station; Broken Hill council dropped millions in its dream of a film studio in its old one, while disproving the old “build it and they will come” balderdash.
It’s gone to the dogs
IT would have been nice if your front-page article on dogs on the beach was less one-sided and was fact checked.
These beaches in question have historically been no dogs whatsoever as this is a conservation area.
In Dec 2016 the council decided to allow doga on a leash with little or no notice or consultation.
There has been constant abuse of this concession and on a daily basis dogs are running free, defecating, jumping up and annoying beachgoers, chasing seabirds and tearing in and out of the dunes.
There have been untold complaints of unruly and aggressive dogs.
There has been a two-year public consultation with numerous public meetings and discussions with the final outcome reported by council to be overwhelmingly and strongly against continuing to allow dogs on these beaches.
It is also possible that the council acted against federal law in the first place to allow dogs on these beaches.
After the changes on October 21, 40 per cent of Cockburn’s beaches will remain accessible to dogs, these are lovely clean beaches – not as described in your article.
Keep footy pumping
KEEP it down, folks. Aaron is here.
In last weekend’s Thinking Allowed (“WAFL or plain AwFL,” Herald, October 17, 2020) the Herald’s new footy writer complained that going to Optus Stadium was “close to unbearable”.
There should be no flickering lights to celebrate goals, no loud speakers and no video screens, according to Senzio.
I’m surprised he didn’t complain about the crowd noise.
Aaron needs to check his privilege and be thankful that he can actually afford to go to a footy game at Optus Stadium – and not complain about it.
It costs almost $70 for one adult to go to an Eagles game. Something most can’t afford.
On the rare occasion that I go to a game, I want all the entertainment I can get and I congratulate the AFL for attempting to provide a little more bang for your buck.
Perhaps Aaron should find his nearest RSL Hall to watch games next season. I’m sure he would find a much more accommodating atmosphere there.
AS a Fremantle ratepayer I am disappointed at the latest act of irresponsibility by the mayor and councillors of the City of Fremantle.
After sending Fremantle deeply into debt building a new Taj Mahal for our governing body, we now find that their profligate behaviour has reached new heights.
Due to insufficient, if any, forward planning, and facing a huge empty space, the city has now offered the jewel in the crown, an 828sqm entertainment venue in the new civic precinct, to a new tenant with 10 years – yes 10 years – FREE rent, plus the city are paying for the fit out, as you would.
Contrary to earlier promises to inject new life into Fremantle by excluding current Fremantle business interests, the city has found a business operating 500 metres away to take up the new space.
With apologies to Mr Orwell, it’s all a bit “2 legs good, 4 legs better”.
After selling off all the good income-producing properties in Fremantle, the city are now giving them away; I cannot believe it.
The Ed says: As we reported last week, the 10-year rent free period was something sought by the proposed operator which the council is hoping to negotiate back to something more in its favour. The proponent is also offering to pay all costs of the fit out.
It’s our park
WHAT do Gerard Butler, Gideon, and Bert Jeffrey Park have in common? A small but vocal 300-strong army.
Yet despite multiple petitions spanning this number of signatures over four long years, the City of Melville continues to disregard residents and ratepayers in its handling of the cricket at Bert Jeffrey.
Its plans for a whopping $400,000 amenities building have ignored reasonable objections by residents over decreased flora, graffiti, child safety, litter, and drug use.
The City’s latest ploy? Backtracking on the boundary.
Despite claiming since 2017 that the Applecross Cricket Club required a 68-metre boundary, the city recently (and remarkably) revised its estimates to only 60m.
This came after a GIS consultant drawing presented at the August 4 agenda briefing forum showed the existing boundary could not safely accommodate the children’s playground and users – including children, dog walkers, runners, and amateur sporting players.
However, even the drawing of the 60m boundary with the 20m minimum safety buffer required shows that both the amenities building and playground cannot be fitted outside the safety buffer zone at the BJP.
If the ACC requires merely a 60m playing field, the city should investigate other venues.
Why not Shirley Strickland Reserve, where ACC has its clubrooms? Or Tompkins Park, where the ACC was to be accommodated originally?
This is in addition to club’s already privileged access to Winthrop Park, Troy Park and Shirley Strickland Reserve.
Please hear out the true underdogs, and save Bert Jeffrey as a green space for community use.
Sport is important, and so are we – the rest of the community.
Let sleeping dogs lie
IN response to the article in last weeks paper regarding “Amno Whammo”.
Being a dog owner myself, I am sure the dog owners mentioned may be very responsible with their dogs but I would like to point out, not everyone is.
It is my experience on my regular visits to the very same beach (minus my dog), dogs can often be seen running freely without any restraint despite signage saying the contrary.
Families on an innocent day out at the beach do not want to be approached or threatened by numerous dogs off lead, nor witness dog fights, nor do they want to stand in their excrement.
Let sleeping dogs lie or go to the designated dog beaches.
Howick Ct, Coogee