Sign In
or Create a new accountWhich of the broad options do you support and why?
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
Options include:
- Reallocating revenue from other services or lifting ratesExpanding use of existing facilities to be licensed or leased for a profit to additional regular users/licensees. Additional uses could include cultural and community shows, concerts, moonlight cinema, markets, community events (like carols by candlelight or fireworks night) and/or other sport codes (like soccer, lacrosse, frisbee, touch football, rugby union)
- Reclassifying land along Pittwater Road and building a commercial development at the southern end of the Park to be leased for a profit. Uses could include conference or function rooms, restaurant, licenced premises (pub or club), retail shops, offices, medical centre, commercial gym or indoor sports centre, serviced apartments or youth centre
- Building a commercial car park under the Oval integrated with a new ‘park and ride’ bus stop
- Selling the naming rights to the Oval
- Introducing advertising on Pittwater Road
- Pursuing Federal or State government funding
- Pursuing funding from Foxtel
- Increasing charges for using the facilities
- Introducing a small levy on ticket costs for Sea Eagles games
- Selling or developing other Council owned land.
This online discussion forum has concluded. You can still browse the site but the discussion area will no longer accept new comments or votes.
Comment 1 3 Aug 2010, 8:43 PM
1) Pursuing Federal or State government funding
Every other NRL clucb has received massive Federal or State funding to redevelop their grounds. Why shouldn't Warringah receive similar funding to redevelop Brookvale Oval into a modern ground capable of comfortably seating 20000 supporters. The Council needs to lobby Federal or State government for what our fair share.
2) Reclassifying land along Pittwater Road and building a commercial development at the southern end of the Park to be leased for a profit.
This seems like sensible solution to raise extra funding and is not going to disadvantage anyone.
3) Selling the naming rights to the Oval
But this will only work if COuncile works with the Sea Eagles to achieve what both sides want. Naming rights are going to be useless if the Sea Eagles are not playing at Brookvale.
Comment 2 3 Aug 2010, 10:33 PM
Dear Warringah Councilors,
I thought we elected you to make some decisions?
The conjecture about Brookvale Oval has been going on for long enough. Brookie is the home of the Manly Sea Eagles, it has been since 1947 and there should be no question about whether or not it should be in the future.
Would you please get on with it. Either lobby for funding from the Federal and State Governments or rezone it so the available space on the southern end along Pittwater Road can be turned into a revenue generating space.
Thank you.
Comment 3 6 Aug 2010, 3:27 PM
Dear Council
The Council currently has one tenant and I believe a very patient tenant ,given that the ground is by far ,the worst ground in the NRL for both players and spectators.
The responsibility for funding falls on the Council to lobby the State and Federal Governments.The Council need to embarrass the relevant governments into action by pointing out the blatant "pork barrelling" in other areas such as Leichardt, Newcastle and Campbelltown.Did I read just today that in 10 years nearly 1 billion has been spent on ground upgrades and Brookvale Oval has received $1 million?
The Oval needs to be developed more…
Comment 4 6 Aug 2010, 9:11 PM
I support the below;
* Reclassifying land along pittwater rd to be leased for profit on the proviso profit remains in Brookvale Park budget, and not spent elsewhere and the oval is left in current state. Indoor sports centre, conference room, licenced premises, retails shops, offices would be fine.
(Already 2 medical 3 if include DY nearby, 2 nearby gyms, Youth Centre - outdated idea)
- Car Park underneath oval. Pending on cost. I thought oval was built on a rubbish tip>? might not be possible.
- Naming rights to oval yes. Would have to be in conjunction with Sea Eagles or another major more…
Comment 5 9 Aug 2010, 8:47 AM
I support the following:
- Pursuing Federal or state government funding. It is evident the local council cannot afford to upgrade the ground to the level required for the NRL, regardless of efforts to explore other revenue sources from the ground. It needs funding grant(s) from other levels of government.
As stated above, without federal or state funding, attempting to get additional revenue sources from a dilapidated asset appear futile given the upgrade that is required. However if this is a course of action the council wishes to take, then I support the following:
- Increasing charges for use of the facilities
- Introducing a small levy for Sea Eagles games
- Building a commercial car park under the oval (although, how much does this cost????)
I categorically object to the following:
- Reallocating revenue from other services or lifting rates
I cannot believe this has been listed as an option:
- pursue funding from Foxtel.....as if Rupert will give you some money!
Comment 6 23 Aug 2010, 9:17 PM
I support the expansion of uses at the Oval eg have more community events as it is great people venue; I am cautiously supportive of the southern section being reclassified/redeveloped for an indoor sport centre- this would widen the community's use of the site. I support pursuing Federal/ State funding for the upgrade - why does Tony Abbott only promise Federal funds for Brookie just before elections ? - he was in power for 10 years and did nothing.
Comment 7 23 Aug 2010, 10:40 PM
I do not believe developing commercial facilities will be a viable option. Look at the business currently in the area, many are struggling and the shop turnover is high. Moreover, there is no real pedestrian traffic (footfall, as it's called) so no "occasional walk-in" business, which effectively rules out convenience retailing. This leaves "destination facilities" such as a medical centre or childcare centre, all of which is plenty provided for in the area and thus would add competitive pressure to existing facilities in the area, potentially at unfair rates as the council has ulterior motives as opposed to commercial land more…
Comment 8 23 Aug 2010, 10:42 PM
Make all parking around the oval 4P paid parking (with a resident exemption scheme of course), and allocate the revenues to the Park (not just the Oval). Do the maths: it can make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year at virtually no initial investment or development disruptions. Fast, cheap, clean and efficient!
Comment 9 24 Aug 2010, 8:55 PM
I believe it is like flogging a dead horse to continue to use Brookvale as the suburb to hold this level of event. Why further impose upon the residents, it will not improve with time only worsen. Move the venue to Ingleside and build the best standard oval possible, with best parking and transport backup for the visiting teams supporters. Spare us the misery of growing traffic, and poor access. Would it be possible to include the club on the same site, so we could watch in comfort as well. Brookvale needs a breather,give us a break.
Comment 9.1 31 Aug 2010, 1:29 PM
This is the most sensible and practical suggestion I have read so far. By doing so, the Oval would be returned to the wider community, as originally intended by the donor of the land Jane Malcolm, who transferred the land to the Council under a caveat that it only ever be used for public recreation.
Unfortunately, in the past couple of decades it has been used by the Sea Eagles at the exclusion of almost all others. Gone are the days of the Brookvale Show, the Italian festivals, the outdoor cinema, the fireworks displays, etc - all fond memories from my more…
Comment 10 27 Aug 2010, 4:14 PM
1)No. By all means, expand use. Do not try to turn the public facility into a money making venture.
2)No. Brookale oval should remain a public facility, not a money making item for private enterprise.
3)No. Will not solve traffic problems - see no advantage.
4)Perhaps, not keen on the idea. The oval must be for the local people not those with the naming rights.
5)If it helps. The oval must be for the local people not those with the advertising rights.
6)Yes, good luck.
7)No. The oval must be for the local people not private enterprise.
8)Perhaps. Pricing must not deter local people.
9)Perhaps. Pricing must not deter local people.
10)No. Shot term solution, not maintainable.
Comment 11 31 Aug 2010, 9:50 PM
- I support the use of the Oval for multiple cultural activities, but not necessarily for profit. The Oval used to be the cultural heart of the area when it was used by the wider community, and this changed when its use was restricted to the group that could afford to pay the most (the Sea Eagles). I would like my children to be able to enjoy the community atmosphere at the Oval as I did as a child at the Brookvale Show, the Italian festivals, the outdoor cinema, the fireworks displays, and to be able to see other sporting more…
