The Federal Golf Club Members Flyer has been sent to all known FGC members. The flyer outlines in summary some of the negative aspects the development proposal will have for Golf Club members. For more complete details on the issues faced by residents, please refer to our previous post.
GAHRAG 
What ever happened to “User Pays”; seems to me that the members of the golf club just need to pay a little bit more for their golf thereby leaving the pristine woodland environment intact for the benefit of ALL Canberrans and visitors alike.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It seems there is a limit to how much the Federal golf club members are prepared to pay out of their own pockets for the privilege of playing their beloved game of golf – do the maths – if the 700 members (of a private golf club) entitled to vote each made a one off payment of $2000 they could get their watering system, with funds left over. What are they prepared to go without in their own lives to find $2000 for that purpose. They all purport to love golf so much but not quite that much! That’s what the rest of us have to do to finance our lifestyle and our hobbies, or will the ACT Government let us all build 4 or 5 units on our blocks of land because we are a bit short of money to do the things we love.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If any of you hopeless group of thugs that accessed the club’s private information without permission think you will get away with you, well you have something else coming. For starters this “GAHRAG” was created without 90% of the residents knowing. You have got to be kidding yourselves. If this golf club wasn’t at your back door, your homes would be worth nothing, constant complaints, illegal tactics, you won’t win any of this. So keep going, you’ve already dug yourselves 10 feet under, you might as well keep going.
LikeLike
A good balanced opinion from a golf club member that should stand the club in good stead from a public relations point of view when due process for the application for deconcessionalisation and lease variation takes place in the months/years ahead. Not!
Although the views of members of the club will be irrelevant in that process once you have voted. It will all be up to the developer to put forward a winning case to the Government. Why get so angry if you think the club and the developer successfully achieving their aims is a foregone conclusion. Much more dignified to ignore GAHRAG I would have thought.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, that was a disappointing meeting. 250 for the development and 40 opposed. Balance of the membership left sitting on the fence. Puts the club in a rather weak position in presenting the case to the government and may see the developer thinking twice about putting any further resources into the project if they are realistic.
Aside from the apathy which is a bit sad, let us hope our fine course is not ruined. The proposition was easy to vote for because of the benefits on offer, but it is short sighted.
Perhaps it is time for some belt tightening and creative thinking.
LikeLiked by 1 person
GAHRAG are living in a fantasy land if they think the ACT government will not turn the land into a new suburb should FGC fold. All to pay for a tram that Garran and Hughes residents will never use!
Unfortunately, the NIMBY element is far too short sighted to understand this.
The privacy breach is another matter and any breach of privacy should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, particularly those member/s of both FGC and GAHRAG, as the privacy breach will be very easy to trace.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh dear! the same old fear mongering that the ACT Government planning authorities would be incapable of doing a development sympathetic to the surrounding Red Hill Reserve, that is if they too ever managed to get a change to the Territory Plan. Sorry, but I would rather take my chances with ACTPLA than the seemingly “made on the run” plans of MBark, as it endeavours to squeeze the footprint for its development into a smaller space as a result of the pressures of safety, parking etc and the need to follow a set business model. And pity the poor potential + 55 residents if they ever get stuck in their frosty shady hollow in the winter.
LikeLike
The Red Hill Regeneration Group has been instrumental in opposing inappropriate developments which have been proposed from time to time by the Federal Golf Club. Extensive documentation regarding this matter can be found on the Regenerators web site.
With regard to the current proposal which has been developed by MBark and the FGC, the Regenerators published a letter dated 28 January 2016 to MBark, which outlined twelve areas of general concern regarding development proposals on the FGC concessional lease. This letter can be found on our website. The Regenerators Committee plan to meet shortly to consider how the current proposal, as described in the Mbark pamphlet dated 27 May 2016, address these areas of concern.
Paul Ratcliffe
Treasurer, Red Hill Regeneration Group
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Handicapped. The Mbark proposal would wreck the course forever and at best would only provide short term relief for the difficulties facing the club. The proposed clubhouse is in reality designed for the residents of the retirement village not for golfers. Once development of the retirement village is underway and certainly when it is in place it will not be the FGC that is calling the shots it will be Mbark. There is no cast iron guarantee that there will not be further development in the future which could result in the amenity of the club being further reduced. The FGC needs to rethink their approach and not undertake any further work with Mbark who have come up with a proposal that is in keeping with their business model but is totally out of keeping with the golf course and the needs and interests of those who play it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree with Handicapped. The Mbark proposal is a lazy, poor design. It would have totally unacceptable impacts on the neighbouring properties and most importantly would severely damage our jewel of a golf course. If the Mbark proposal went ahead it would destroy the very character of the thing that we are trying to save. it is vital that the club not proceed with undertaking further work with Mbark. They might know about retirement villages but it is clear they have no idea about the real needs of golfers. If the proposal was allowed to proceed it would be to the detriment of golf and golfers with Mbark being the ultimate beneficiary.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you! Finally a member of the golf club who is prepared to consider a different viewpoint of the Club’s re-development proposal.
LikeLike
As a member of the golf club I can sympathise, the Brumbies RU people have been in a similar situation and their solution will not be enduring. A pity to wreck a good course. We should be asking who benefits from all this. In the long run it won’t be the golfers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Golf Club proposes to alter a concessional lease to enable a commercial development, this is simply a matter of converting a community asset to private benefit. Also called theft.
The Golf Club has been crying poor for 20 years and if the development proceeds it will achieve temporary respite before being back in difficulties because the club cost base is too high and current difficulties are a result of the club living beyond its means. The development will ruin the golf course for the players so recruiting new members will be harder and any short term advantage will be squandered until the son of Mbark returns to add more housing to the initial 120 units. Crace comes to Red Hill.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Mr Adcock
I am a Hughes resident and I am delighted that some Garran residents have had the gumption form the Garran and Hughes Residents Action Group. My friends in Hughes were thinking of doing the same thing – not just because of the eighth attempt by the FGC management to build a housing estate in the middle of a nature reserve – but also to stop other ghastly new developments wrecking the amenity of local area. Where can we join?
Best wishes – Blakley
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Blakly for your support. It is much appreciated. After the delivery of the flyers to members we are now waiting to see how the members vote on 20 June. Depending on the outcome we will organise a meeting for a GAHRAG discussion. You can send a letter to PO Box 945 Mawson, shown on the top of the flyer, with details on how we can get in touch with you. It would be appreciated if you would include details as to whether you are a member of the Golf Club or not. I can appreciate why you might not want to disclose this information on this forum.
LikeLike
Fair point but at least all Canberra taxpayers would benefit from the Government’s development, rather than a small number of golfers always crying poor. You are all obviously not paying sufficient fees to support your club and your recreational activity. If you are so concerned about its fate and the Club’s development proposal falls through, you must realise that the only alternative is to charge members higher fees, as they are like a stuck record on the subject of residences on the course and seem to have no fall back position. Will you stick around if you are asked to cough up more in fees? A test of loyalty indeed.
LikeLike
Of course I will, golf is my hobby. It’s a pity u seem to have an uneducated opinion of golfers as all are not as u say. As for funds benefitting all Canberrans I’d luv to hear your opinion about how u think the funds will be raised for projects like the light rail and how it will as u say “benefit ALL Canberrans”.
LikeLike
Do people actually think that if the club does not survive that it will be made into a nature reserve.?? It will be developed right across the entire course by a developer who will care a lot less than u think, they will pack in more than 2-4 storey unit developments they will be 12 stories high..I’m voting Yes..
LikeLike
How many paid up members does GAHRAG have, please?
LikeLike
Dear Mr Adcock
I am appalled that one of your Group has blatantly breached my privacy by obtaining my personal information and details about my membership of the Federal Golf Club from a secure “members only” section of Federal’s website so you can then send me your Group’s newsletter to my home address. If I find out who the relevant FGC member is and I have my suspicions I will be seeking them out for a serious chat – and they probably cheat at golf as well !!.
FORE!!!!
LikeLike
How Did You Get My Address?
Someone please explain how the “Garran and Hughes Residents Action Group” obtained my address and membership details. This is a clear case of NIMBY. I find it offensive that your letter purports to represent Hughes residents – you don’t represent me. In fact I’ve never heard of your organisation until now and don’t agree with your stance on the issue.
LikeLike
So you always lose your cool if someone comes along trying to present ideas contrary to yours? Good luck to you if you feel the Board and Mbark have presented you with all the details necessary for you to make an informed decision. Some people feel very differently and are entitled to present that view. Will the Club have a ninth attempt if this one fails? You could at least try and understand our distress that no never seems to mean no.
LikeLike
Members of the Federal Golf Club have every right to be incensed by the receipt of letters from the Garran and Hughes Residents Action Group regarding their view of the proposed Federal Redevelopment, to be voted on at a Club meeting on Monday 20th July.
Not only has the membership list of a private club been accessed, but addresses of those members have (seemingly) been accessed from the ACT Electoral Roll. This would appear to be the only source of this information as, in my case, I am ex- (telephone) directory and use a PO Box as my address on the Federal database, not a street address (which was used for the mail out)
The Residents Action Group appears to think that Federal members do not have the intelligence to independently weigh the pros and cons of matters being put before them by the Club’s Board. In this they are sadly mistaken.
LikeLike
You obviously do not appreciate that residents adjacent to the course have every right to be incensed that the golf club board has launched an eighth attempt to develop the golf course as a residential estate, in our currently peaceful back yards. Perhaps you would like 125 units including four storey flats constructed across the road from your house with no right to protest. We have paid to live in the neighbourhood as it is and currently the members of the FGC HAVE NO RIGHTS TO RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS to raise money for which you are not prepared to increase your fees sufficiently to support your hobby. Indeed the current zoning of the FGC lease demands that you protect the rights of the neighbours to their peaceful existence. Perhaps you should blame the board of your Club for making residents angry enough to feel the need to write to you to present an opposing case that they refuse to be honest enough to give to you in the spirit of consultation. What are the members going to do to raise the apparently enormous amounts of money they require if this current proposal by Embark fails? Or will you desert the club when the facilities no longer appeal to you, either because of the development or because the course is in a poor condition- an option available to you not so easily available to residents abutting the course. Perhaps you should vote in members of the board who can manage adequately the fees you do pay do obtain the facilities you require.
LikeLike
I received a flyer in my mailbox, hand delivered and addressed to me.
How did you get access to the Members Directory of Federal Golf Club?
Who gave you permission to access this Directory for this purpose?
You do your cause a lot of harm by using these unethical (and possibly illegal) tactics.
LikeLike
MBARK and the club had no compunction about delivering letters to tell us that they were about invade our privacy by building houses right outside our back fences in order to raise money on your behalf to buy an irrigation system. And that was the first time we had even been made aware that the club was considering such a move. So you think you have worries!
LikeLike
If you would care to look at the proposal there will be no houses “right outside your back fence”, nor will there be 4 storey flats on your doorstep or a road linking to Brereton Street. Your action group has misinformed you and has also breached every FGC members privacy by obtaining their personal details for their letter box drop which has incensed so many members. If you want to have the freedom to walk on the golf course whenever you choose then join the club and get some exercise. It will be interesting to see how you feel when you have 80 hectares of housing right outside your back fence when the club folds and the land is sold to a developer and the suburb of Federal evolves. A prime example of NIMBY.
LikeLike