Sunday 20 April 2014

Trader Seeks Market Expansion

The following is a well considered response to some management concepts that have been revealed over recent weeks. Responding to market plans is a very important part of the consultation process. We have obtained approval from Bruce to publish his letter.

To whom it may concern,
Thank for inviting David O’Neil to offer advice his experiences with the use of public markets renewals all around the world.
David O’Neil demonstrated many strategies how to cooperate in order to achieve the overall benefit for the future of public markets.
Firstly I would like to state clearly that I am AGAINST any reduction of the Queen Victoria Market but rather in favour of upgrading or the expansion of the Queen Victoria Market.
The current geography of the Queen Victoria Market is divided into categories (Fruit& Vegetables, Meat and Fish, Delicatessen and General Merchandise). We as traders are not inter-connecting with each other - the Queen Street side is dividing us.
As a general trader our views do not align with the Fruit & Vegetables, Meat and Fish and Delicatessen traders.  But the proposed underground car park for sheds A,B,C and D of which is inclusive of cold and dry storage and car park spaces seems more beneficial to the Fruit & Vegetables, Meat and Fish and Delicatessen traders.
I do not believe an underground car park is necessary and our resources should be invested into the upgrade of Queen Street.
But by creating another market within a market on Queen Street could inter-connect/knitting the Queen Victoria Market as a whole hence create a benefit for the whole. For example food stalls, vintage/recycled goods, computer parts, crafts and artists etc…
Another factor to consider is that our public space is used for 1 purpose.  To create multi-uses would promote and increase attraction to the Queen Victoria Market, hence creating more business activities to the private and public sector. E.g. (Day-time general shopping and night-time food/crafts and entertainment venues.)
To have cooperation with all or majority of traders for any inconvenience of any proposed construction for the benefit and future of the Queen Victoria Market, there would be assurances that must be addressed:
·        1. Traders original positions/allocations would be returned back to them
·        2. A specified period of the commencement and completion +- 3 months
Traders will not go on-board if they do not know the end result.
Without prejudice,

Bruce Pham

Have Your Say - click here.

21/04/2014 13:37:20 Expansion "Bruce's  idea does have a lot of good and sound ideas" Old man
21/04/2014 13:48:05 Bruces letter "Very well written Bruce, and some great suggestions. In particular the Queen St dividing the market. Its a no-brainer in my opinion. This area needs to be utilised (covered) to join the bottom to the top half of the market. 
On a different topic - I'm all for fancy new modern day pop ups, and trendy stalls coming to the market, but they are not likely to be loyal to QVM as our family run businesses are/ have been. Not many people will have the longevity that we currently have in the market." Tony
27/04/2014 12:21:49 Trader seeks expansion "Well written Bruce. Change, it appears is inevitable, however moving forward, it is paramount that there be transparency and inclusion of traders in management discussions. Information should subsequently be filtered through to all other traders. When information is delivered from other sources (ie. "the age" article 22/4) regarding the renewal it can cause frustration amongst traders with management. " Kerri