VICTORIA PARK (BAKKABAKKANDI) MASTER PLAN

Transcription

1 VICTORIA PARK (BAKKABAKKANDI) MASTER PLAN Submission by: GPO Box 2653 Adelaide SA 5001 Te: Web: 30 March 2007

2 Submission - Victoria Park (Bakkabakkandi) Master Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 3 2 THE PROCESS 4 3 THE DESIGN BRIEF 5 4 SUPPORTING PRINCIPLE 6 5 KEY DESIGN AND PLANNING ISSUES The "Grandstand" Use of the Building The Heritage Grandstand and Proposed Oval Car Parking Temporary Event Buildings 8 6 CONCLUSION 9 Page 2

3 1 INTRODUCTION This Submission has been prepared by the Planning Institute of Australia, South Australia Division, to provide the State Government with the views of South Australian Planners and Urban Designers who are members of the Institute. The Planning Institute commends the Government for initiating the consultation process, but has significant concerns regarding the process undertaken to develop the Master Plan and the political process that has ensued during the consultation process. The Planning Institute also commends the State Government for initiating the Master Plan process which should lead to an improved outcome for the South Australian community regarding the use and development within Victoria Park. Page 3

4 2 THE PROCESS The consultation process officially ends on 30 March As far as the Planning Institute is aware, decision making by the Park Lands Authority and the Adelaide City Council was intended to inform the consultation process to enable the Authority and the Council to provide feedback to DTEI on the Master Plan proposals. The Planning Institute is therefore particularly concerned at the intervention by the State Treasurer prior to the completion of the community consultation process. Instead of waiting to the end of this process, analysing submissions and investigating possible improvements to the project, the Treasurer has repeatedly intervened and clearly indicated that he is not interested in compromise. In fact, he has attacked critics of the proposal and made it clear that he doesn't value their opinions. On Sunday 25 March 2007 the Treasurer, seeking some sort of compromise with the Adelaide City Council, called on the Council to advise him by Friday 30 March 2007 of the exact changes to the Master Plan that Council was seeking (eg, how big should the "grandstand" be?, etc). This is totally unacceptable, particularly given that the period for receiving submissions only finishes on 30 March In summary, the Planning Institute is extremely concerned at the lack of due process as far as community consultation relates to the Master Plan proposals. Such interference and clear distain for opposing views as expressed by political leaders reflects very poorly on planning generally. Page 4

5 3 THE DESIGN BRIEF The Planning Institute is also concerned at the fact that the Design Brief for those who prepared the Master Plan was primarily limited to the interests of the Motor Racing Board and the SAJC. Due to this limitation the resulting Master Plan and the "grandstand" development have been designed primarily for single usage, and particularly for use by the Motor Racing Board for the Clipsal 500 annual event. We remain particularly concerned that such a large building and development at such a significant cost has been designed primarily for a single annual event which may or may not exist into the future. In order to avoid the situation where large "single use" buildings are developed in the Adelaide Park Lands and then the intended use disappears, it is our view that the building should be designed as a multi-purpose facility limited in footprint, bulk and floor area to the absolute minimum required for sustainable long term usage. At the very least, additional users of the facility need to be identified and clearly articulated to ensure economic sustainability. It would also appear that the Master Plan design has been dominated by the needs of the Clipsal 500 event rather than of the SAJC, who are in fact the primary users (up to 30 events per annum). The building is clearly too large for the needs of the SAJC, particularly given the relatively small numbers of people who attend horseracing events. In summary, the Planning Institute is of the view that the Master Plan suffers from a narrow Design Brief and that incorrect and limited questions have been asked of the Design Team. Page 5

6 4 SUPPORT "IN PRINCIPLE" The Planning Institute supports "in principle" the objectives of the Victoria Park Master Plan. The existing situation is totally unsatisfactory and needs to be improved. In many aspects the Master Plan does improve the existing situation, but it can be further improved. It should also be stated that even if the full Master Plan was not implemented, steps should be taken to demolish under-utilised buildings and hard stand areas and open up the Park Lands for greater public usage. Page 6

7 5 KEY DESIGN AND PLANNING ISSUES 5.1 The "Grandstand" The multi-purpose building proposed (popularly described as a "grandstand") is far too large and should be significantly reduced in footprint and floor area. It should primarily be designed for the needs of the SAJC for typical horseracing events, with a viewing area limited to the typical size of crowds coming to horseracing events. Naturally the building should include all of the expensive core areas such as kitchens, toilet facilities, key entertainment areas, etc. However, for larger events such as the Clipsal 500, the core building should be extended using well designed temporary structures adding on to and connecting with the permanent building. The recent decision by Adelaide City Council to support a reduced building length of 200m is not supported. This is considered a relatively minor reduction in total length and will result in a building of excessive bulk for the Park Lands context. Furthermore, it is a disappointment that a more iconic design has not been considered. The introduction of a permanent building to the Park Lands should have taken the opportunity to create a special, iconic building that becomes a design landmark for South Australia, while also performing the necessary functions. The building design is questionable in terms of its environmental sustainability and is relatively bland in design. This is a wasted opportunity for South Australia to reassert itself as a place of quality design and public realm. 5.2 Use of the Building The Planning Institute is concerned at the prospect of constructing a large permanent building within the Park Lands if it is only to have limited use. There is no guarantee that the SAJC will use it 30 times a year. Currently there are only approximately six horseracing events at Victoria Park and Morphettville Racecourse is intended to remain as the main venue for racing events. If usage was to double (to say 12 events), the building would have limited year round usage by the SAJC. Naturally the Clipsal 500 only needs to use it for a single event at this point in time. Greater clarity is required as to what other usage could be made of the building, particularly uses that have broad public appeal. The building should have public access and should be designed with security in mind. Given its isolated location when it is not being used, how will it be protected from vandalism/graffiti, etc? Will the building in fact need to be fenced when not in use? An analysis of the siting of the building with respect to crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) principles suggests that it is poorly sited and could be an ongoing security issue. 5.3 The Heritage Grandstand and Proposed Oval The Planning Institute is supportive of the proposal to restore the heritage listed grandstand. The Master Plan indicates that it will be able to be used for spectator seating during the Clipsal 500 event, and possibly for sporting events on the proposed oval located between the heritage grandstand and the proposed new "grandstand". Page 7

8 However, if the heritage grandstand is not required for spectators to sporting events, it will only be used once per annum or during motor sports events. The Master Plan therefore does not propose a sustainable usage for the grandstand that places it in an appropriate context where its ongoing usage can be guaranteed. What proposals are in place to promote more active usage of the heritage grandstand? 5.4 Car Parking The Planning Institute is seeking clarification as to how Victoria Park and its environs will be utilised for car parking during events. Naturally the aim should be to minimise the impact of any car parking on the use of Victoria Park and the amenity and maintenance of green spaces. It is understood that the car racetrack could be used during horseracing events. Can this be confirmed and what happens during the Clipsal 500 event? 5.5 Temporary Event Buildings The proposed new "grandstand" does not significantly reduce the need for temporary buildings during the Clipsal 500 event. It has been stated that many of these require replacement due to their age. The Planning Institute is of the view that improved design quality should be incorporated into any new temporary buildings associated with events within the Park Lands. By improving their design, opposition to their existence would be reduced. The Planning Institute has been informed during the consultation process that the time to set up and clear temporary structures associated with the Clipsal 500 event will only be reduced by one month out of a current five month period. This five month period is considered excessive and all effort should be made to reduce the total time taken to set up and remove these temporary structures. It has been noted following the end of the Clipsal 500 event in 2007 that the removal of structures is taking place slowly with relatively few workers involved. The aim should be for the total time taken to be reduced to a maximum of three months, leaving Victoria Park free from intrusion for nine months of the year. Page 8

9 6 CONCLUSION The construction of permanent buildings within the Adelaide Park Lands must be undertaken with extreme caution, and only when absolutely necessary. The City of Adelaide Development Plan makes it clear that new buildings are discouraged and should only be considered where necessary and where the total floor area of buildings will be reduced as a result of new development. The extent of new building in the Victoria Park Master Plan exceeds the floor area of existing buildings, notwithstanding that the footprint may in fact be reduced. Any new building should be designed for sustainable usage and not be predicated on the assumption that existing uses will continue indefinitely (or for the life of the building). The size of any proposed new building should also not be designed based on the needs of the user with the largest spatial requirement if that user is only an irregular user (or in this case, a "once a year" user). The Victoria Park Master Plan and any proposed new development within that section of the Park Lands must be designed to the very highest standard. Its design should not be hurried and community consultation needs to be incorporated in the Design Brief and in design solutions. The Planning Institute recommends that a national design competition be held to identify the preferred development for Victoria Park in order to achieve the best possible outcomes for the State and the Adelaide City Council. Should the development proceed, it should be a high quality, iconic and environmentally sustainable building that reflects the high quality of South Australia s design community anything less is a wasted opportunity. If this means that the construction of a new "grandstand" and associated works is delayed by a year then the Planning Institute is of the view that such a delay will be worthwhile. It is critical to "get it right" and ensure that there is no repeat of situations where major new developments in the Park Lands proceed, only to find that their long term use is unsustainable. As an organisation the Planning Institute is keen to assist the State Government and the Adelaide City Council in the development of an improved outcome for the Victoria Park Master Plan, and offers its services in a broad range of specialists skills relevant to this development. Page 9