EDWARDSTOWN SOLDIERS MEMORIAL RECREATION GROUND BACKGROUND REPORT

Transcription

1 EDWARDSTOWN SOLDIERS MEMORIAL RECREATION GROUND BACKGROUND REPORT October 2013

2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Edwardstown Soldiers Memorial Recreation Ground Master Plan study has been commissioned and funded by the City Of Marion with a supporting contribution from the Office for Recreation and Sport Community Recreation and Sport Facility Program. The study has been undertaken by Suter Planners, WAX Design and JPE Design Studio and lead by Suzanne Suter of Suter Planners. A collaborative approach to the development of the Master Plan and Building designs was adopted by the consultant team. The study has been managed by Sean O Brien, Project Leader Facility Development for the City of Marion. A Project Reference Group was established to provide input and feedback throughout the study with the following groups represented: Edwardstown Football Club Edwardstown Bowling Club South Road Cricket Club Edwardstown Community Hall Committee Sturt/Holdfast/Marion Cycling Club Returned and Services League (RSL) Residents linked to sportsground Management Committee Consultation with sports bodies, residents and the Office for Recreation and Sport was also undertaken.

3 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY THE MASTER PLAN CONTEXT 1 Purpose of the Master Plan 1 Approach to the Planning 2 Broader Planning Links 4 The Planning Outputs 5 THE RECREATION GROUND 7 Ownership and Zoning 7 Key Features and Facilities 9 Site Analysis Findings 11 Connection to the Surrounds 21 UNDERSTANDING DEMAND 24 Population Character Considerations 24 Sports Participation Analysis 27 User Requirements and Desired Directions 31 Broader Community Opinion 33 SUMMARY OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND FINDINGS 35 Key Demands 35 Supply Issues, Constraints and Opportunities 36 i OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 37 Community and Sport Hub Principles 37 Management and Usage 39 VISION AND OBJECTIVES 45 Vision for the Recreation Ground 45 Objectives for the Future 46 MASTER PLAN OPTIONS 47 Master Plan Brief 47 Master Plan Options for Consideration 51 BUILDING DESIGN POSSIBILITIES 63 Building Design Brief 63 Building Design Concept Possibilities 67 Building Design Options Assessment 81 Indicative Cost Comparisons 82 APPENDICES Indicative Cost Comparisons Document Review

4

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction and Key Findings As part of Marion City Council s commitment to creating four quality sport and community hubs strategically located across the City, Council has commissioned the development of a Master Plan for the Edwardstown Soldiers Memorial Recreation Ground. The Master Plan will guide future facility development and enhancements to the Recreation Ground over the coming years as resources become available. The Recreation Ground is already an important hub due to its good location, the quality of the oval and the existence of the cycle velodrome which has regional significance. There is a lack of open space in the district and if Castle Plaza is developed as a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in the future this will create additional demand for usable open space. However, there are issues associated with the Recreation Ground that currently reduce its hub value as indicated below. The Recreation Ground incorporates three large buildings that dominate the western part of the site and lack connectivity. This results in the duplication of facilities and a lack of integration between facilities. The buildings are beginning to age and each has design and function limitations, including poor accessibility for the main sports club and potential to improve the function space, storage and office space. The cycle track surface is beginning to crack and requires an upgrade to enhance the value of the track for cyclists. The recreation spaces are disconnected and need to be improved in quality, including the need to enhance the appeal and usability of Memorial Park. Car parking is lacking and the flow of traffic is affected by the positioning of the buildings and the location of the entrance point. The landscape could be improve to enhance the aesthetics and provide shade, including replacing potentially invasive vegetation (Fraxinus angustifolia subsp. angustifolia known as Desert Ash) The fencing around the site is dominant and creates a sense of exclusivity and could be improved in quality and replaced or removed in some sections. There is potential to strengthen the hub value of the Recreation Ground through a review of the design, function and quality of the site. In consultation with the users of the Recreation Ground and a Reference Group established to guide the master plan project, master plan options and building design concepts have been developed for community engagement. i

6 Master Plan Options The purpose of this Background Report is to present the initial demand and supply findings of the master plan project and the initial design options that have provided a basis for the final master plan and building design. Three initial master plan options for the site and two initial building design concepts are presented in this report. The three initial Master Plan design options are summarised and presented on the following pages. These options consider the needs of the sports and the broader community and aim to address the supply issues identified through the planning process. Each option continues to support all of the existing sports on the basis that there is demand for these activities and there is no justification to remove any existing sport or user from the Recreation Ground. Master Plan Option A: Moderate Improvements Most facilities are retained and enhanced in quality rather than a major redevelopment. This option does not achieve one integrated building, but there are some improvements to the connection of the recreation spaces. This option would involve a major refurbishment of the existing single storey bowls and the two storey building rather than develop a new building. A community space would be developed above the bowls facility. The existing community hall would need to be removed and the bowls club would require a second level. ii

7 Master Plan Option A: Moderate Improvements iii

8 Master Plan Option B: Building Consolidation and Balanced Site Changes The main change is the replacement of all existing club and community buildings with one new integrated building. Other facilities are retained and enhanced. This option creates connected spaces and building improvements. However, because the building needs to be located near the bowls greens, the site of the building is disconnected from the oval. As such, an alternative building option is considered in the building design concept possibilities. iv

9 Master Plan Option B: Building Consolidation and Balanced Site Changes v

10 Master Plan Option C: Building Consolidation and New Layout The main difference between Option C and Option B is the establishment of a plaza on Raglan Avenue to better connect the Recreation Ground to the surrounds. This option involves establishing one integrated building as for Option B, but it requires the relocation of one bowling green and the building would be even more disconnected from the oval. vi

11 Master Plan Option C: Building Consolidation and New Layout vii

12 Master Plan Options Comparison Cricket nets are incorporated within the Recreation Ground and improvements to the cycle track, pedestrian track, Memorial Park, playspace and tennis courts are proposed in each master plan design option. The approach to these components varies slightly in each option to highlight potential different approaches. In Option B, the bowling greens are reduced to 18 rinks to enable Memorial Park to be increased in size and a playspace and activity opportunities are included in the park. Landscape improvements and upgrades to lighting, fencing and other infrastructure would occur in each design option. A comparison of each master plan option is provided in the report. The comparison suggests that there are differing strengths of the three options, and there are some features within each of the options that could potentially be interchanged to provide an alternative master plan design. Building Design Concept Possibilities Two building design concepts have been developed for feedback including: Building Design Concept 1: One integrated building (based on the Master Plan Option B location) Building Design Concept 2: The concept of establishing two buildings instead of one building in order to better connect the buildings to the activity areas (bowls greens and oval) The one integrated building design concept would need to be modified if Master Plan Option C is selected. As Master Plan Option A involves upgrading the existing buildings, the building designs do not relate to that Master Plan Option. The building design concepts are presented on the following pages and further details are provided in the report. The final Master Plan could include components from each option. viii

13 Building Design Concept 1: One Integrated Building ix

14 Building Design Concept 1: One Integrated Building x

15 Building Design Concept 1: One Integrated Building xi

16 Building Design Concept 1: One Integrated Building xii

17 Building Design Concept 2: Two Buildings Linked to Activity Areas xiii

18 Building Design Concept 2: Two Buildings Linked to Activity Areas xiv

19 Building Design Concept 2: Two Buildings Linked to Activity Areas xv

20 Building Design Concept 2: Two Buildings Linked to Activity Areas xvi

21 Building Design Concept 2: Two Buildings Linked to Activity Areas xvii

22 Building Design Concept Comparison Whilst the Building Design Concept 1 creates one building, the potential to integrate the bowls component with other function and activity areas is difficult due to the need to connect the bowls club to the greens at ground level while the community and sports function areas are best located at level one to provide views of the oval and the Adelaide Hills. Also, the location of the sports club towards the bowls greens is not ideal with constrained views over the oval. A final building design concept will be developed following feedback from the potential user groups and discussion on the benefits of two buildings versus one building. The concept of one building versus two buildings will influence the Master Plan Design. The final building design concept will need to respond to the selected Master Plan Design. Building Design Concept 2 achieves one integrated sports and community building that is directly connected to the oval and track and would have excellent viewing opportunities. However, this requires the development of two buildings with a separated bowls club facility. xviii

23 Indicative Cost Comparison Indicative (broad) QS based costings have been obtained for each master plan and building concept and these are summarised below. Master Plan Options (including potential building works) Indicative Cost Comparison of Building Concepts Option Indicative Total Cost Range Concept Broad Indicative Cost to Date Option A: Moderate Improvements $8.6m - $9.5m Building Concept 1: One integrated building $6,175,850 (inclusive of all associated percentages) Option B: Building Consolidation and Balanced Site Changes $9.4m - $10.5m (based on building concept 1) Add $2.6m for building concept 2 Building Concept 2: Two buildings linked to activity areas $8,258,725 (inclusive of all associated percentages) Option C: Building Consolidation and New Layout $9.3m - $10.3m (based on building concept 1) The costings are detailed in Appendix 1. Exclusions The indicative costings do not include infrastructure costs such as lighting, fencing, gates, irrigation, drainage and utilities as further assessment of these items is still being undertaken. However, these costs will be the same, regardless of which master plan option is adopted (i.e. the difference between the cost of each option will not be altered by these items). The costings exclude Interest and Holding cost, GST, contaminated soil removal, removal of significant trees, and escalation beyond August xix

24 Recommendations The design options and concepts included within this report are based on a comprehensive analysis of the opportunities. To enable the development of one master plan and one building design concept, community engagement with the users and the community is required to obtain feedback on the various design options. The findings of the feedback are included in Report 1 (the Master Plan Report). Each master plan option and building concept has positives and negatives and these are outlined in this report together with a comparison of the options. Through the community engagement, one master plan and one building design will be developed that draws out the positives from the various options. Community engagement using the design options as a basis is required to enable the development of a final master plan and building design concept. In addition, it is recommended that the Edwardstown Soldiers Memorial Recreation Ground is rezoned as Open Space through Council s Development Plan to be consistent with the Council s commitment to retaining the Recreation Ground for community use for generations to come. xx

25 Page 0