We heard it before, in respect of Prince Alfred Park.
“It’s underutilised”, they
said when they wanted to adapt it for more “active” leisure. Then
again, when there were recent threats to develop Redfern Park,
they sniffed, “It’s nothing
more than a dog-walking park”.
Now we are hearing it again, this time in respect of Marian Street
Park. Apparently, it too
is underutilised. However, the methodology by which they arrived at this
sweeping conclusion falls far short of what we should expect for a development
of “State Significance’:
Nor has there been a multi-criteria analysis to canvass
alternatives to the present Built Environment Plan. Unless the Redfern Waterloo
Authority is keeping very quiet about it, there appears to be no evidence that
they have used such an advanced option-generating decision tool to resolve the
problem of how they can creatively site thousands more people into the region
while maintaining – or improving – environmental standards.
Even if planners posted a 24-hour watch on Marian Street
Park to record the
precise numbers of people who walked through it, how long they lingered there,
and exactly what they did there, it would not be enough to properly assess the
value of this park to the locality.
Urban communities benefit from green spaces in many ways,
which don’t necessarily involve
spending lengthy periods of time there. A wide range of physical and
psychological benefits has been canvassed by local residents in their written
objections to Mr Robert Domm and the
RWA.
la development is so “significant”, then surely it
w ants the use of decision tools which take account of a wide range of social
and environmental impacts – now and in the future. They should also thoroughly
evaluate the current benefits and disadvantages.
Has the RWA analysed the load of vehicle emissions dumped on
Gibbons Street
every day and compared this with the amount of CO2 absorbed by Marian Street
Park greenery? Has the
amount of 02 generated by the park been calculated? Has the impact on local
biodiversity been evaluated? If so, I have not heard about it, and I imagine
RWA would have been shouting from the proverbial rooftops if they had any such
impressive research to show us.
On the contrary, the sitting of the planned 18-storey tower
seems about as sophisticated as a game of “pin the tail on the
donkey”.
Destruction of this – or any other urban park – is
effectively irreversible. Yet our appointed decision-makers are steaming ahead
with no evidence that they used best-practice planning methodology at all.
Remember that next time you hear Marian Street
Park is underutilised.
[South Sydney Herald September 2006]