"Underutilised" parks - a common refrain

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]