city of port lincoln assessment... · 1 introduction ... 2.1 city of port lincoln community survey...

City of Port Lincoln

Site Assessment Report

Prepared by SGL Consulting Group in association with DASH Architects, Rider Levett Bucknall, FMG Engineering

and Frank Siow & Associates

www.sglgroup.net

SGL CONSULTING GROUP

SGL also has offices in

• Auckland • Christchurch • Wellington •

Indoor Aquatic Facility Feasibility Review – Site Assessment Report

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1.1 Early History .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1.2 Lessons from the existing Leisure Centre ............................................................................ 1 1.1.3 Community Reference Group ............................................................................................. 2

1.2 Study Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2

1.3 Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 2

1.4 Structure of the Report .......................................................................................................... 3

2 REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS ............................................................................................................. 4

2.1 City of Port Lincoln Community Survey 2011...................................................................... 4

2.2 Community Aquatic Swimming Facility Strategy .............................................................. 4

2.3 Council Resolutions ............................................................................................................... 5

2.4 Population Health Profile ...................................................................................................... 5

2.5 Summary ................................................................................................................................ 6

3 DESCRIPTION OF POTETNIAL SITES .............................................................................................. 7

3.1 Bowling Avenue..................................................................................................................... 7

3.2 Ravendale Oval Site ............................................................................................................. 9

3.3 Mortlock Terrace Site .......................................................................................................... 11

3.4 Existing Leisure Centre Site ................................................................................................. 13

4 ASSESSMENT OF SITES ................................................................................................................ 15

4.1 Assessment Criteria ............................................................................................................. 15

4.2 Decision Grid ....................................................................................................................... 17

4.3 Qualitative Assessment ...................................................................................................... 17 4.3.1 Bowling Avenue .................................................................................................................... 17 4.3.2 Ravendale Oval .................................................................................................................... 18 4.3.3 Mortlock Terrace ................................................................................................................... 18 4.3.4 Leisure Centre ........................................................................................................................ 18

4.4 Summary .............................................................................................................................. 19

TABLE OF CONTENTS


This chapter presents an introduction to the Feasibility Review and includes background to

the study, objectives of the study, methodology and structure of the report.

1.1 Background

The following background information is derived from the Project Brief prepared by the City

of Port Lincoln.

1.1.1 Early History

In the early 1980’s the City of Port Lincoln constructed and operated a Leisure Centre

complex located at the then new ‘marina’ precinct, consisting of heated indoor pools,

sauna, spa, water slide, child care facility and ancillary rooms. A gymnasium and two court

stadium was a later addition to the aquatic facilities.

Council received advice at the time that revenue from the stadium and gymnasium

operations would offset the significant operating losses being incurred by the aquatic facility.

This was found not to be the case. The facility was leased to a management company for a

period of four years with an operating subsidy from Council. Similar to many Leisure Centres,

the facility operated with a significant annual public subsidy and without capital

replacement funding being set aside by Council for future upgrade or replacement. Council

resumed responsibility for facility’s operations when the management company did not seek

an extension of its contract.

In 2001 the facility was tendered for sale and subsequently sold to a private company for

what was essentially land value, but with an encumbrance to maintain the aquatic facility as

a public swimming pool for a period of fifteen years. The encumbrance expires in November

2016. Council has been advised by the owners of the facility that at the conclusion of the

encumbrance the continued operation of the aquatic facility cannot be assured.

1.1.2 Lessons from the existing Leisure Centre

A lot of information has been acquired over the life and operations of the existing Port

Lincoln Leisure Centre. Some key lessons learnt and knowledge gained in regard to building

and operating a public aquatic facility

include:

Public aquatic facilities generally operate at a substantial loss

Quality materials and practical design are essential

It is important to minimize heating costs for water and air, and co-generational power

and heating together with solar technologies should be considered for cost-efficiency

Operational flexibility is required, with usage times and labour flexible to reflect

seasonal conditions, special events and community demand

Facility location is paramount to maximizing patronage

1 INTRODUCTION


Feasibility considerations must include both capital and operating revenues and costs

Funding of maintenance, componentized renewal and major capital replacement

should be identified on an asset management basis for long term financial planning

purposes.

1.1.3 Community Reference Group

In 2012 Council formed a Swimming Facilities Community Reference Group, drawing

representation from various sectors of the community, including Education, Health, Swimming

Club, Aged and Youth groups, other sports, Businesses and Council Elected Members. The

Group developed and presented to Council the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility

Strategy, which was subsequently adopted by Council.

Council resolved to proceed with a Feasibility Study for an Indoor Aquatic Facility at a site

adjacent the Centenary Oval complex, in line with the recommendation of the Swimming

Facilities Community Reference Group, recognizing the key date of expiry of the current

operating encumbrance at the existing Leisure Centre in November 2016. It has subsequently

been resolved to include consideration of other possible sites and the existing Leisure Centre

site in the Feasibility Review.

1.2 Study Objectives

The objective of the project is to undertake a feasibility review of the optimum location,

development and operation of an Indoor Aquatic Facility in the City of Port Lincoln, including

the option of acquiring and refurbishing the existing Leisure Centre site.

The Feasibility Review will provide:

An initial review of four possible sites for a Facility.[Site Assessment Report]

A concept design and feasibility assessment of a new Facility at a recommended

preferred site and alternatively at the existing marina-precinct site.

1.3 Methodology

The feasibility study involves three phases with the following tasks:

Phase 1: Project Inception

1 Project Inception Meeting

2 Document Review

Phase 2: Selection of Preferred Site

1 Potential Site Selection

2 Individual Site Assessments

3 Site Assessment Report

4 Presentation to Council

Phase 3: Feasibility Assessment

1 Key Stakeholder Interviews – both sites

2 Structural Audit of Existing Centre

3 Review of Environmentally Sustainable P&E

4 Review of Pool Design

5 Benchmarking

6 Population/Participation Analysis

7 Design Brief

8 Demand Assessment Report

9 Precinct Plans


10 Concept Master Plan

11 Cost Estimate

12 Management Options

13 Operational Analysis

14 Whole of Life Costs

15 Final Feasibility Study

1.4 Structure of the Report

This Site Assessment Report presents the findings of the research conducted in Phases 1 and

2.


This chapter reviews existing reports and other documents relating to aquatic facilities in Port

Lincoln.

2.1 City of Port Lincoln Community Survey 2011

Using a web based survey tool (Survey Monkey) respondents were asked to indicate whether

they used non Council facilities and services and their level of satisfaction, including the

Leisure Centre Pool. 708 responses were received with the following results:

32% had “Not Used/No Opinion”, which suggests 68% had used or had an opinion on

the pool.

The majority (57%) of respondents who had used or had an opinion of the pool were

satisfied. A further 11% reported their satisfaction level to be “above expectations”,

whereas almost a third reported their satisfaction level to be “below expectations”

These results suggest, the pool is adequate, but improvements are required to increase

satisfaction levels.

2.2 Community Aquatic Swimming Facility Strategy

This report summarised the findings and suggestions of the Swimming Facilities Reference

Group, formed to assist Council in its deliberations regarding future aquatic facilities in Port

Lincoln.

Community Survey

Council’s 2011 Community Survey included two questions in relation to aquatic facilities:

“If council developed a new community recreation centre what facilities would you like to

see incorporated?”

83% of respondents supported the inclusion of an indoor aquatic facility in a new recreation

facility.

59% of respondents supported the inclusion of an outdoor aquatic facility in a new recreation

facility.

“Where would your preferred location be for a new community recreation centre?”

Six locations were suggested:

Adjoining Centenary Oval & Schools (29% of responses)

Ravendale Sporting Complex (26%)

Within CBD (22%)

Outside CBD (11%)

Marina area (7%)

Other (5%)

Recommendations (in the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility Strategy)

2 REVIEW OF

DOCUMENTS


To gain the maximum patronage an aquatic facility must be located close to schools to limit

travel time and cost, be centrally located to residential areas and have adequate parking

and drop off within close proximity to the facility.

Indoor aquatic centres with heated water are very expensive to operate. No examples of

such facilities in regional Australia have been found that operate on a break even or

profitable basis. At best examples of operational losses vary from $200,000 to $400,000.

Preliminary design options include:

25 metre 8 lane pool with minimum depth 1.2 metres to a maximum of 1.5 metres with

disability ramp

Up to 300 m2 multipurpose pool incorporating warm water pool, leisure pool and learn

to swim with beach access

Hydrotherapy pool

Office and Administration area with separate staff facilities

Entry foyer, reception and kiosk/café

Male and female change rooms with separate cubicles

Parents change room and toilets

Seating and viewing facilities

Outdoor openings for ventilation to pool decks

Water filtration and heating options

Solar heating and solar power offset options

Flexible plant and building design to support future additional uses

2.3 Council Resolutions

19 August 2013 Council resolved to endorse “the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility

Strategy as tabled and agrees with the findings of the Swimming Facilities

Community Reference Group that an indoor aquatic facility in Port Lincoln

is a necessary community asset for our regional population and if designed,

constructed, operated and funded appropriately it should be a significant

asset for the future use of the community.”

2.4 Population Health Profile

This report was prepared by Adelaide University for the Local Government Association of SA,

and relates specifically to the Councils in the Lower Eyre Peninsula Group, comprising Lower

Eyre Peninsula, Port Lincoln and Tumby Bay. Key findings relevant to the possible

development, management and operation of an indoor aquatic centre are:

Given the small numbers of people born in predominantly non-English speaking

countries, relatively few of the overseas-born population reported that they had poor

proficiency in English.

Aboriginal peoples comprise 4.4% of the Lower Eyre Peninsula Group’s population, 23%

higher than non-metropolitan areas overall. Proportions varied from 5.6% in Port Lincoln

and 2.9% in Lower Eyre Peninsula, to 0.8% in Tumby Bay.

When compared with the non-metropolitan areas overall, the Lower Eyre Peninsula

Group has 10% fewer people with a profound or severe disability, and were living in the

community.

The Index of Relative Socio-economic Disadvantage (IRSD) score indicates a similar

level of relative disadvantage in the Lower Eyre Peninsula Group compared with non-

metropolitan South Australia overall. The lowest scores are in Port Lincoln and Tumby

Bay, with a higher score, and lower relative disadvantage, in Lower Eyre Peninsula.


Almost a quarter (23.9%) of all children under 16 years of age in the Lower Eyre

Peninsula Group were living in low income families receiving welfare payments, the

same as in the non-metropolitan areas overall. Proportions varied from 28.2% in Port

Lincoln, to half that level in Lower Eyre Peninsula.

The estimated obesity rate for males and females in the Lower Eyre Peninsula Group is

19.3% and 17.8%, respectively.

The estimated extent of physical inactivity (39.4%) among the adult population in the

Lower Eyre Peninsula Group in 2007–08 was 4% above the average rate in the non-

metropolitan areas. Port Lincoln had a slightly above-average proportion of its

population who were physically inactive (40.6%).

2.5 Summary

1 A web based survey of 708 respondents suggested, the existing leisure centre pool is

adequate, but improvements are required to increase satisfaction levels.

2 A Community Survey conducted by Council in 2011 found that the preferred location

for a “new community recreation centre” were:

adjoining Centenary Oval and Schools (29% of responses) and

Ravendale Sporting Complex (26%)

with a further 22% supporting a “CBD location”.

3 In August 2013 Council resolved to endorse the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility

Strategy which recommended:

Assess site suitability to establish an aquatic centre on crown land adjacent to

Centenary Oval and Port Lincoln Bowling Club.

25 metre 8 lane pool with minimum depth 1.2 metres to a maximum of 1.5 metres

with disability ramp

Up to 300 m2 multipurpose pool incorporating warm water pool, leisure pool and

learn to swim with beach access

Hydrotherapy pool

Supporting amenities


This Chapter reviews the four potential sites for an indoor aquatic centre.

3.1 Bowling Avenue

The Bowling Avenue site (refer Figure 3.1) is owned by Council and was formerly leased to the

Port Lincoln Bowling Club. The lease over this parcel of land has been relinquished and is

under direct control of Council.

Figure 3.1: Bowling Avenue Site

The site is located on the eastern side of Bowling Avenue. It is bounded by Centenary Oval to

the east, croquet and bowling greens to the south, and residences on the western side of

Bowling Avenue and on the northern boundary of the site.

Based on a site survey undertaken for Council, the site is approximately 139m x 44m, and

slightly irregular (5,896m2). It has a downhill slope from west to east, with a gradient difference

of approximately 5.5m. This offers the opportunity to lower the overall profile of the built

structure and/or make use of a ‘lower level’ space at the eastern end.

A traffic and parking analysis found:

1 Parking availability:

200+ spaces available at the Oval and bowling club car parks.

Shared parking with many other users.

Peak parking times of the Oval is on weekdays after school and on weekends

during football games, albeit football games are seasonal in nature.

Adequate parking is likely to be available.

3 DESCRIPTION OF

POTETNIAL SITES


2 Cater for buses:

Consider a bus bay on Bowling Avenue adjacent to the Aquatic Centre building,

with a pedestrian footpath provided to link the bus bay directly to the entrance

of the Aquatic Centre building. With the subject site being immediately adjacent

to the "school precinct", the site could be accessed on foot by many school

children (school swimming activities), instead of relying on bus transport.

3 Access from the CBD:

In close proximity to the CBD and immediately adjacent to the "school precinct".

4 Future potential impacts:

Not aware of any future development impacts in the immediate area.

Residents immediately to the north of the site may have concerns about traffic

and parking impacts from the site – these will need to be carefully considered

and managed as part of the overall site design.

5 Pedestrian and cyclist access:

Good bicycle and pedestrian facilities present. A path linkage between the

Aquatic Centre site and Centenary Oval should be established to enable shared

use of car parking.

Town planning information has been obtained from Council’s planning consultant. Factors

which have to be considered are:

The subject land is zoned Regional Town Centre in the Port Lincoln Development Plan

(Consolidated 24th October 2013) as highlighted on Map PtL/5 that under Objective 1

seeks recreational facilities. A swimming pool is also an envisaged use in Principle of

Development Control 1. The subject land is also located within Policy Area 8 –

Community/Education.

An indoor aquatic facility would be assessed on its merits and as a Category 1 form of

development for public notification purposes in the subject zone. Subject to design the

application should be achievable with the areas likely to require the most

consideration being:

car parking,

height, and

transition to adjoining residential development.

The ability to ‘fit’ the facility along with an acceptable level of car parking is may be

challenging. The Development Plan car parking Table is silent with respect to this type

of facility. There is an ability to possibly have a ‘shared’ car parking facility with the

existing bowling club and Centennial oval.

Policy Area 8 also stipulates a 12.0 metre height limit (above natural ground level),

which may not be able to be achieved and would have to be justified if a new

building goes over this height.

The land holds existing use rights for recreational purposes as a bowling club and within

the subject locality there is a mix of recreational uses, school uses and residential.

The land is centrally located within the Central Port Lincoln township so has easy

walking distance to main streets, the beach and the jetty. There would also be an

opportunity for this site to take advantage of excellent ‘city’ views to the north.

The gradient of the subject land is also considered reasonable for development with

minimal cut and or fill required to provide a benched site for development of the

facility.

The building is not heritage listed so could be demolished subject to approval.

Vegetation – there are minimal trees on the subject land that could be removed

without issue.


Access to the site is existing but would need to be widened and formalized.

There are no Development Plan Amendments (DPA’s) that would impact the subject

land.

3.2 Ravendale Oval Site

Ravendale Oval complex (refer Figure 3.2) is owned by Council and is a large multipurpose

recreation and sporting facility. Sporting facilities include two football/cricket ovals, baseball

diamond, synthetic and grass hockey pitches, netball and tennis courts. The area proposed

to be used for an aquatic centre is bordered in red. This part of the Oval has been cleared

and has no buildings upon it.

Figure 3.2: Ravendale Oval Site

The site is located on the northern side of Windsor Avenue. It is surrounded by sporting

facilities in Ravendale Oval complex on three sides. To the south is Windsor Avenue and light

industrial properties and the Port Lincoln Racecourse.

A detailed survey has not been undertaken. Based on Google Earth the site is approximately

90m x 60m - 40m (3,700m2). It is a flat site.



Very large parking areas available, well in excess of 200+ spaces.

Shared parking with many other users.

Peak parking times of the Oval is on Saturdays, albeit football games and netball

games are seasonal in nature.

The existing car parks are used to high occupancies.

Additional car parking (60-70 spaces) could be provided on vacant land

adjacent to the subject site if necessary (refer to Figure 3.3). With the additional

parking provided, adequate parking is likely to be available.


Figure 3.3: Additional parking if required within the Oval site

2 Cater for buses:

Consider a bus bay on Windsor Avenue adjacent to the Aquatic Centre building,


of the Aquatic Centre building.


South of the CBD and reasonably remote from the CBD.


Not aware of any future development impacts in the area, although changes to

the road network for the Lincoln Lakes development in future could see

increased traffic using Windsor Avenue as this road would become one of the

major access road between the CBD and the Port Lincoln marina.


The Parnkalla Trail is remote from the subject site. Given the distance of the

subject site from the main residential areas around the CBD, it is unlikely that

many users would walk or cycle to the facility.



The subject land is zoned Residential in the Port Lincoln Development Plan

(Consolidated 24th October 2013) as highlighted on Map PtL/9 that is relatively silent

with respect to this type of use but does highlight that “small scale non –residential uses

such as recreation areas that serve the local community” are envisaged uses under

PDC 1. The subject land is also located within Policy Area 4 – Southern.

An indoor aquatic facility would be assessed on its merits and would be a Category 3

form of development for public notification purposes pursuant to Schedule 9 of the

Development Regulations 2008 wherein all adjoining landowners would be written to

directly and an advert would be placed in the local newspaper. Any representors who

lodge a submission would also have appeal rights to the ERD Court. This has the

potential to possibly delay the application process but it is impossible to predict what

level of support or objection there might be to a proposal of this nature.

Subject to design the application should be achievable.


The Development Plan car parking Table is silent with respect to this type of facility.

There is an ability to have a ‘shared’ car parking facility with the existing Ravendale

Sporting Complex.

The land holds existing use rights for recreational purposes as part of the Ravendale

Sporting Complex and an indoor aquatic facility would no doubt enhance the mix of

recreational uses on the subject land and locality.

There is a Masterplan for the Ravendale Sporting Complex, which highlights the subject

land was going to be dedicated for a future toilet block and Aboriginal & Horticultural

Society Building… this Masterplan would need to be reconsidered as part of the

proposal.

The land is not centrally located within the Port Lincoln township so would most likely

require vehicle access for most patrons.

The gradient of the subject land is flat so very minimal cut and or fill would be required

to provide a benched site for development of the facility.

The land remains vacant so no demolition required.

Vegetation – there are no trees on the subject land requiring removal.

Access to the site is existing through an internal sport complex access road.


land.

3.3 Mortlock Terrace Site

The Mortlock Terrace site (refer Figure 3.4) is owned by the State Government and is a

triangular parcel of vacant land. It is currently for sale, with an asking price of $925,000,

Figure 3.4: Mortlock Terrace Site

The site is located on the northern side of Porter Street, between Mortlock Terrace and

Blackman Place. Residential properties abut the west and northern boundaries of the site. On

the western side of Mortlock Terrace St Joseph’s School, Port Lincoln Primary School and Port


Lincoln High School are located. On the south side of Porter Street is the rail yards, and north

of Blackman Place are a mix of residential, retail and commercial properties.

At the intersection of Mortlock Terrace and Blackman Place is a Council owned parcel of

land. It Is currently occupied by a community arts groups - Arteyrea Workshop.

A detailed survey has not been undertaken. Based on Google Earth the site is approximately

145m x 100m x 160m (7,250m2). It has a gentle downhill slope from east to west.



Potentially approximately 80 spaces could be provided within a new car park.

More parking could be made available, if additional site area, clear of the

building footprint, is provided to fit more parking in.

2 Cater for buses:

Consider a bus bay on Porter Street adjacent to the Aquatic Centre building,


of the Aquatic Centre building.


In close proximity to the CBD and close to the "school precinct".


DPTI road. A sheltered right turn lane would be required on Porter Street for entry

to the site, which could require some localised road widening. Not aware of any

other future development impacts in the immediate area.


Blackman Place is part of the Council's bicycle route. Footpaths are available on

the main roads.



The subject land is zoned Regional Town Centre in the Port Lincoln Development Plan

(Consolidated 24th October 2013) as highlighted on Maps PtL/6 & 9 that under

Objective 1 seeks recreational facilities. A swimming pool is also an envisaged use in

Principle of Development Control 1. The subject land is also located within Policy Area

9 – Non-Core Retail.

An indoor aquatic facility would be assessed on its merits and as a Category 1 form of

development for public notification purposes in the subject zone.

Subject to design the application should be achievable with car parking, height and

transition to adjoining residential development being the areas that would require the

most consideration along with the awkward triangular shaped nature of the site and

the as of yet unknown Secondary Arterial Road frontage access requirements.

The ability to ‘fit’ the facility along with an acceptable level of car parking is going to

be challenging.

The Development Plan car parking Table is silent with respect to this type of facility.

Policy Area 9 also stipulates a 12.0 metre height limit (above natural ground

level),which may not be able to be achieved and would have to be justified.

The land is vacant and void of built form with no existing use rights or approvals on the

subject land.

The land is reasonably centrally located on the margins of the Central Port Lincoln


township but on a busy arterial road with limited footpaths is not considered ideal (at

the current point in time) for pedestrian access.

The gradient of the subject land is reasonable for development but would require some

level of earthworks to cut from higher areas and fill the lower depression areas.

Vegetation – there are numerous trees on the subject land that could be native and as

such would require approval under the Native Vegetation Act .

Access to the site is not formally existing and would require a reasonably widened and

formalized access point and possibly a left hand slip lane in and out. It is also unlikely

that right hand turn access across double lanes heading south west would be

approved… further liaison with the Department of Planning Transport & Infrastructure

(DPTI) would be required to work through appropriate access requirements on ‘their’

road.


land.

3.4 Existing Leisure Centre Site

The existing leisure centre (refer Figure 3.5) is owned by the Sarin Group. The complex

comprises three interlocking buildings, which are all self contained – the aquatic centre, the

basketball stadium and Sarin Group offices.

Figure 3.5: Existing Leisure Centre

The site is located in Lincoln Cover Marina, on Jubilee Drive. Car parking and access road

create a buffer between the leisure centre and residential properties.

Subject to negotiations yet to occur, a separate title would be created for the swimming

pool component of the property and Council would purchase the existing Leisure Centre site

for a negotiated price. The scope and cost of mechanical, hydraulic, structural and

aesthetic renewal and upgrade of the existing facility is to be examined in Phase 3 of this

Feasibility Review.


Preliminary plans indicate that the swimming pool building and minimal surrounding land will

occupy 3,130m2. This does not include any of the car parking areas surrounding the leisure

centre, and on-going attribution of parking to meet the Centre’s needs would need to

negotiated (probably at a cost).

This site presents an alternative to selecting a ‘green fields’ site and developing a new

swimming facility, instead involving the likely major upgrade of the existing 1980’s facility. This

will involve a different set of risks and opportunities and likely result in a community facility

with shorter asset life than the ‘build new’ approach would provide.



200+ spaces available.

Adequate parking would be available.

Not owned or controlled by Council and likely to be subsumed in a future

redevelopment of consolidated Sarin Group land holdings, unless otherwise

agreed.

2 Cater for buses:

Bus drop off and pick up catered for.


Remote from the CBD.


The future Lincoln Lakes development would see Marina Drive closed off and a

new road network established further to the west. Access to the subject site

would therefore become more circuitous.


The Parnkalla Trail passes the subject site. However, given the remoteness of the

subject site from the main residential areas around the CBD, it is unlikely that

many users would walk or cycle to the facility.



The subject land is zoned Residential in the Port Lincoln Development Plan

(Consolidated 24th October 2013) as highlighted on Map PtL/10 that that is relatively

silent with respect to this type of use but does highlight that “small scale non –

residential uses such as recreation areas that serve the local community” are

envisaged uses under PDC 1. The land holds existing use rights for recreational purposes

as an aquatic centre.

There is an ability to possibly have a ‘shared’ car parking facility with adjoining

recreational and hotel uses if it is considered the current facility requires expanding.

The land is not centrally located within the Port Lincoln township so access to the site is

required via a vehicle.

The building is not heritage listed so could be demolished (if the facility was to be

replaced).

Vegetation – the landscaping has already been developed around the building and

car parking.

Access to the site is existing.


land.


This chapter assesses the four potential sites against seven criteria using a Decision Grid

analysis tool. Each site is then assessed using a subjective or qualitative assessment.

4.1 Assessment Criteria

Criteria which can be used to assess each potential site.

CRITERIA 1: LAND SIZE

Estimate of Parking Requirement

Based on a private pool facility in metropolitan Adelaide:

60 spaces (weekdays) to 80 spaces (weekend).

Based on a public pool facility in metropolitan Adelaide:

Estimated maximum number of people at any one time during the peak hour of

approximately 300.

100 to 120 spaces.

Estimate of Building Footprint

A preliminary estimate of the area required to develop an indoor aquatic centre including

the components recommended in the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility Strategy.

Component Size (m2)

Wet Areas

25 metre x 8 lane pool with disability ramp (25m x 21m) 525

300m2 multipurpose pool 300

Hydrotherapy pool (10m x 5m) 50

Concourse (5m around all pools and 10m between main and program pools) 560

Sub Total 1,435

Dry Areas

Offices (1 x 16m2 and 2 x 10m2), 36

Administration area 20

Staff facilities 20

First Aid Room 10

Storage areas 30

Entry foyer, reception and kiosk/café 100

Male and female change rooms with separate cubicles (2 x 100m2) 200

Parents change room and toilets (3 x 5m2) 15

Seating and viewing facilities 100

Plant room 100

Crèche (not included) 0

Program room (not included) 0

Circulation (20% dry floor space) 125

Sub Total 756

Total 2,191

4 ASSESSMENT OF SITES


Estimate of External Areas

A preliminary estimate of the external areas surrounding an indoor aquatic centre, with the

features summarised above.

Component Size (m2)

Outdoor Areas

Setback from boundaries including landscaping (3m x 190m ie 45m x 50m) 570

Grassed outdoor space 500

Car parking, access and circulation (30m2 x 120 spaces) 3,600

Total 4,670

Total Land Areas Required

It is estimated that the total land area required to develop an indoor aquatic centre

including the components recommended in the Community Aquatic Swimming Facility

Strategy is:

Building footprint 2,191m2

External areas 4,670m2

Total 6,761m2

CRITERIA 2: AVAILABILITY OF LAND

The land must be available to be developed within the next 12 – 18 months. It may require

purchase of the land or vacant possession of land either owned or under care and control of

Council.

CRITERIA 3: COST OF LAND

The land may be required to be purchased, rehabilitated or cleared. Each of these actions

will involve a cost to Council. Clearly, the lower the cost, the more suitable the land is for

development of an aquatic centre.

CRITERIA 4: ZONING

The land must be zoned as appropriate for development of an aquatic centre. If rezoning is

required, the potential difficulties and time taken to be rezoned will have to be considered.

CRITERIA 5: COMPATIBILITY WITH ADJACENT PROPOERTIES

In addition to zoning, ideally the aquatic centre will be developed on land which is

compatible with the uses of adjacent properties. In general terms this will usually include

commercial, schools, recreation and sport uses.

As a relatively high visitor facility, locating an aquatic centre within a residential area or

adjacent to residential properties can create a nuisance for residents due to noise and traffic

movements.

CRITERIA 6: ACCESSIBLITY

Although the vast majority of users of aquatic centres travel by car, the travel time and ease

of access is important. Consequently, ideally an aquatic centre will be located close to, but

not necessarily within, residential areas. The closer the proximity of an aquatic centre to

schools, particularly primary schools, the greater the probability of it being used for aquatic

education.

CRITERIA 7: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE

The characteristics of a site will affect both the design and cost of development. Factors


which may have a negative impact on the cost of development include topography,

contamination, geographical features, native title, environmental sensitivity and access to

services.

4.2 Decision Grid

A comparative assessment of the four sites using a Decision Grid and the criteria listed above

is summarised in Table 4.1. Each criteria has been weighted to recognise its relative

importance in deciding the best location for an aquatic centre. The raw score is then

multiplied by the weighting to determine the weighted score.

The key points to note from this table are:

Ravendale Oval and Bowling Avenue sites are the two with the highest raw scores and

weighted scores.

Ravendale Oval has a slightly higher weighted score than Bowling Avenue.

Both Mortlock Terrace and the Leisure Centre have the same raw score. When

weighted scores are computed, Mortlock Terrace scores higher than the Leisure

Centre.

Table 4.1: Decision Grid

Bowling

Avenue

Ravendale

Oval

Mortlock

Terrace

Leisure

Centre

Criteria Wtg Raw

Score

Wtd

Score

Raw

Score

Wtd

Score

Raw

Score

Wtd

Score

Raw

Score

Wtd

Score

Land Size 10 8 80 9 90 10 100 6 60

Availability 9 10 90 10 90 10 90 10 90

Cost 8 10 80 10 80 5 40 6 48

Zoning 8 8 64 8 64 8 64 8 64

Compatibility 7 8 56 9 63 7 49 10 70

Accessibility 7 9 63 7 49 8 56 7 49

Characteristics 7 9 63 9 63 7 49 8 56

Total

62 496 62 499 55 448 55 437

4.3 Qualitative Assessment

Each potential site is assessed based on its major advantages and disadvantages.

4.3.1 Bowling Avenue

Advantages

Close to CBD

Close to schools

Central to residential areas

Good access by schools and residential suburbs

Relatively flat site

Council owned land – no cost to purchase

Within a recreation and sport “precinct”

Can achieve approximately 90 car parking spaces on-site

Existing car parking in adjacent, Council owned facilities


Disadvantages

Bounded by residential properties on two sides

Access via a part - residential street

Car parking on adjacent land may be required at peak swimming pool demand times

to ensure adequate off street parking

4.3.2 Ravendale Oval

Advantages

Within a recreation and sport “precinct”

Adequate existing car parking in adjacent, Council owned facilities

Relatively flat site

Council owned land – no cost to purchase

Traffic and noise unlikely to impact neighbouring properties

Disadvantages

Most users will travel by vehicle (schools and families)

Perceived to be “long way” from residential areas, and limited potential users within

walking distance

Will require use of existing parking spaces in the Oval complex, and the attribution of

up to 70 new spaces on the Ravendale complex site, reducing flexibility for future

growth of the complex’s sports facilities

4.3.3 Mortlock Terrace

Advantages

Close to CBD

Close to schools

Within residential area

Reasonable access by schools and residential suburbs

Car parking needs can be met on-site

Disadvantages

Sloping site which may require substantial cut and fill

Shape of land will require creative design of facility

Vehicular access may be a problem

Residential properties abut the site on two sides

Relatively high cost to purchase land

4.3.4 Leisure Centre

Advantages

Existing aquatic centre

Within a leisure precinct

Reasonable level of use of the site

Disadvantages

Site will have to be purchased

Site does not have space for car parking – will have to negotiate purchase or access

to adjacent car parks

Substantial (unknown) cost to upgrade the existing aquatic centre


Perceived to be a long way from schools and residential areas – limited users within

walking distance

Existing aquatic components do not meet expectations of proposed new facility (eg 8

lane pool)

Existing facility has design and layout limitations which may require substantial

remodelling to meet contemporary standards

4.4 Summary

Both Bowling Avenue and Ravendale Oval are suitable sites for developing an aquatic

centre. They have adequate land for the aquatic centre and associated car parking and

are relatively flat sites within recreation and sport precincts.

Anecdotal information together with the recommendation of the Council’s Community

Reference Group, suggests that Bowling Avenue may be considered as a better site as it is

closer to schools, and hence both enhances accessibility generally and reduces transport

costs for schools. Whilst this is obviously important, it is unlikely that the same facility located at

Ravendale Oval would experience significantly lower attendances and revenues,

Similarly, the perception is that an aquatic centre must be close, or central, to residential

areas, for ease of access. In practice most users travel by car, with younger users

(teenagers) cycling to the venue. In this regard, both Bowling Avenue and Ravendale Oval

have similar beneficial attributes.

In distinguishing between the advantages and disadvantages of the Bowling Avenue and

Ravendale sites:

The Bowling Avenue site is likely to achieve more alternative mode (pedestrian, bike,

bus, wheelchair, gopher, etc) travel than Ravendale will. This has the potential to

increase patronage, and will support healthy and more sustainable travel mode

choices.

The Bowling Avenue site will provide the opportunity for consolidation of journeys to

multiple destinations in the CBD.

The Bowling Avenue site was clearly favoured by the Community Reference Group.

The Bowling Avenue site can accommodate more parking within its own site than the

Ravendale site. The latter will rely on either using spaces that already nominally serve

other sports users, where the peak demands don’t coincide; and/or allocation of new

or existing spaces within Ravendale sports ‘precinct’, making them not ‘countable’ for

other future Ravendale sports facilities.

The Bowling Ave site has the potential of being extended, should that be necessary, if

the small membership of the croquet club disbands or relocates to another site.

Given the ongoing complaints about the non-central location of the existing leisure

centre over the last two decades, it is likely that “the weight of community opinion”

would favour the Bowling Avenue site to the Ravendale Oval site.

Consequently, it is recommended that the feasibility study assess the operational viability of

developing an aquatic centre on the Bowling Avenue site. In particular, the site and building

design will need to carefully consider and manage impacts on residential land to the north

of the site.

city of port lincoln assessment... · 1 introduction ... 2.1 city of port lincoln community survey...

Documents