|
|
|
ALBERT PARK SNAPSHOTS
Top of this page
ALBERT PARK ROADS STILL UNSAFE
Save Albert Park has had a joint meeting with Parks Victoria and a representative of the Motorcycle Riders Association of Australia regarding roadside barriers. Following on from that meeting we have written to Parks Victoria raising a series of questions about the implementation of the "Albert Park Traffic Management Implementation Plan".
This document appears to be the basis of Parks Victoria's recent and ongoing strategy for the rectification of road safety problems in Albert Park.
SAP's letter raised a number of questions relating to the tardiness of the implementation and the funding of the recommended 100 "treatments".
The study brief required that the consultant prepare "detailed cost estimates for proposals". The draft report included headings for the approximate cost of each recommended treatment, but not the cost estimates. However, in the final report the headings referring to costings had been deleted!
Parks Victoria was obviously very conscious of the seriousness of the road safety problems in the Park. As the brief stated: "Parks Victoria considers resolution of these issues as a matter of urgency", so it would be of interest to hear why the draft report was six months late and the final report 12 months late.
Implementation of the recommended road safety treatments was to commence in July 1998, but the lack of progress has been disturbing, particularly given the urgency expressed in the brief. Even some of the works designated as Stage 1 priority have not yet been completed.
Question - Why, three years after initiation of a project which Parks Victoria considered "a matter of urgency," have the highest priority recommended treatments not yet been implemented?
Lack of funding has been given as a reason for delay in implementation of some of the works. However, the brief stated that the works were urgent and implementation was to commence in July 1998. Presumably funds had been allocated for the anticipated works at that time.
Question - Did the estimated cost of the works substantially exceed the allocated funds?
Question - What funding had been allocated for the works in 1998/1999, 1999/2000?
Many of the road safety issues that required 'treatments' were a direct result of the reconstruction of the roads in Albert Park, by the Australian Grand Prix Corporation, into a motor racing circuit. It was the Corporation's responsibility to ensure that the track was safe as a public road.
Question - Why should the recommended "treatments" not be funded by the Australian Grand Prix Corporation?
Top of this page
3CR COMMUNITY RADIO
UNCENSORED AND OUTSPOKEN ANNUAL RADIOTHON
4-17 JUNE - TARGET $125,000
This year, the international year of the volunteer, 3CR celebrates 25 years of volunteer-driven broadcasting, which has allowed the station to remain free from censorship and corporate sponsorship. 3CR is committed to providing independent and alternative coverage of social, cultural and political developments in Melbourne. It relies on the support of the community and the work of its 400 volunteers to keep it on air. Listen to the SAP program for details of how you can help, or call 9419 8377 with your donation. Donations over $2 are tax deductible.
Top of this page
SAP submission to
Advisory Committee on the Grand Prix
Save Albert Park has made a substantial submission to the Albert Park Advisory Committee (APAC) on the impact of the
running of the Grand Prix.
Our submission clearly stated that SAP in no way accepts the running of the Grand Prix in Albert Park and it reiterates SAP's
primary objective: "To work towards the total and permanent termination of motor racing in the Albert Park Reserve."
It specifically noted the narrowness of the Committee's Terms of Reference and made it clear that our submission related only to SAP's second objective, namely, "To work to protect the Albert Park Reserve from the impact of the Formula One Grand Prix and other inappropriate development and activities".
The main body of the submission addressed a range of issues relating to the annual AGPC works program and its effect on the Park and its users, and made a series of recommendations.
Issues raised in the submission were supported by documents including relevant Factsheets, Parkwatch Reports 1996-2000, the package on "Traffic Accidents in the Albert
Park Reserve", previous submissions relating to the Park and Park matters, and a selection of photographs.
GRAND PRIX WORKS
The issues included the length of the set-up and take-down times of race infrastructure; the inadequate organisation of the works program; the inability of the Recurrent Works Licence
provisions to minimise inconvenience to park users or prevent damage to the Park; the disruption to club match programs;
the unacceptable damage to sporting fields. Informal recreation is significantly compromised during works and much of the public open space is poorly restored.
Recommendations
- There should be a 30% reduction in the works period, and in the period from when the infrastructure first appears and when it is handed back (post-restoration), and a reduction in the amount of infrastructure.
- Works should be organised so as to minimise inconvenience to Park users, including minimising the amount of time sports fields are occupied by the AGPC.
- The Recurrent Works Licence should be reviewed with the
aim of improving and enforcing standards, including post-race restoration, and should set penalties for non-performance.
KEY AMENITY ISSUES
Our submission also addressed the impacts on key Park
amenities: the five week closure of the Golf Course; one week
closure to the general public of the MSAC; the degraded and
dangerous environment of the Children's Community Playground during the whole works period.Recommendations
- Relocation of part or all of the temporary works compound away from the Community Playground, capping of the safety fence, inclusion of a permanent public toilet block within the safety fence, and stringent traffic controls.
- Relocation of the infrastructure at present erected on the Golf Course so that it need only be closed during race week.
- Fencing off of the MSAC area and securing of the entrance so that no closure is necessary.
- Nomination of an alternative dogs-off-leash area during the works and restoration period.
SAFETY AND TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT
SAP's submission commented critically on the lack of safety for Park users in and outside the race period; unsecured sites; traffic movement in the Park during works causing noise, air pollution and safety hazards for Park users; and the all-year problems
arising from the unsafe Park roads. The submission argued that the problems could only be fully resolved by the relocation of
the event, but made four recommendations:
- Proper securing of all work sites and more stringent monitoring and enforcement of safety measures including traffic control.
- Immediate implementation of traffic control measures to increase road safety, with costs to be borne by the AGPC.
- Registration of all works vehicles, as is required for vehicles in public areas elsewhere.
- No construction works to be carried out during weekends and public holidays.
EFFECT OF THE EVENT ON LOCAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY AND THE COMMUNITY
As a community group, SAP also addressed a number of social, economic and environmental impacts, which are external to the Park, but which we felt should be articulated in support of affected residents and other groups.Recommendations
- Businesses which can demonstrate a financial loss resulting from the Grand Prix to be compensated by the AGPC.
- That the City of Port Phillip take over the task of managing
residents' parking arrangements with all costs to be borne by the AGPC.- That flyovers be discontinued.
OTHER ISSUES
The submission reiterated our concern about the wastage of water in the lead-up to the Grand Prix and about use of advertising in parkland. It called for Grand Prix-related advertising to be restricted to the declared race period and tobacco advertising to
be outlawed.
Finally, the submission addressed a number of broader issues.
First it argued that the impact of the Grand Prix on the Park is related to the numbers attending and there should be a limit on the number of available tickets.
Secondly, the AGPC should be required to pay a commercial rent based on the areas of Park occupied which would provide a financial incentive to the Grand Prix Corporation to achieve a shorter set-up and take-down time. The additional rental would enable Parks Victoria to monitor more closely the works and effects on the Park, and could fund an annual independent social and environmental assessment of the race's impact. This report should be available for public scrutiny.
Amendments to the Australian Grands Prix Act 1994 to ensure greater accountability of the Corporation were also
recommended.
We await with interest the outcome of the Review by the Advisory Committee.
INCORPORATION - THE CAMPAIGN CONTINUES
Save Albert Park is now an incorporated association. This will mean only a few changes to the operations and conduct of SAP, but it should be taken by the Government and Australian Grand Prix Corporation as a message that the campaign to remove motor racing from public parkland is not about to go away.
The SAP Grand Prix attendance count
Why count?
The Grand Prix attendance figures are very important to the State Government and its statutory authority, the Australian Grand Prix Corporation (AGPC), as a measure of popular support for the event.
SAP decided to check AGPC attendance figures in 1997 when sparsely-occupied grandstands indicated that numbers quoted in the press could be inflated. After a trial count of the 1997 event, full attendance counts have been held every year since then.
It has been a lot of work. There are nine public gates (10 in 1998) spaced around a 10km perimeter. The event lasts four days with gates opening at 8 or 7.30am (sometimes earlier) and significant inflow continuing until 2 to 3pm. With three counting operations required at each gate, and the need to count at five
different points at Gate 1 (the main gate) we have needed each year between 100 and 150 people working shifts.
"Attendance" - what does it mean?
"Attendance" could be taken to mean the number of people who come through the gates during the four days of the event. However, this number not only includes race patrons (ticket-holding spectators) but also staff, officials, crews, police, competitors in other events, press, performers and volunteers who all have an issued 'credential' rather than a ticket.
AGPC attendance figures
The AGPC has never answered two critical questions:
1. How does it get its attendance figures?
2. What do their figures mean?
Ticket sales are confidential and there is evidence that a significant number of free tickets is issued. Furthermore, grandstand patrons are obliged to buy four-day tickets and general admission patrons attending on Saturday and Sunday will find it cheaper to buy a four-day ticket. In both cases four "attendances" can be counted whether or not patrons actually use the tickets.
The AGPC has installed electronic gate counters. These counters cannot distinguish between patrons and all those others entering, or between people entering and people leaving the gate, and are sometimes set so low that legs rather than people might be counted.
SAP attendance figures
SAP counts the "total inflow" through the gates, and identifies (by the coloured ticket lanyard) the number of staff etc entering, and also the number of people who use pass-outs and re-enter the gates. The latter two numbers are subtracted from the total inflow to obtain the number of entries of ticket-holders, i.e. the "ticketed attendance". SAP "total inflow" figures and "ticketed attendance" figures for the years 1998-2001 are set out in the table below, and are compared to the "official" AGPC figures.
Findings
¥ Compared with SAP's four-year "total inflow" count, the AGPC's four-year attendance figure has been overstated by 262,000.
¥ Compared with SAP's "ticketed attendance" count, the AGPC's four-year attendance figure has been overstated by 388,000 (or four full MCGs!)
¥ Since 1998 the disparity between the SAP "ticketed atten-dance" figure and the AGPC attendance figure has increased each year, from 60,500 in 1998 to 114,450 in 2001. (See below)
SAP has legitimate concerns about the reliability of a range of information released by the AGPC, and certainly about their claims of support for the event. Clearly, the AGPC would want to boost any indicator of the support for the race at the current location.
Comparison of SAP and AGPC Attendance Figures
AGPC SAP Difference between SAP Difference between
Quoted Total inflow AGPC and SAP Ticketed AGPC and SAP
Figures "total inflow" Attendance "ticketed attendance"
1998 297,000 262,272 -34,728 (-12%) 236,500 -60,500 (-20%)
1999 345,000 267,818 -77,182 (-22%) 242,341 -102,659 (-30%)
2000 359,803 286,792 -73,011 (-20%) 249,542 -110,261 (-31%)
2001 369,100 291,780 -77,320 (-21%) 254,650 -114,450 (-31%)
TOTAL 1,370,903 1,108,662 -262,241 983,033 -387,870
Attendances over the four days of the race period
Note: The increase in the SAP "ticketed attendance" from 1998 onwards is approximately in line with Melbourne's
population growth. In the absence of information released by the AGPC, ticketed attendance can be assumed to include
an unknown number of "reebies" provided by the AGPC.
Attendance takes priority
Announcement by Ron Walker, Chairman of the Australian Grand Prix Corporation at the conclusion of the F1 GP on
4 March 2001:
"Ladies and gentlemen, on a day when 128,500 people attended this track, and 380,000 over four days, it is with great regret that we announce the death of one of our
brother track officials in tragic circumstances."
(Footnote: The official AGPC total attendance for 2001 was in fact 369,100 not 380,000.)
Albert Park Circuit safety news Alan Attwood's Sunday Age (29/4) feature on the death of the marshal at this year's Grand Prix reinforced our argument in the April Newsletter that this accident has underlined the problems of not using a permanent track.
Evidence given to police has pointed out that there are important differences in design and layout between safety fencing at Albert Park and most other formula one venues. Attwood's sources all indicated that more public money would have to be spent addressing the safety issue.
The article made the alarming point that "Unlike most permanent race circuits, the Albert Park track does not have a dedicated service road for emergency vehicles. Hence the surreal scene that followed: the ambulance pausing, giving way to the safety car and the 17 speed machines behind it."
The message is getting across Our campaign received major coverage in the Malaysian New Sunday Times immediately preceding the Australian Grand Prix. The detailed information on the campaign since 1994 and the reasons for our protest were comprehensively reported and provided evidence that the hard work of preparing and disseminating information continues to be rewarded.
Closer to home, a letter in the April 2001 issue of the professional journal Civil Engineers Australia raised the issue of pollution caused by major events. "Consider motor racing. The pollution costs for the Formula 1 series of motor racing must be substantial. The quality of life costs extend well beyond the blatant expenditure of fuel, rubber and machinery during practice session and racing. There are also the manufacturing, transport and social (noise, loss of public space etc) components that need to be considered."
ALBERT PARK MASTER PLAN REVIEW
Representatives from Save Albert Park recently met with the consultant conducting the community consultation for Parks Victoria.
We took the opportunity to comment on the framing of the questions on the Feedback Sheet and to provide background on the original 1993 Draft Strategy Plan and the flawed implementation of the 1999 Master Plan. We argued that the Review of the Master Plan should have been linked to the Albert Park Advisory Committee process (see story above).
It now transpires that the outcome of the Review will not be a new Master Plan but a "Future Directions Plan" which will provide a vision, objectives and a "framework" for
decision-making. We were assured that the draft plan would be made freely available to the general community through local libraries as well as to the "stakeholders" for comment towards the end of June.
Members are urged to read the draft and make written or oral comments. SAP is recognised as a key informant or stakeholder and will have an opportunity to make oral and written representations to the Reference Group.
FROM THE VIGIL
"Facts do not cease because they are ignored".
Aldous Huxley's words were the appropriate message for our Vigil banner at this time of year when two sports fields remain unplayable and while there are areas of the Park that will not regenerate from one Grand Prix to the next.
This message went with the Vigil to the Parks Day festival in Albert Park organised by Parks Victoria. The yellow umbrella, with its bobbing balloons, was a bright spot among the white marquees, sheep dog trials and multitude of other activities.
The highlight of the Vigil display was a series of "Before and After" photographs illustrating the damage done to the Park each year and reviving memories of favourite places before the days of the Grand Prix-related "enhancement" of the Park.
Governments and individuals may deny that motor racing in
a public park is wrong, but the visual facts cannot be ignored! They are a tangible record of the ill-effects of a car race on a
public park.
Day 2000 of our record-breaking vigil is approaching and will be celebrated in early July.
See the July newsletter for details.
VALE MAC
Mac Caton, a staunch friend and supporter of the campaign, died suddenly on 20th April. Our sympathy goes to Elizabeth and to Mac's family.
FRIENDS OF THE ABC RALLY
Treasury Gardens, Melbourne
Sunday, 17 June, starting 11.00 am
To farewell the Friends of the ABC bus and cavalcade to Canberra, and to convince politicians that Australians want their National broadcaster independent, comprehensive and commercial-free.
Speakers include Rod Quantock, Max Gillies, Ramona Koval, Shaun Micallef.
