The talk around its potential as a site on which to build housing should be removed from any, and all, discussion, in my opinion. I believe that there is a better option for Forbury Park but it involves some forward thinking.
Yes, Dunedin needs more housing, especially more social, co-op, accessible and mixed housing options that provide accommodation for our community. A successful housing development site, no matter which kind, is one where there is easy access to abundant services, supported by the appropriate infrastructure. In my mind, Forbury Park does not tick that box.
An ideal site is one located near good local shops, with regular and frequent public transport options, located close to schools, services and green spaces; combined with a pleasant outlook, built to take advantage of natural light.
So where is this alternative site?
In my opinion, developing mixed community housing on the northern half of Bathgate Park is the ideal location. Envision a three-storey complex with up to 200 to 300 residences. Many of the residents would be able to walk or easily bus to the supermarkets, banks and restaurants and other services around Cargill’s Corner and King Edward St.
There are good schools in the neighbourhood and a number of popular retailers/services as you move along Hillside Rd heading into Caversham.
To be clear, I am proposing only using the ‘‘northern half’’ of the current Bathgate field, leaving the remainder as green space which is vital to the community and would be appreciated by the residents.
It’s important to note that this area sits at a higher elevation than Forbury and as such would require less tidal and flooding mitigation. So ultimately, that’s environmentally appropriate and safer for a residential build.
What about Forbury Park?
If you consider building 100 homes, townhouses or units at Forbury Park, really stop and consider its surroundings.
Firstly, we know that it is in the high-risk tidal and flood-prone zone — and as such will require a significant infrastructure and engineering mitigation strategies to build, which will increase the build costs and expenses significantly.
It has limited bus services (a basic residential route); retail exists as essentially one or two local dairies (one located by the Ice Stadium), but otherwise you need to head to the restaurants at St Clair or back to the bottom of Prince Albert.
Schools are further away, as compared to the other option. Traffic flow would be significantly impacted, with many cars added to the narrow network road. All up, to me it just doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Alternatively, I propose that we consider relocating the Bathgate Park users, as we’ve just redeveloped their field. The Southern Rugby Club is likely to be one of the most affected, along with other community/school sports.
I am sure they would love a new sports ground which could be located at Forbury Park; its grandstand and facilities would be ideal for watching activities across three playing fields and provide clubrooms and change rooms for players. A bank surrounding the playing fields would capture water in severe flooding events, relieve pressures on the surrounding neighbourhood and be a lot less expensive to develop.
So now is not the time to rush in and sign up Forbury Park for a housing development.
Now is actually the time to press the ‘‘pause button’’ and talk about what is needed in the area of South Dunedin as a whole.
Let’s explore other options and opportunities and not be driven by commercial or other interests where the money will be taken out of Dunedin by the New Zealand racing groups.
Instead look at options where the proceeds stay in Dunedin, and work in the best interest of the Dunedin community.
Comments
Very sensible suggestions.
My only quibble is that building at Bathgate Park is merely delaying the inevitable given the problems with the entire land area that comprises South D., but nevertheless glad to see someone has some common sense. Thank you.
Uh huh. Community housing adjacent to Hillside Road?
Without a byline, might it be best to avoid the first person?