The future of the Glenorchy War Memorial Pool site remains uncertain. While Labor and Liberal parties “promised” five million dollars to “repair” the pool, we will have to wait to see whether those promises are “core promises”.

While the management by the Council of the Pool has not been flawless, it is too easy to push all the blame for the current situation – a closed and empty pool – on Council.

A squeaky door gets the most attention they say. One reason that the pool has reached this stage is the lack of an organized body to lobby on its behalf. While the public have used the pool since its construction, fewer and fewer organizations have maintained a continuous connection with the pool. And fewer and fewer people have used the pool.

Sports clubs have a vested interest in the condition of the places they play and practice their sport. They also have an interest in the facilities attached to those places. Cricket clubs their grounds, yacht clubs their launching ramps, rowing clubs their pontoons, BMX clubs their tracks, bowls clubs their greens and facilities, tennis clubs their courts and facilities.

But the pool since the turn of the century has had no significant body lobbying on its behalf. Around that time the Hobart Aquatic Centre became fully operational, the chief swimming coach Chris Wedd at Glenorchy moved to Hobart, took most of his charges with him, and started a new club. The Glenorchy Swimming Club faded away without a strong purpose or strong leadership.

Those who have used the pool since then have enjoyed its availability but don’t appear to have contemplated the possibility that it might stop being available. While individuals may have thought about it, there was no organization to work for the pool.

A lobby group nagging Council or politicians can create friction, create some noise. And if they do that regularly then their facility will not be forgotten.

One good thing that may arise from the current situation is a single organized body. A body which:
• is democratic with leadership elected by its members,
• cares about the pool and its future,
• represents the interests of the individuals and groups using the pool,
• works with Council to develop long term plans for the pool,
• raises funds for improvements to the pool,
• actively promotes the pool as a recreational destination,
• provides volunteers to assist with pool operation e.g. mowing the lawns and keeping the premises clean, etc.

And there must be people in Glenorchy willing to take on leadership roles in that organization. If we depend on Council to create that body and keep it operating, we have failed.

So regardless of what we eventually see on the pool land, the existence of such a body is essential.

On Monday 18 March 2024 the Glenorchy Planning Authority (GPA) rejected a Development Application (DA) proposing a small business development on a private property almost at the end of Fairy Glen Road in Collinsvale. The vote was 3 for, 2 against – as close as it gets.

The rejection had in fact been recommended by council staff who were not persuaded by the conclusions of a Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) commissioned by the proponent.

I should start by saying that virtually every member of the GPA said at some point that they felt “conflicted” as they decided how they would vote. Disagreeing with the recommendation of planning staff has historically been very rare. It can create difficulties later in the decision-making process. One is finding a planning expert willing to defend the GPA decision should the proponent or any representor decide to appeal.

Most of the “confliction” related to the safety of people driving along the single lane road (gravel-covered track?) which provides the only vehicular access to properties on Fairy Glen Road.

For most of its length, it winds along a steep hillside. The downhill side of the road generally has a soft verge, so much so that council has placed a load limit on vehicles using the road. That means that Veolia waste collection does not happen on this road.

For a 570 metre stretch of the road, there is nothing that could be described as a “passing bay”. Council staff made it very clear that the construction of anything along like a passing bay, even it were possible (which they doubt), would be extremely expensive. And attempting to pass on the soft verge is very risky business.

Clearly those who live in the eight or so residences along the road have found a way to cope with the limitations of the road. They have adapted. The proposal involved the use of a minibus to bring tourists to the development, ostensibly to reduce traffic. The more likely reason is to reduce the likelihood of tourists with no knowledge of the local circumstances having to deal with risky situations or poor road conditions.

Despite what you might hear from property developers, outright rejection of development applications is rare. There is in fact a slight positive bias toward development. Council staff will work hard to find ways to make development possible. Staff advise developers on aspects of a design that may be problematic. Staff will try to find a set of conditions to attach to the permit which make the development compliant.

In this case, the critical issue is the dangerous 570 metres; dangerous because of lack of passing, dangerous because of soft verges, dangerous because of slippery surface when wet.

In conclusion, providing the GPA decision is upheld on any appeal, this decision makes me wonder about the long-term future of Fairy Glen Road, residential or business. The arguments used for this DA could equally apply to any future development. A subdivision would introduce additional regulation. But suppose current residents proposed infill development inside their properties. How would the GPA react?

Council is between a rock and a hard place. As a public road, Council has responsibility for its upkeep. The current road infrastructure is substandard but Council does not have the funds or resources to make it standard. It would be unfair to expect current residents to move away; they seem in any case to have adapted. The most equitable approach is to leave the situation as it is but not allow further development that would make it worse, say by increasing traffic.

The map accompanying this post summarizes the results of the site inspection of problematic 570m. Source: p33 of meeting agenda.

The closure of the Glenorchy pool has touched a nerve for many who live here. There is a campaign underway to “Save The Pool”.

But the closure, along with the high cost of repair or replacement, as well as the annual $400k subsidy coming out of our rates, force us to give more thought to how we react, how we decide how to proceed.

Let’s start by looking at what the pool was for. Of course we go there to swim. But there is more to it than that.

It is a “memorial” pool. It was intended to remind us of sacrifices made in the two world wars. It’s doubtful that it does any more because in recent times most remembrance services have been elsewhere. There are memorial plaques in the pool but they get little attention. So couldn’t the plaques be moved to a more appropriate location?

And the pool has lanes designed for practice or competition. They were well used until just before 2000. There was an active swimming club based at the pool. But it seems the fate of the club was sealed when head coach Chris Wedd moved to the new indoor Hobart Aquatic Centre where he started the Hobart Aquatic Club. More recently it has only been the hardy few using the lanes for an energizing early morning swim.

In times gone by, schools used the pool for their annual swimming carnivals. But that has become rare as schools want to avoid the vagaries of the weather at the covered Hobart Aquatic Centre or private pools.

So do we need the lanes of a competitive pool? Does any replacement even need to be rectangular?

And many of those angry about the closure probably recall their younger days when they often used the pool in summer either with their parents, family, or friends – a place of recreation and social activity.

One more you may have missed, obvious but easily overlooked. The pool provided a way for people to cope with a hot day. Glenorchy, despite being beside a large river, has virtually nowhere outdoors where people can get relief from the heat. It now has none. Some might have noticed a modest water feature in the defunct proposal for the Montrose Bay. The Goodwood substitute has none.

So clearly the pool served a variety of purposes for a variety of different groups. And different groups will rank their importance differently.

In discussing potential futures for the pool, one useful approach might be to focus on each purpose, contemplate whether Glenorchy needs something in future to serve that purpose, then think about where and how that purpose might be addressed.

Currently the pool serves various purposes. It may well be that it makes sense to have purposes served in different places. Maybe there is something which is a dedicated memorial. Maybe there is no longer any need for a facility for lane swimming. Maybe we do not need a pool as such but a place for water-based recreation.

So I ask – why is the pool important to you?

When pedestrians find existing pathways or roadways inconvenient or dangerous, they will naturally look for alternatives. When there is no marked path, people will work it out for themselves – and make their own path. We might call it a shortcut. But a path made that way is, in the jargon of urban design, called a desire line or desire path. The image for this post shows an example running down from McVilly Drive down to the Intercity Cycleway.

Maybe the architect or designer gave more thought to the aesthetics (or the cost) than to whether people would actually use them.

In some situations, designers build no path, wait to see where people walk, then build the path there.

I’ve written about desire lines here because the term appears in the agenda for the July 2023 GPA meeting (page 15). The agenda item concerns a proposed development at 72-74 Main Road, Claremont, and contains a few paragraphs arguing for no change to the service road for the new development. It is part of an attempt (perfunctory as usual) to consider the needs of pedestrians. It is as weak as dishwater.

It was really a token gesture because, as you can see below, the current service road provides no safety for pedestrians. And there is too little space on its verges to provide any.

In any case, it would be truly miraculous for the needs of pedestrians to be a serious part of any GPA discussion.

A desire line will usually be the shortest or quickest route from A to B. But not always. People can take account of details in the landscape. And there may be more than one desire line from A to B, with one going up and the other going down, depending on the terrain.

Next time you go walking, notice where you walk, and you will occasionally find yourself on a desire line (possibly even starting a new one).

For more information

1. Desire paths: the illicit trails that defy the urban planners from the Guardian.
2. Desire lines: to pave or not to pave? from the University of New South Wales.
3. Desire lines: signs of bad design? from Daniel Bowen.
4. What desire paths can tell us about how to design safer, better public spaces from the ABC (Australia).

Note

The image for this post is the desire path running down from McVilly Drive
to Intercity Cycleway in Hobart near the Regatta Ground. Photo taken 27 July 2023.

Recent reports of construction and demolition work on the Claremont Primary School site prompted me to find out more. Below are direct quotes from replies from someone intimately involved in the development project.

My first question related to the work going on now.

“[I’m] happy to say that the demolition of the newer extensions to the school are as per our DA permit. We are also adding temporary protective works to the roof and making the walls of the main building more secure to try and stop unauthorised ingress and protect more from weather. These were requirements of the permit and the owner felt it was best to do them now while we still work on finalising the project so as to not risk any further damage. 

This will hopefully make the site less of an attraction to vandals and make it harder for them to get in to the lovely main building that of course remains and will have its facade restored to its previous state. The grounds will also be easier to upkeep as it will remove a number of hazards on the ground. 

We are still the architects and still working hard to get the best results for everyone including the local community.”

Email received July 2, 2023 with minor edits for readability.

My next question related to possible changes to the original design.

“There is not much I can say due to commercial confidentiality but also simply things not being finalised in terms of decision as to what if anything to change.

As you are aware covid and other recent events have affected the construction industry heavily in terms of material costs and other site costs which affected many projects across the state in terms of their feasibility studies, Claremont included. We have therefore been working hard with builders and others to understand better the various cost implications of materials etc so we can make sure we document a project that maintains its viability under the new conditions. This has meant exploring options of reducing scale and other elements which may be what you are referring to but I stress that we have not made any decision as to the final outcome of these explorations and that is why we do not wish to be premature in stating that things have or haven’t changed as that just causes confusion, frustration and disappointment.

Our eye is always on making the project as good as it can be for all concerned, and is not priced out of reach for those who wish to live there. We think the market is settling down now with logistics problems and material shortage problems being reduced so we can start to feel more confident in what we have to deal with. The project will be built in stages in over a number of years and so need to get these things right.

I am sorry we cannot be more forthcoming at present, the whole industry is frustrated at the moment, believe me, but we believe some firmness is returning to the relevant areas. Architect is both an art and a business and it is difficult to get these balances right, so we are not going to rush it.”

Email received July 5, 2023

The comments above come directly from someone in the project team. They are the facts.

PS. Received this supplementary information today (July 14) from the same source on the project team:

“The demolition and tidy up for the site should finish next week. We will be leaving some of the slabs as we wish to crush and recycle that material to help with raising the ground level in some locations to help with the local flood issues that was part of our DA requirement. They are also useful for.the builders during construction to place their site huts etc.”

Email received July 14, 2023