Do you like what is suggested in the Gold Coast Cultural Precinct Masterplan?

by SiteAdmin, about 3 years ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

In answering this question, you might like to think about things such as use of the open space and grounds and uses or functions of the Cultural Precinct buildings.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link

This consultation has concluded. Information about the consultation, forum comments and related documents are retained for your reference.

  • goldone over 9 years ago
    To create a tue rcultural precinct, I'd like to see the use of all outdoor and indoor spaces used for impromptu and planned performances, displays, exhibitions and readings, as well as, ensuring the precinct has creative spaces for all art forms. A tue cultural precinct interacts with the spaces around it and within and allows both artists and the community to interact with it in a number of unique and interesting ways.
  • Uber over 9 years ago
    A cultural precinct needs to integrate into the city - not stand alone as a beacon of 'culture'. If it cant be located in more urban parts of the city, why not create more 'urbanity' around it. Mixed use buildings with retail and residential uses to create a '24 hour' activity hub that improves connections throughout the site, and to the rest of city.
  • tony over 9 years ago
    Born and bred on the gold coast and almost ashamed to live here. I would not normally be bothered to sigh up to the councils website but feel compelled to do so. Wake up councillors... from tiplers to light rail to allconex to the council chambers. Shame on the people elected to govern the gold coast. . From locals and boaties.... tipplers you should be ashamed why change anything that people knew and loved, what a waste of money. From locals and train enthusiants light rail.... what a waste of resources with damages to locals property and to buisness what a waste of revenue you should be ashamed. From locals and property owners allconex what a money grab people aren't suffering enough financially... you should be ashamed. The redevelopment of the council chambers another waste of money for a perfectly good site as it is...what a waste of money. Call an election early and see who gets re elected for the direction and decent decisions that should have been made and should be made for the gold coast. Soon it will be egypt style reforms for governments
  • GCArch over 9 years ago
    The Evandale site is such a precious jewel. The civic or cultural centre should respect that. However this master plan seems to remove itself from the active edges of the site, prefering to occupy the waters edge and hide from the public via carparks and vegetated parks. The open space of this site is so valuable and hosts some wonderful events even in it current bemusing format. This new masterplan continues the fragmentation and separation of the open space areas and instead focuses the bulk of development on the waters edge thus separating the open space parks from that edge as well. It seems to promote a "power" position for the Mayor's and CEO's offices and relegates the people's spaces behind and indeed even dominated by above ground parking. With so many options available this one seems like the adolescent choice - that is everything for itself. There is a wonderful opportunity to establish world class buildings that contribute to the urban built form aligning with transport corridors and contributing to walkable streets rather than separating itself from the life of the street and further separating the open space from the waters edge. This is a building in a landscape for the few, rather than an integrated active mix of uses and intensity that supports the open space and access to all.

    I expected much better. The cultural precinct in Brisbane works because it interacts with the other developments around it and the waters edge of the Brisbane river become a beautiful back drop. This is a different site that seems to try and reuse that concept and it does not work.

    Align the buildings along the southern and western edges of the site and then allow for vast open spaces that open to the water for the people to use whilst also enjoying the cultural buildings of the site. Let's face it, these buildings and uses involve internal activities that in many cases will waste a water frontage. Views to the water can be obtained from within the building across the open space, but views to the water from the open space behind the buildings offer less opportunities, and poorer outcomes.
  • lradich over 9 years ago
    The proposed design does not address the major problems with the existing site, instead it replicates them in a new very 2010 form.

    The precint should adress its edges, ie the roads, water. The current design does not do this. It lacks a connection to the fabric of the city. The current site has a terrible site address and entry and the proposed design is almost the same?
    Sporting fields have been neglected in favour of whispy small garden areas? How will people row under that cramped little bridge? How will tourists from surfers access the site?

    Looking at the design I am left wondering, why would you bulldoze existing buildings and build new ones in their place in this age of sustainibility, that operate in the same manner?

  • Amanda Lake over 9 years ago
    As a born and bred Gold Coaster who has been following this Cultural Precinct Development, I am concerned that this design still has a very long way to go - with major site opportunities not yet being addressed.

    1. I know Donovan Hill have done great projects.. but the structure of this design (as far as amount of info presented) doesn't get the Gold Coast 'VIBE'... which would have to be of CORE importance to a Cultural Centre. This image reminds me of a shopping centre somewhere/anywhere. It does not capture the imagination.

    2. The LAKE could / should be better integrated with the design outcome.

    3. The view of this building / approach to whole Cultural Precinct is uninspiring from any angle.

    4. Carparks should not be eating up prime community parkland space. Better to be underground.

    5. A green bridge link through to Surfers is needed IN ADDITION to the one through to Chevron Island. The hubs around these bridges need to be of activities that increase SURVEILLANCE (CPTED) of these core pedestrian linkages.

    6. Mayor and Councillors do not need to be situated in the prime north facing waterfront sector of the site. Better to use that area for mixed use facilities - imagine dining and retail and performance terraces linked through to Chevron/Surfers from this point instead. Leave Councillors in their existing white building.

    that's a start... too many opportunities missed still... was there nothing of use from the previous competition submissions??
  • outside observer over 9 years ago
    Rather than a masterplan, this is shown as a preliminary design for actual buildings, with the emphasis on scoping of programmatic needs, interior layout, and architectural massing.
    It is not presented in a way which enhances public debate about spatial relationships of different activity areas within and beyond the site, or the development of the precinct as a whole.

    Beyond the architecture, the masterplan’s proposal for open space and urban design are very weak. The complex is compact and inward-looking. The urbanistic proposal is limited essentially to using the buildings and terrace to frame views to the high-rise skyline. This view is an obvious, indeed unavoidable aspect of the site. Opening a view corridor from the site’s street frontage through to the canal and the skyline beyond is a positive step, but on the whole the architectural proposal goes a long way to actually reduce views, restricting them into two very architectural forms: the tower and the events terrace. The scheme also restricts movement through the site to the singular landscaped slope, which is 90% closed off by a water feature, and which would probably be untrafficable when wet, and would thus most likely end up being paved.

    Although windowless auditoria and back-of-house areas are clearly a major programmatic requirement of the buildings, some of these unwisely block views from the centre of the site (eg the view south), and could probably be pulled around 90 degrees to open up through-views in the current proposal. The artist’s impression of the view across the events terrace and the 1:500 section both highlight that the public lobbies and terraces of the performance venues, which could be anticipated to be the most lively parts of this very internalized scheme, are trapped in the courtyard’s interior, and views from them to the skyline are largely blocked by the tower. One has to climb to enjoy the view. Views from the events terrace would also seem to be largely blocked by the over-abundant raised skylights on the roof to the concessions. These are cunningly omitted from the isometric perspective view and reduced in number on the artist’s impression. Reflected glare from the outside of these shafts would probably render the skyline largely unviewable from the terrace at night. The concessions probably have the nicest views, although being hidden beneath the terrace, no-one may know it. The problems of such a design can be seen at Commonwealth Place in Canberra, where the concessions are not yet fully let.

    The plans indicate that the delightful view shown in the artist’s impression is not an unobstructed view from a public terrace, but would only be available through glass when standing outside the toilets of the discovery centre, or from within its administrative offices.

    Connection between the buildings and the copious public open space of the site, which would help to activate both, is very poor. The building complex is set back at a great distance from the street, from the parklands and from the water frontages. Every side of every building is fronted by carparking, and/or by a wide orbital road on the canal side which has no clear function. It is only the council offices and chamber (building 4) which enjoy frontage to the canal and to open parkland. The council’s own splendid isolation and private function terrace do not send a message of accessible government.

    As an essentially hermetic architectural proposition, almost no attention is given to site development in the masterplan. No amenities are proposed in the parklands, lake or canal - eg play equipment, picnic areas, terraces, stages, jetties, architectural follies which might precipitate innovative deployment of social, cultural and commercial possibilities. Nothing which might attract and sustain use of different parts of the site. Despite the Gold Coast’s weather, only traditional, fully indoor performance venues are proposed: there are no considerations of amphitheatres, sail roofs, or hard surfaces for temporary outdoor stages, either connected to or independent from the more formal facilities. Melbourne’s Music Bowl shows that such elements can remain popular even under worse weather. Parc Guell in Barcelona shows that a well designed public terrace with a nice view can be a popular social space even without buildings around it.

    No particular access is shown from the buildings to either the lake or the canal waterfront. The pedestrian bridge is shown without any connecting paths, and in any case it is hidden from view behind the council admin building. The only open space which does have a lot of detail is the ‘events terrace’. This is a dead-end space which only provides connection to two buildings; the ramp prevents circulation across the open area to the discovery centre. Most of the ‘front’ approach to the building complex is the blank walls of secondary service areas such as loading bays, staircases and offices.
    Hide Replies (2)
    • noculturalcentre over 9 years ago
      Outside Observer, according to the two representatives from the Planning Department of Council that the Save Evandale Lake and Parklands group met with this week, this design may as well be scrapped, as it is not a design of any actual building that may be there in the future it is merely a suggestion of "spacial use of land". We asked questions all night about how many car spaces, pathways, where exactly is the Green Bridge going etc etc etc. We were continually told that they didn't know the answers to any specific questions as this was just a suggestion of the "spacial use of the land". We are being asked to comment on a Masterplan that is not really a masterplan at all. Although we were told last year that the plan the public was asked to comment on was the Masterplan then too. Spin after spin after spin.
    • Vectis over 9 years ago
      That is a well written critique of the mud-map concept. However you have not said whether you are for or agin it! You should obviously throw your hat in the ring with a concept.

      Of course Gaudi's Parc Guell is hardly a comparable public amenity. Can you imagine leaning pillars and brightly coloured walls and objects?
  • giilour over 9 years ago
    I would be interested in the events that are matched with the proposed facilities.
  • PinkynPerky over 9 years ago
    There are fundamental and philosophical debates that are carefully avoided in the presentation. These though are key to the type of development and they will flavor any review and future discussion on the masterplan until they are addressed, debated and resolved. Discussion of all other issues seems superficial and the site cannot be masterplanned without these decisions. These will be emotional issues but form part of the initial vision for the site.

    These are:-
    1. Is the precinct to be pedestrian only or are cars allowed into the heart of the Evandale site?
    2. How many car parking spaces are required and where will they be located? Surface or underground/ under buildings?
    3. How will future visitors arrive at the site (ferries/bridges/light rail/push bikes/park and ride)? This affects the extent of car parking.
    - You only have to have visited the Cultural Precinct forum & presentation at lunchtime to see the extent of the car parking problem.
    - You only have to look at the extent of the existing space given over to car parking from an aerial view (and at the forum all the green space was parked as well) to see the extent of the problem.
    - Never mind when the site is developed into a grander facility with more activity and participation. There seems less space given to car parking in the new masterplan even when the underbuilding area is considered unless parking on the grass is expected at a regular basis.
  • Urban Designer over 9 years ago
    As an urban design masters course student I did research on the role and impact of tourism and facilities on the urban fabric. From my research i found that "shopping centre" type developments (such as the proposal), not connected with public transit or destiantions, not surrounded by mixed use, not integrated with the urban fabric and not visable from main tourist precincts will not improve or contribute to the city and its residents. Just look at Brisbane or Melbourne and see the value and even impact that these facilities have on the city. If I was a tourist coming to the GC staying in Surfers, why would I walk (and knew about this secret destination) through Chevron Island to this development? What if I was staying in Broadbeach, how would public trasport get me to this development? We are just about to spend millions on improving public transit. Potential solution: What if we can design an "art necklace" with iconic buildings and sub tropical spaces connected through our city, walkable, on the main transit routes, activating dead spaces? The GC tourism industry is struggling and this development or vision can be the key in making our city an innovative "must-see" tourist destination.
  • colin over 9 years ago
    The point below sums up my biggest concern. This area should be for the public firstly and the council secondly.

    6. Mayor and Councillors do not need to be situated in the prime north facing waterfront sector of the site. Better to use that area for mixed use facilities - imagine dining and retail and performance terraces linked through to Chevron/Surfers from this point instead. Leave Councillors in their existing white building.
  • JoeP over 9 years ago
    The cultural centre of the Gold Coast should have some iconic building or structure that is distinctive worldwide. It should be visible from a distance e.g. if you are standing in Surfers you would ask what it is. Maybe even have a cable car or something of sorts going from the site to Surfers and back. The design shows a collection of normal contemporary buildings which is very "ho-hum". It should be a visionary structure and become an international attraction such as the Sydney Opera House is.
    Hide reply (1)
    • lradich over 9 years ago
      we already have a cultuiral precinct at evandale, from my desk I am staring a large building with a theatre and gallery. Knocking over existing buildings to build a new 'more funky/colourful' building will not necessarily be the cultural saving grace for the gold coast. Solving the problems with the existing might, ie lack of connectivity to Surfers, poor public transport, difficult access/drop offs. In addition the building should be representative of the gold coast and its culture(from now and into the future) the warhol images on the outsuide of the building do not suggest much understadnuing into GC's culture.
  • Vectis over 9 years ago
    This is an essential concept for a town as large as ours. We could legitimately call ourselves a city with The Evandale Cultural Precinct. However new transport is essential?? as is a bridge for people to walk to The Centre, from Surfers, or to Chevron Island and Surfers. A fabulous idea 100%.
  • noforwardthinking over 9 years ago
    we have spent millions of dollars on a rapid transit system .....we should consider[ if at all ],to have the cultural precint walking distance from a rapid transit station,,,the station should be dedicated to cultral theme with coved walkways to the main entry....the cultural centre should be linked in with the new hospital that is being bult.[walking distance with cultural theme walkways to accomadate possibly, eletric carts and wheelchares], to acommadate the needs for the well being,of ill patents.(mental health).....griffith uni students alike can use the cultal centre for their studies ,relaxation and possibly hire out someareas when not in use for the public....the gold coast council have spent millions upgrading their office area at Evandale ....only to be torn down,,,what a waste of money,,ron and the clonies love spending taxpayers money ,rates keep skyrocketing ,next thing we will read in the newspaper is the council is broke and we haveto borrow money....
  • Richard John over 9 years ago
    The aspect of the proposed Gold Coast Cultural Precinct that I find most exciting is the proposed hands-on Science Discovery Centre and/or Museum. It’s about time!!!! For too long we on the Gold Coast have missed out on crucial community educational facilities such as this.

    If you are interested in why I think we need such an important resource here on the Coast then I outline three major reasons below. Happy to receive any feedback.

    The need for a Hands-on Interactive Science Centre on the Gold Coast:

    i) We have been missing out!: With a population base in excess of 500 000, the Gold Coast is the sixth largest population centre in Australia and second largest in Queensland; it is also one of the fastest growing regions in the country. This rapid growth and development has meant the Gold Coast has missed out on some of the conventional community education assets that population centres of its size (or even smaller) would normally expect.

    In terms of access to informal science education opportunities, this typically takes the form of visits to museums, zoos, botanic gardens, aquaria, science centres and science outreach programs. The Queensland Museum has eight campuses around the state – none of them south of the Brisbane River! In addition, the Gold Coast has no zoo, no aquarium, no educational base to its botanic garden and no hands-on science centre. Students, teachers and the broader community simply do not have ready access to these important community assets.

    By contrast the top five population centres in Australia (Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide, Perth) all have hands-on interactive science centres – so does Canberra (8th), Wollongong (9th), Launceston (15th), Bendigo (21st) and Devonport (pop. 18 000). In New Zealand, city-based science centres at Auckland (pop. 1.1 million) and Christchurch (pop. 270 000) are complimented by regional science centres at Hamilton, Palmerston North and Dunedin whose population bases are 150 000, 120 000 and 100 000 respectively. Put simply, the Gold Coast region has been missing out.

    ii) It serves an important social and civic need: A hands-on interactive science centre will contribute to the social, educational and economic vitality of Queensland and in particular the Gold Coast. Furthering public understanding of science and improving civic scientific literacy through experiential learning is at the heart of any science centre’s mission. This exciting new Gold Coast initiative will offer a rich, social environment for life-long learning, providing meeting places for citizens, community groups and the research community, as well as supporting schools, universities and the TAFE sector in the area of science education.

    The fundamental importance of civic scientific literary to a knowledge-based economy is recognised both nationally and internationally. Indeed, this concept is embedded in most of the initiatives outlined in Queensland’s Smart State Strategy. Countless studies indicate that the use of informal (out-of-classroom) education resources is “crucial to improving civic scientific literacy” (Roempler, 2002) and in fact “second only to college (university) level science courses” (Miller, 2002). Additionally, all learning theories support the value of hands-on approaches and the importance of “learning by doing” (Bruner 1960). It is clear that the voluntary, self directed, curiosity driven, exploration of scientific ideas stimulate and develop capacity for life-long learning (Ewing, 1999; Ucko, 2001) whilst also having a “significant impact on the acquisition of science knowledge” (National Research Council, USA, 2002). The proposed “Discovery Science Centre” will serve this important civic need in the Gold Coast area.

    Visits to science centres are “vividly remembered” (Stevenson 1991) for “long periods of time” (McManus, 1993) by student and family groups. Korpan (1997) has documented the “richness of science-related learning opportunities outside the home” that was felt by parents during family visits; further, the information that family members exchange “became richer and more complex during their visits” (PISEC, 1998). The benefits of a hands-on science centre to socio-economically disadvantaged groups will also be evident as recognised by researchers who have shown that “the benefits of hands-on science were greatest for disadvantaged students. On tests of both process skills and content learning, disadvantaged students made significantly bigger gains than their more advanced peers” (Harvard Education Newsletter, 1990).

    iii) It serves an important educational need: The Smart State Strategy (2005-2015) recognises that education is a key component to achieving its goals, acknowledging conclusions from a 2001 OECD study “that high levels of education and literacy are the key principal components demanded in the knowledge economy”. It further acknowledges that “a move toward radical innovations and new technology is inevitable if (we) are to change (our) current resource and energy use patterns”. Key elements of the Smart State Strategy therefore centre on innovation, technology, technology diffusion, technology transfer, intellectual property and sustainable development. Given these key elements, science education and scientific literacy within the broader community become central to the overall Smart State Strategy. Unfortunately however, we are currently in a climate where scientific literacy, science enrolments in senior secondary schools and science/engineering graduates from Australian (and Queensland) universities are at worrisome lows. Currently, Australia ranks third lowest in OECD countries for graduates in the enabling sciences (maths, physics and chemistry) and fifth lowest for graduates in engineering. Queensland ranks below the national average in both criteria while the Gold Coast region ranks below the overall Queensland averages.

    Studies indicate that these declines are due to (bad) experiences of science at school that include: lack of appeal; inadequate equipment and materials; relevance to everyday life; poorly trained or poorly resourced teachers; and lack of emphasis on practical hands-on aspects of science. A hands-on interactive science centre will help to address these concerns by providing a wide and varied array of formal and informal science education programs presented in a fun, engaging and relevant way. Professional development of teachers and ready access to the expertise, resources and infrastructure of local industry and local education institutions is always a key feature of any science centre.

    The primary role of the Discovery Science Centre will be as an out-of-classroom learning centre aimed at raising the interest, understanding and literacy of science and technology issues in Gold Coast’s school children, teachers and the broader community. From a formal education point of view it will provide a highly visible support structure for teachers and students of the Gold Coast. As few other educational settings could, the Discovery Science Centre will be able to help teachers and students move from a third person relationship with science – ‘science that other people do’ – to a first person relationship: ‘science that they can do’. The many and varied support programs proposed can only improve student outcomes and improve teacher skills and knowledge through a focus on continued professional development.

    A significant anticipated outcome of a hands-on science centre on the Gold Coast will be an increase in the number of students studying science in senior secondary school and at University. Studies by Salmi (2000), Coventry (1997) and Woolnough (1994) show that extra-curricula science activities encouraged students to study science at school and to pursue science careers (Woolnough, 1994). In Perth, Western Australia, Coventry (1997) found that 80% of students studying for science-based careers had visited the local science centre, compared to 64% of students who were not studying for science-related careers. By comparing university enrolments in science related degrees with previous visits to science centres in Europe, Salmi (2000) concluded, “the informal learning sources seem to have much stronger impact in academic and career choices than has been recognised”. He further concluded “science centres have the potential for universities as a motivational factor to create positive attitudes towards science and research among young people”. Such views are clearly in-line with the Smart State Strategy of promoting the study of the enabling sciences, technology and engineering and the Science Discovery Centre will be a crucial link in this process.
  • Greg over 9 years ago
    I do not like the master plan for a number of reasons;
    1. it does not take full advantage of the site and ignores the importance of its connections with the water frontage - its civic spaces should touch the water somehow, particularly as we are a water's edge city with no true urban water frontage
    2. it downplays the importance of the landscape
    3. it fails to add value to the popular swimming lagoon
    4. it looks like a 60's shopping mall sitting as it does in a carpark when it should be an iconic piece of architecture and a must see & visit destination for tourists and locals
    5. it does not have a major pedestrian approach and downplays the very important pedestrian connection to Chevron Island
    6. It presents buildings with great walls of glass facing the sun when it should be an example of environmental sensitivity
    7. it combines functions in one large building when they should be isoloted and easily accessible from ground level eg Art Gallery. Having separate functions grouped in one building reduces long term robustness and prevents the complex from future easy expansion when various components need in time to do so and in their own way.
    8. it ignores the nearby commercial precinct when it needs to use it to reinforce the urban context of our cultural heart
    9. it includes an administrative wing of Council that has no place in this precinct. Imagine a mayor's office under the Sydney Opera house or worse still sitting as an ugly box in the forecourt.
    10 It contains one large courtyard/amphitheatre facing the wind and the local residential areas. It should have a greater number of smaller courts to help diffentiate the various cultural uses, each with their own character and function expressed. If there is a need for a larger public outdoor amphitheatre - a good idea - then it should face the west across parkland as it would be better protected from the weather and have greater flexibility of use because its noise would be directed away from the resdiential areas to the existing commercial precinct. It would also be more visible.
  • JoeP over 9 years ago
    A cultural precinct for a city of this size is sorely needed but is what is proposed the answer? Along with that is it the right economic climate now to be proposing such an expense for the already price gouged ratepayers of this city? If the money earmarked for the new Council headquarters in Robina were re-directed into this development then it would help this to be an almost sensible financial decision. If one were to weigh up what makes the best cost benefit or even better if this precinct were to clearly pay for itself in the future and could be proven to run at a decent profit then yes it is something that should be considered. However before millions of ratepayer dollars are spent or even committed shouldn't the ratepayers representatives, such as the Gold Coast Resident and Ratepayers Association be given some seats on the committee that makes the final decisions?