The Belair National Park is a bushland gem in the Adelaide Hills suburbs. Its environment is special for all kinds of nature recreational activities; bushwalking, riding, picnicking, taking photographs, running as well as educational,heritage and environmental activities. The old golf course area needs to be kept so that it promotes these type of activities. I love world football and believe the Sturt Lions are doing a marvellous job with all their teams. But they do not fit into this natural bushland setting. Pitches, car parks and clubrooms go against the ethos of an environmental park. Mountain biking can be done without upsetting the natural feel of the Park, which must be preserved at all costs.

I believe part of this area could be used as a natural burial ground.
* Strict specifications on plaques could be required before any approval for burial could be given.
*The natural environment would be maintained
* Facilities are already in place for small gatherings of people and others could be constructed on the site of the apparently useless building currently on the site.
* Roadways are already in place meaning no extra access would need to be created
*Money obtained from the burial sites could be used to maintain the whole area because no ongoing maintenance of the actual burial sites would be needed
*The provision of such a site would meet a need currently unavailable anywhere near the local area

As a Hawthorndene resident and regular user of the former Belair golf course, whose son is playing soccer for the Sturt Lions, I'm against changes to the golf course's current state, especially the idea of establishing soccer pitches. This site does not need any further development; it's perfect as it is. The mountain bike trail is nice but any further "use" and "development for wellbeing" is counterproductive in my opinion. Too many nice lawns and proper walkways in Adelaide already; why not keep a few wild parts ("weed infested"!?) entirely purpose free? Just like absence of activity/boredom is necessary for creativity to germinate, purpose free wild areas are necessary for true wellbeing to develop.

Great to see some very positive areas of development in the proposals viewed. I fully support all of the ideas related to public access for exercise and exploration. Mountain bike and walking trails look great. Not keen on the extent of football pitches. That doesn't seem to fit with the natural interaction of this beautiful environment.

It’s Kaurna land maybe have a discussion with local elders about other ideas for the site ? Football pitches don’t make sense we have plenty of clubs for sport and huge amounts have just been invested in current club infrastructure in the last two years already

Love the intent and direction of the master plan. Having just moved to the area over a year ago there’s so much potential.

I’d like to ask what is the reason for so many pitches to be allocated to the Sturt Club ? What will it bring to the community having that many in one location?

Seeing the amount of space and potential, there’s a real opportunity to make it more communal that families and people of all ages can enjoy, I’m thinking ;
- frisbee/soccer golf using a few of the existing holes
- fenced dog parks (small and large like north Adelaide)
- knocking down the country club but leaving smaller rest rooms and powered sights for food/coffee vans for the games on the weekend
- bmx trail/loop on 6 of the holes
- full size AFL oval (would be nice to have)
- connecting walks to the rest of the National park

What ever is to be built there it’d need adequate parking, all development to be definitely as environmentally sustainable as possible, & paying homage to the old golf course potentially by naming the zones hole 2 etc.

I am deeply concerned about the proposal for Lions football club to build soccer pitches in the National Park.
The impact on vegetation, wildlife and local residents will be severe.

Any commercial ventures in the area MUST be aligned to National Park objectives - primarily flora and fauna conservation as a first priority.
Mountain bike trails seem like a good idea. Wildlife park with flora/fauna observation and education also seems like a good idea.
Clearance and excavation of over 10 hectares of natural land seems bizarre and very-much against everything a national park stands for.

IMPORTANT CONSIDERATIONS:
Parking. If more than enough FREE carparking is not provided for events held here, people will use side streets including upper sturt road and hawthorndene drive to park their cars. This is going to create major problems and will really disrupt the area which already has inadequate footpaths and very inadequate on-street parking (even for guests to attend local houses, parking is often a problem as it is).

Traffic congestion and parked cars banked up and down side streets MUST NOT HAPPEN.
Most residents move here for the peaceful natural environment. Not to live in a congested area full of visitors and people littering everywhere (what is the WASTE and BIN plan for this proposal??), who have not come to appreciate nature but instead rock up to attend sporting events and then leave with no care beyond that for the area.

ALL activities in the national park MUST encourage natural conservation first and foremost.

Regardless of what happens, we MUST make sure that ongoing funds area provided for grounds maintenance, mowing and care of the area - we MUST future proof all plans and now just think of now but what happens in 2 years time, 10 years time etc - where is the money going to come from for upkeep? I would like to see a complete plan showing all care and upkeep intended ongoing and what funding has been allocated for this, paid for by whom.

I am strongly opposed to the proposal to allow the Sturt Lions Football Club to take over 10 hectares of the former Belair National Park golf course. The destruction of trees, impact on wildlife, noise & lighting pollution, increased traffic flows, overflow parking on to local streets, dust & noise during the construction phase and loss of community amenity for sectional interests are concerns for my family and many local residents. This would be environmental vandalism and the loss of trees and other flora should not be contemplated when we are trying to offset carbon emissions.

Leave the national park as it is. The locals that live in this area love it how it is and so do the wildlife.

How many soccer pitches do we need? There are pitches all over Adelaide, and they are about to install a bunch more at Gepps Cross. If you want more, stick them somewhere else. Literally anywhere else. Not in a National Park. The first guiding principle in the masterplan is "Protection and restoration of the natural environment". The installation of 7 soccer pitches with associated carparking and lighting is in direct opposition to that principle. This large parcel of land presents an amazing opportunity to allow native flora to regenerate. This could be managed by biodiversity professionals and volunteers, who can speed up the process with revegetation. There would still be scope for recreational use, like mountain biking or bushwalking. Even disc golf would be far more environmentally-friendly than soccer here.

The Department of Environment and Water (DEW) has listed six objectives in relation to the protection of the Park and its environment and heritage. Many of the future ideas I agree with but, I am strongly opposed to any plan to implement the building of the soccer pitches, club house and car parks. This part of the plan is the antithesis of the listed objectives and breaches every one of them. Most of the reasons against the pitches and damage caused to the environment have already been clearly stated, in detail, in previous comments listed below. I won't, therefore, reiterate them. I will, however, reiterate my opposition to the soccer aspect of the plan.

There are a lot of people concerned about the environmental impact, it’s a national park and should stay that way. There has already been enough damage done by the fires now they want to remove even more trees out of a National park to make way for unsightly football pitches and a car park. Definitely no

I think this is a terrific plan, but I'm concerned about the environmental impacts of the soccer grounds. Light pollution is a big concern; with our native insect population already dropping, building a soccer complex with all its associated lights in Belair national park would surely accelerate this species loss. This is an important issue for the local ecosystem. Perhaps games could be allowed during the day only? Or night games kept to a strict minimum e.g. once a month to lessen the impact on the native insect population. Thanks

With regard to the master plan document itself, I thought it was presented in a way that misrepresented its contents.
Despite a major part of the plan being the addition of a soccer complex, there wasn’t a single picture of a soccer pitch, or of a game of soccer being played. Not even an “artists impression” of an indicative set of club rooms and spectators enjoying a game; not one photo showing cleared vegetation, large expanses of flat green grass, and asphalt car parks.

Cynically, one might suggest that this was done so as not to have people seeing the reality of what a soccer complex would look like.

Even if reality is different, perception is a powerful thing.

There is, to my mind, a place for some activities with a relatively low environmental impact, such as walking trails, Disc Golf (as happens at Ityamai-itpinna / Park 15 / King Rodney Park, Adelaide) and Mountain Biking on purpose-built trails, such as the Birdie Loop. Escapegoat Adventures is a welcome resident and flourishing addition to the area. They deserve success.
However, there is NO place for a 10-hectare, 7 pitch soccer club with a clubroom including a liquor license and carparking in Belair.
I vehemently oppose having ANY land set aside for the exclusive use of a private sports club. This is NOT what the Belair National Park was set aside for in 1891. Some of my concerns are:
• Who pays for it? – construction and ongoing maintenance – it is not fair that a public funds would be used for a private entity’s exclusive use; and speaks volumes of the perceived current Department’s financial priorities that seem to consider the natural environment is a saleable commodity,
• For the government to commit funding for a sports club spits venom in the face of the hard-working volunteers that work in Belair and other parks - who could really use some help managing vast areas of public land and attempting to stop invasive weeds. These efforts are seemingly unsupported on the ground as the government wastes hundreds of thousands on consultants and glossy brochures and the exorbitant park entry fees go to general revenue, not back to the park itself,
• The water required to irrigate 10 hectares of ovals combined with drainage and runoff – hardly promotes a ‘care for the environment’ ethos,
• Light and noise pollution for a club with 400 members having games and training sessions at various time during weeknights and weekends is an unwanted and unnecessary burden to inflict on local residents,
• Traffic management – ingress and egress. Upper Sturt Road is already a busy road (7,000 vehicles/day in 2018). Adding extra traffic will further congest the overstretched road infrastructure (Source: Department for Infrastructure and Transport: https://location.sa.gov.au/viewer),
• The felling of mature trees and destruction of native flora. I have overlaid the proposed footprint with an image from google maps below. The golf course has the only population of Chorizandra enodis (a native sedge) and Chloris truncata (a native grass), as well as a stand of Callitris gracilis (Slender Cypress Pine) thought of be a pre-European remnant to the area (pers. comm. *name supplied* – Consultant Ecologist, January 2021).
What Environment Minister or Department would wish the legacy of the destruction of such a huge swathe of remnant native flora?
I note the proposal is decidedly (deliberately?) vague in terms of details of the actual soccer club proposal, but if it is anything like the Southern Soccer Facility (also on public land, pictured below) this is absolutely not what should be in Belair National Park.
The Southern Soccer Facility has four pitches, only one of which will be for general public use, and the plan includes the construction of 358(!) bitumen car parks. This is completely unacceptable for any open public space, but even more so in beautiful Belair National Park considering this plan would involve the removal of pre-European overstory flora.
A suggested alternative to Belair National Park for the Sturt Lions FC would be to engage the City of Marion to modify the Southern Soccer Facility to ‘piggy-back’ their proposal onto this facility for shared use with other soccer clubs before construction starts.
Would the revegetation be an ‘offset’ for the required removal of this overstory flora? That would lead to a net zero in terms of biomass added or carbon sequestered – in either way, a bad thing to be doing as we transit towards zero-carbon as soon as possible.
An image, taken from the Master Plan itself, shows that there was still overstory flora present after the initial construction of the golf course in the 1930s. These trees were here before us, and barring this imposition, will be here after we are gone. It is up to us to choose wisely about this and think of the future we leave for the next generations at Belair.
At the end of the day, the politicians and the Department will decide this, and the future of the ex-golf course is in their hands. I hope they consider the environment over a plan to denude and transform a space from mature Grey Box woodland with recovering remnant ground flora, to irrigated fields for the use of a privileged few.

I hope in later version of the plan that a good trail design and building company would be used to determine more routes for bike trails than are shown on the plan.
Despite many opinions to the contrary, there aren’t actually that many bike trails through the National Park that are the type of single track trails that bikers like. Most of the trails are fire roads, with the exception of some parts of the Adventure Loop. I hope there is consideration of there being more than just ‘one and a half’ trails shown on the master plan map. Not all riders want jump and flow trails either.

The National Park has no cycling trails that are suitable for family riding, the gradients are too steep and the hills are too long for young kids to ride. The trails that would be ideal for that (like Lorikeet Loop) are off limits to cyclists. Incorporating varying length trails around the less hilly area of the former golf course would be a very welcome addition.

The addition of a ‘skills’ park and a pump track would be hugely popular, and have seen enormous success where they’ve been incorporated elsewhere. They don’t take up nearly as much space as a soccer pitch either! There are many kilometres of trails around Mitcham, Belair and Craigburn Farm etc. but there isn’t much in the way of things for beginners, not all cyclists can (or want to) hit the jumps or ride the wall on Ando’s.

The area of the former golf course has the potential to facilitate some really nice trails that would cater to all ages and skill levels and all while having very little in the way of environmental impact; cyclists ride to ride amongst nature, not clear cut it.

7 pitches * 30

As many others have commented, I think the building of soccer pitches directly contradicts your first principle of "Conservation of the natural environment and heritage, habitat restoration and revegetation"

Belair National Park currently supports low density recreational activities, which have been deemed acceptable due to their limited (although this is open to debate) impact on the environment, and because they are non-exclusive, ie. open to the public. A football club is the opposite.

The Master Plan map ignores the amount and location of car parking that would be needed by the soccer club. The map labels the current parking area by the Country Club, which is several hundred metres from from the proposed pitches, and is therefore too far away. It is also unsuited to the large amount of traffic that the proposed soccer games would generate.

Weekend games using 7 pitches will likely attract about 30 participants per pitch plus spectators. As cars are the only way to get to the Park, it can be expected there would need to be parking for 210+ cars at any one time. The Master Plan map does not show any car parking within walking distance to the proposed fields. I conclude that creating such a large car park, and one adjacent to the pitches, is incompatible with the Master Plan.

In 2020, as a carer of the adjacent bushland to the Karinya soccer pitch in Eden Hills, I was involved in the formal feedback concerning Sturt Lions Football Club's upcoming upgrading of the grass pitch. So that A-grade games can be played at this site, the pitch is going to be synthetic. I think it most likely SLFC has similar aspirations for their proposed Belair National Park site, so it can safely be assumed they will require synthetic fields.

In addition to the issue of exorcising 10ha of land from the Park, for the use of a sporting club, the public may not have any, or limited, access to the pitches. Given that the pitches would likely be synthetic, SLFC naturally would not want any activities that could damage the surfaces. The pitches would therefore need to be fenced off to keep out kangaroos, dogs etc. thereby excluding wildlife, dog walkers and possibly the public in general.

While synthetic grass is anathema to a national park, ironically it may be more ecologically friendly than real grass, which would need to be regularly watered and fertilised. As the proposed soccer club footprint is on a ridge, drainage and seepage from the fields would be downhill to the north, over the old golf course. Nutrient laden water will therefore seep into the remnant bushland, causing increased weed invasion and consequent degradation of the already degraded bush in-between the golf fairways.

In conclusion, I think the SLFC proposal is inappropriate for Belair National Park. It is more appropriate that much of the golf course be regenerated back to bushland, while allowing low impact activities as covered in other posts.

Repeating others concerns about soccer pitches. I struggle to understand how this aligns with guiding principles and community feedback.

Key points are protecting natural features, promoting habitat restoration, revegetation, vaue of sites natural setting etc. The document states one aspect the development meets community expectations is by way of minimal vegetation removal. This is a weak connection at best and seems an attempt at creating a link rather than selecting a proposal based on its strength in aligning with guiding principals and community feedback.

Further it addresses one aspect of the proposal: the required footprint of the soccer fields. It fails to acknowledge the associated development, change in overall setting and factors neccessary or inherent for functioning sport fields. Pointed out repeatedly on this discussion, there will be vegetation removal; noise, light, facilities detract from the natural setting, impact on biodiversity, not to mention impact on neigbouring residents. Is a carpark or other upgrades required - this will need more land/vegtation removal? If no carpark this will push traffic and parking into residential side streets. How is rubbish managed - there are no bins in the NP to avoid negative effects on fauna. Would this also apply here? How do you 'mitigate' unavoidable consequences of such developments.

I question how this proposal was promoted above others. Possibly i missed information - what were the other proposals? Was there not one other option that better aligned with community expectations and principals? Are there other overriding factors contributing to decision making here - preserving BNP visitation (entrance fees), reducing maintenance responsibilities of DEW?

How has community consultantion been conducted so far. Apart sharing within the community how are people been made aware. How extensively was this drop in session advertised? Actively seeking community engagement and establishing communication channels has been lacking so far. This needs to improved before it can be suggested that appropriate feedback and consultation has occurred. It has not.

Overall this is glaringly at odds with many in the community and needs to be reconsidered.

As scientist and entomologist I am abhorred that the government is considering killing off >10 ha of national park by replacing it with artificial turf and bitumen and having lighting installed that will shine brightly on many nights. Light pollution is a real issue, and its effects are substantially underestimated. The lights will attract and kill the night insects from the wide surroundings. These insects are food for bats and smaller nocturnal birds, which are in substantial decline. In the daytime, these insects, and their larvae, are also food for birds and reptiles. And many are pollinators of specific native plants.

I doubt that we need to attract more people into the park. Belair NP is one of the busiest recreational parks already and has got loads of well-used recreational areas. We need to protect what is left of biodiversity and enhance it. 30 % of native plant species have already disappeared from the golf course area.

There is also a large disconnect here: national parks should first and foremost protect biodiversity. Then, we may carefully allow people to enjoy that nature a bit, as long as it doesn’t do any harm. In national parks, generating income from rent, accommodation, facilities, hospitality, and businesses enterprises should not come at a substantial costs to biodiversity. As I explained above, the planned 10 ha of bitumen and artificial turf will kill all biodiversity in place, and cause substantial harm to the surrounding area. Ignoring the intrinsic value and importance of the little nature that we have left in favour of making money, is out of date and very much out of sync with the rest of the world! Apart from in the few protected areas, we are already making money at a very large cost of biodiversity. If we allow this, where will it stop? Where will the remaining native biodiversity be protected if not in the areas designated to its protection?

It was also very disappointing to find that the presentation of the plans at the community event and in the brochure was deceptive. For example:
1) I heard: “There will be a carpark for 180 cars.” But I've heard from informed sources that that the actual plan is 340-410 car parks
2) I heard: "We are not planning to bituminise the carpark." But not bituminising is impossible for a winter sport on that soil, and planners know that.
2) I heard: “We are planning on keeping the roadside trees.” There isn’t enough room for 7 soccer pitches and >1 ha of carpark needed. That is probably why the car park wasn't drawn in the community brochure! Planners must have been aware of that too, as well as of the likely need to increase the width of Upper Sturt road - guess on which side.

In all, an awful plan, whoever made it seems intent on wrecking biodiversity, rather than protecting it.

As local residents for 30 plus years and with family and neighbours (neighbourhood) that will be impacted directly by seven soccer pitches, a club house, 300 car parks, a complete relevelling of the land deemed for this usage, a change in the landscape surrounding our home/s an increase in traffic, congestion, parking, noise, extended night time usage with LED lighting, an additional increase in noise pollution for unknown hours morning, noon and night... and an impost on a National Park that is constituted for recreation use by all in a natural setting - not by a 'select few' in a reconstituted setting - we are opposed to the football pitch suggrstions/proposals.

We and our neighbours moved and invested in this area for several key reasons:
- The Environment.
- The Fauna and Flora.
- The peace and quiet.
- Nature and natural surroundings on our doorsteps.
- The knowledge this was locked in - zero development- by local, State and Federal regulations.

None of the neighbourhood moved to the area to have a sports field and all the imposts that that brings developed outside the mandate of the National Parks consideration and on our doorsteps.

These pitches are considerations by others (most likely non local rrsidents) that is understood, the impact on the immediate locale and the local residents must be deemed the number one priority in this scenario - we live, have invested in and are the residents of the area - visitors will come and go and we look forward to that occurring with respect to minimal impact on the natural surroundings and where we live.

Believe that is a reasonable request to not have our chosen lifestyles disrupted unnecessarily!

As local residents for 30 plus years and with family and neighbours (neighbouhood) that will be impacted directly by purported seven soccer pitches, a club house, 300 car parks, a complete relevelling of the land deemed for this usage, a change in the landscape surrounding our home/s an increase in traffic, congestion, parking, noise, extended night time usage with LED lighting, an additional increase in noise pollution for unknown hours morning, noon and night... and an impost on a National Park that is constituted for recreation use by all in a natural setting - not by a 'select few' in a reconstituted setting - we are opposed to the football pitch suggestions/proposals.

We and our neighbours moved to and invested in this area for several key reasons:
- The Environment.
- The Fauna and Flora.
- The peace and quiet.
- Nature and natural surroundings on our doorsteps.
- The knowledge this was locked in - zero development- by local, State and Federal regulations.

Would consider that none of the neighbourhood moved to the area to have a sports field and all the imposts that that brings developed outside the mandate of the National Parks consideration and on our doorsteps.

These pitches are considerations by others, that is understood, the impact on the immediate locale and the local residents must be deemed the number one priority in this scenario - we live, have invested in and are the residents of the area - visitors will come and go and we look forward to that with respect to minimal impact on the natural surroundings and where we live.

Believe that is a reasonable request to not have our chosen lifestyles disrupted unnecessarily!

Having spoken to the disc golf representatives on Sunday, it seems clear that an 18 ‘hole’ disc golf course should definitely be a consideration for the area.

On their recommendation I checked out the East Parklands course and it’s unobtrusive, fits in with the landscape. It would do the same at Belair. It would certainly be less obtrusive than, large, flat, featureless, soccer pitches.

Hiring/borrowing of discs could likely be facilitate somehow, and it would be a great way to add another purpose to a walk.

While I love the idea of improvements to the park and the addition of more bike trails, the soccer pitches and where they are likely to be placed seems completely inappropriate. As a resident in close proximity to the proposed changes, I could not be more opposed to this idea. At times, upper sturt road is already mayhem. The idea of the additional traffic, noise and congestion seems awful. The fact that parking is mentioned just once in the 'master plan' seems like an oversight. All of the local residents would no doubt be greatly affected in a number of ways and it seems clear that no consideration has been given in that regard.

As has already been mentioned, the proposed changes are in complete opposition to the key values of the master plan. The addition of the Escapegoat bike rental seems like it has been great for exploring the area and it is low impact. More ideas like this need to be explored, instead of adding what will no doubt be awful for the areas wildlife and residents.

As a resident who does not live far from the proposed soccer fields, I am opposed to it. We live here due to to environment, trees and wildlife. Traffic on Upper Sturt Rd and Hawthorndene Drive is busy, we do not need the extra traffic which will be incurred with 7 soccer pitches. What happens on a catastrophic day? It is bad enough for us residents to be able to navigate out of the area with limited access out. Having up to an extra approximate 200 people in the area, it is dangerous. Have the CFS been approached? It is crazy. What about real estate prices?

I am in support of the proposed master plan draft. My son is involved with the Sturt lions and also heavily active in socially bike riding. With the growing family community surrounding the blackwood area, we are in dire need of facilities like a new soccer club. Current arrangements are in adequate. Modern LED lighting should have limited impact on the surrounding homes and having these facilities and the inking trails should allow the National park to receive some extra funds to aid in future park developments or maintenance. Thankyou