Sport and Recreation Policy Committee

 

Agenda

 

6 July 2021

 

 

Notice is hereby given, in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993 that a Sport and Recreation Policy Committee meeting of ORANGE CITY COUNCIL will be held in the Council Chamber, Civic Centre, Byng Street, Orange on  
Tuesday, 6 July 2021
.

 

 

David Waddell

Chief Executive Officer

 

For apologies please contact Administration on 6393 8218.

  

 


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                       6 July 2021

Agenda

  

1                Introduction.. 3

1.1            Declaration of pecuniary interests, significant non-pecuniary interests and less than significant non-pecuniary interests. 3

2                General Reports. 5

2.1            Outcome of the Public Exhibition of the Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan. 5

 


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                       6 July 2021

1       Introduction

1.1     Declaration of pecuniary interests, significant non-pecuniary interests and less than significant non-pecuniary interests

The provisions of Chapter 14 of the Local Government Act, 1993 (the Act) regulate the way in which Councillors and designated staff of Council conduct themselves to ensure that there is no conflict between their private interests and their public role.

The Act prescribes that where a member of Council (or a Committee of Council) has a direct or indirect financial (pecuniary) interest in a matter to be considered at a meeting of the Council (or Committee), that interest must be disclosed as soon as practicable after the start of the meeting and the reasons given for declaring such interest.

As members are aware, the provisions of the Local Government Act restrict any member who has declared a pecuniary interest in any matter from participating in the discussion or voting on that matter, and requires that member to vacate the Chamber.

Council’s Code of Conduct provides that if members have a non-pecuniary conflict of interest, the nature of the conflict must be disclosed. The Code of Conduct also provides for a number of ways in which a member may manage non pecuniary conflicts of interest.

Recommendation

It is recommended that Committee Members now disclose any conflicts of interest in matters under consideration by the Sport and Recreation Policy Committee at this meeting.

 


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                       6 July 2021

2       General Reports

2.1     Outcome of the Public Exhibition of the Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

RECORD NUMBER:       2021/1308

AUTHOR:                       Tony Boland, Business Projects Officer    

 

 

EXECUTIVE Summary

A report on the Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan was considered by Council on 20 April 2021 and subsequently put on public exhibition for 28 days. The exhibition period received seven written submissions and 192 responses on the Your Say site. In addition to the 192 Your Say responses there were a further 332 visitors to the Your Say page that were informed of the process but did not take the opportunity to participate any further.

Link To Delivery/OPerational Plan

The recommendation in this report relates to the Delivery/Operational Plan strategy “11.1 Prosper - Capitalise on the character and lifestyle of Orange to remain a destination of choice”.

Financial Implications

The adoption of the Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan itself does not commit Council to expenditure. The purpose of the plan is to inform Council of future development directions and provide support in applying for various grants to implement the various aspects of the plan.

Policy and Governance Implications

Nil.

 

Recommendation

That Council resolves:

1     To note the concerns of owners of adjacent properties

2     To adopt a position of passive appropriation of alternative access to Lake Canobolas

3     To adopt the balance of the plan as presented.

 

further considerations

The recommendation of this report has been assessed against Council’s other key risk categories and the following comments are provided:

 

 

 

Service/Project Delivery

The capacity to deliver on all aspects of the plan will be subject to Council being able to secure grant funding. The approval for many of the works will be through Cabonne Council.

 

Financial

Council will have to consider funding in future budgets to match or partially match funding from the State or Federal Government.

 

Environmental

The development in the precinct needs to be environmentally sympathetic, both ecologically and visually, to ensure the area is not over-developed.

 

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

 

Background Summary

The Lake Canobolas Precinct is the term for the general area comprising Lake Canobolas, the Mountain Trail Bike (MTB) Park and the Canobolas Scout Camp. It has become apparent in recent years that the precinct is experiencing increased visitation, further increasing since the onset of the Covid 19 pandemic.

Council engaged Stone Three to update the previous Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan that was developed in 2004. The update was in recognition of Canobolas Scout Camp control being returned to Council and the proposed Earth Sanctuary being discontinued and replaced with a mountain bike park. The review was also to take into account a significant change in visitor and resident expectations for activities and facilities in the precinct.

During a quotation process for the master plan Stone Three was able to demonstrate that they were well balanced in mountain biking, passive recreation, education, sports and recreation visitation as well as indigenous culture and tourism experience. Stone Three also exhibited good consultation skills and experience directly translatable to the project. This experience is essential to develop a comprehensive master plan for the precinct.

During the master planning design and consultation phase, Stone Three had direct interaction and consultations with a number of site user groups and owners of neighbouring properties. The plan was exhibited on Council’s website and promoted through social media, media releases and advertising through mainstream media.

The final format of the document is intentionally high level and does not have a numerically ordered list of priorities. The intention of this document is to gauge public opinion, guide concepts for detailed design and be flexible enough to support grant applications without a new revision being created each time a different grant is applied for.

Part of the brief to Stone Three was to explore additional connections to the precinct, both from Orange and from Mt Canobolas or the Pinnacle. Stone Three explored all of these avenues and included them in the plan as requested.

 

Exhibition Period Outcomes

The exhibition period saw seven written submissions and 192 further submissions were made through the survey on the Your Say site. In addition to this, a further 332 people accessed the Your Say site and reviewed the documentation without leaving a comment. There were 24 people who left a comment on the Your Say page as a guest.

The Your Say survey had four questions:

1.   How often do you visit the Lake Canobolas Precinct (Lake Canobolas, Canobolas Scout Camp or Mountain Trail Bike Park)?

2.   What activities do you currently do in the area?

3.   What do you consider the highest priorities for the development of the precinct? Select your top 5 options.

4.   Do you have any other suggestions for development in the precinct?


 

Summarising this feedback from submissions in a way that is both manageable and digestible is a challenge. The seven emailed responses have been included in their entirety with personal details redacted. The summarised results from the 192 surveys has been included as an auto-generated report. The auto generated report does not cover the free-text questions (questions 2 and 4). The issues highlighted in the free-text have been included as an additional attachments to this report. Some people selected the maximum allowable five high priorities in the survey so included additional comment and priorities in the free-text. Some survey respondents made no comments while others may have had five or six comments in the free-text. These have been paraphrased and categorised in the attachment for ease of reference. This also reduces the report by some 192 pages.

 

Exhibition Period Feedback

Submission 1

The submission describes the plan as attractive and that an upgrade of the precinct is required. There is concern expressed at the lack of detail and that they look forward to a business case for the master plan. The group also states they expect an independent environmental assessment as well as a comprehensive weed removal program.

Many of the requests in the submission regarding funding, resources and consultation are more appropriately part of the next Community Strategic Plan (CSP) consultation process or the development application process for individual developments in the precinct. The submission also references privatisation of some facilities. There is no plan to privatise the facilities but the zoning for the Scout Camp is RE2 (Private Recreation) which allows Council to charge for use of the site. Again, this is part of the CSP and also the annual budgetary process through the setting of fees and charges.

Submission 2

The submission uses language very similar to Submission 1 regarding detail, recommendations, timeline and business case. These are more appropriately addressed through the CSP and the budgetary process.

Dot point one correctly identifies that there is land outside of Orange City Council ownership. This will be addressed later in the report.

Dot point 2 of the submission correctly points out that a MTB track on Mt Canobolas has not been mapped, assessed or approved. This came from earlier documentation uncovered in desktop research by the consultant and will be removed from the final document.

Dot point 3 incorrectly makes the assumption that road based access has not been considered in this process. Orange City Council will be working with Cabonne Council on this matter, however, the consultant was asked to focus on potential access points that minimised shared use between pedestrians/cyclists and vehicles. This is particularly with families in mind.

The balance of the submission is focussed on environmental protection measures including the habitat of nine threatened or migratory species of bird and weed control.

Submission 3

The group is happy to see a boat shed included in the plan but has identified some issues in relation to the placement of the shed. Any boatshed design would include extensive detailed consultation with user groups prior to detailed design being put out for public exhibition, potentially prior to and as part of a DA process through Cabonne Council.

Submission 4

The owner of this property strongly objects to having an access through their property.

Submission 5

This submission raises seven points of issue.

1.   Submission claims there should have been a public forum (inferring that it is contentious) and that the effort to make the public aware is questionable, yet we are able to measure in excess of 500 people through the Your Say site plus unmeasured reach through traditional and social media. The level of survey respondents (192) would suggest a high level of engagement.

2.   Potential connections will be addressed later in this report.

3.   No consultation with the National Parks and Wildlife Service is listed as an issue. The consultants brief was to investigate connections to Orange, the Pinnacle and Mt Canobolas. The brief was not about activity on Mt Canobolas.

4.   The submission questions the validity of the Strava maps. While the actual percentage of people using the Strava app cannot be answered, the alternative is anecdotal evidence.

5.   Submission expresses concerns and the track record of previous plans and also road conditions in the region.

6.   The level of development is questionable according to the submission. This correlates with some of the feedback from the survey on the Your Say site where some respondents (11) seek to ensure the precinct is not over-developed or over-commercialised.

7.   The submission calls for further detail and consideration of all the areas surrounding their precinct.

Submission 6

Submission states the Lake doesn’t need anything added to it and then goes on to state that it needs accessible toilets and updated play equipment. Submission says there is nothing for young children and adolescents and that Council should focus on them.

Submission 7

Submission requests that the Lake should not change and any development should be across the road.

Guest Book Submissions

All of the Guest Book submissions on the Your Say site have been included in the summarised free text document (attached).


 

Your Say Survey

The survey responses have been collated by the Your Say program. Of the respondents, around a fifth visited at least weekly, a third monthly and a third visited three or four times a year.

The most sought after infrastructure was boardwalks and viewing platforms (84 people). The next three groups of infrastructure (all with 74 responses) were fully accessible paths through the precinct, boats or kayaks for hire and finally, more adventure equipment (outdoor gym, commando course).

Of notable interest was the number of responses to the option of “Nothing, I don’t want any changes” with only 4 responses out of the total of 192, indicating there is a strong appetite for improvements.

 

Land Outside of Orange City Council Ownership

As noted earlier in the report, the consultant was asked to explore additional access to the precinct that would be family friendly as well as connecting (if possible) to the Pinnacle and Mt Canobolas. While some neighbours are happy to work with Orange City Council to create these corridors, others are extremely concerned about access through their land. This is for a range of personal reasons and the concern is understandable.

The recommended course of action is to not actively pursue any access where the owner has expressed concern. Council can note the potential for future access and if the land becomes available for purchase or the owner has a change of mind then revisit the issue at that point in time. For the purposes of a recommendation this course of action has been called ‘passive appropriation’. In some cases the ownership may not change for decades and in that situation there would be no action taken.

 

Themes Highlighted

The responses to the survey have highlighted some themed issues in both the limited response questions and the free text question. One of the foremost themes is accessibility, particularly for those who have a mobility challenge. As highlighted in the report to the meeting of 20 April 2021, Orange is well positioned to move into the visitor market for people with mobility impairment. The same facilities will also serve our local residents with mobility impairment positioning the region well for having recreation facilities that match our health industry capacity.

There was strong support to have improved toilet facilities and have the toilets located closer to playgrounds and activity areas. These should also be accessible and have a parent’s room.

There is a call for more shelter from the sun. There are also calls to avoid over-development and to preserve the natural look with low key developments. Weed control was mentioned in the written submissions as well as the surveys.

Some of the feedback has given additional consideration to the re-adaptation of facilities. For example, some respondents requested a new café building and with a liquor licence. Others have requested a small hall for kids birthday parties and yet others want a small room with a camp kitchen for school groups.

These requests could all be met by constructing a new café and repurposing the existing café into a venue for hire for birthday parties, meetings or school classes. It could also double as a classroom for students undertaking environmental studies at the Lake.

 

 

 

Attachments

1          Summary Report The Future of Lake Canobolas 01 May 21 To 01 June 21, D21/38255

2          Project Detailed Report Your Say Orange 01 June 21 To 01 June 21, IC21/14308

3          Grouped Results from Free Text Responses for Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38786

4          Submission 1 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38788

5          Submission 2 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38794

6          Submission 3 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38804

7          Submission 4 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38807

8          Submission 5 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38809

9          Submission 6 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38813

10        Submission 7 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan, D21/38818

11        Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan Presentation Report for Council, IC21/6064

  


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 1      Summary Report The Future of Lake Canobolas 01 May 21 To 01 June 21

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 2      Project Detailed Report Your Say Orange 01 June 21 To 01 June 21

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 3      Grouped Results from Free Text Responses for Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 4      Submission 1 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 5      Submission 2 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 6      Submission 3 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 7      Submission 4 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 8      Submission 5 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 9      Submission 6 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator


Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                               6 July 2021

Attachment 10    Submission 7 - Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan

PDF Creator



Sport and Recreation Policy Committee                                                                                 6 July 2021

Attachment 11    Lake Canobolas Precinct Master Plan Presentation Report for Council

PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator


PDF Creator