Facts and fiction in Boronia Park

Councillor Zac Miles recent article in The Weekly Times criticises the Draft Plan of Management for Boronia Park and gives incorrect information that could divide the community and reduce our capacity to make Boronia Park great for current users and future generations.

Contrary to what Clr Miles says:

  • There is no proposal to restrict recreational use in favour of conservation
  • There is no proposal to destroy existing infrastructure
  • There is no proposal to restrict access to facilities (private cars have been excluded from Princes St for most of the time during the last 3 years).

Clr Miles is concerned about the areas used for competitive sports, which is a quarter of the total park. The Draft Plan is for the whole park.

There is no need for sporting enthusiasts to worry.  The Draft Plan proposes major expenditure:

  • 60% for Active Recreation (club sport)
  • 7% for Bushland
  • 33% for Passive Recreation.

Alister Sharp checks each of the points in Clr Miles article (download here: Facts or fiction in the Draft PoM or see below).  Read the Plan of Management for Boronia Park  for yourself.

Councillor Miles’ article Comment by Alister Sharp
‘As many may be aware, Hunters Hill Council is currently in the process of reviewing its Plan of Management for Boronia Park.This important process allows us to deliver a vision for one of Hunters Hill’s premier sporting and recreation areas and allows our community to contribute and give their feedback on what improvements council should make to the park.’ Council selected, by open tender, a firm of landscape architects (Thompson Berrill Landscape Design) with 20 years experience to help them develop a new Plan of Management for Boronia Park.The tasks of the consultant were laid down in the Project Brief, and include that they ‘Address current issues including the mix of recreational facilities, recreation needs of residents, the natural bushland and conflict between users.’As required by Council, the consultants commenced the project by reading background legislation, polices and regulations, and then talking to all parties, with a special meeting with Councillors (which Clr Miles didn’t attend).

‘Unfortunately, we have seen a concerted effort by a vocal minority group in the community to restrict the main active and passive recreational uses of the park in favor of low-use conservation; which will come at the cost of the hundreds of patrons who use the park for recreation every day.’ The reason for placing documents such as the Draft Plan on Public Exhibition for an extended period is to allow individuals and community groups the opportunity to discuss the experts’ recommendations.Several community groups, including the Boronia Park Sports Clubs Coalition, have circulated their views as part of this process.To date, neither the Draft Plan, nor any community organisation, is suggesting to restrict recreational use of the park in favour of conservation. Indeed, the Draft Plan suggests several projects to increase recreational facilities.
‘There are a lot of wonderful conservation initiatives in the current draft plan, including consolidating walking tracks into a single path to circumnavigate the park and connect it more properly to the Great North Walk- ameliorating the damage currently caused by multiple small tracks cut through the bush, protecting endangered species and ensuring Aboriginal Heritage sites are protected and correctly documented.’ Yes!Amongst other recommendations in its Action Plan, the Draft Plan gives High priority to developing a comprehensive signage strategy, which will benefit all visitors to park.
‘Yet there are also a number of proposals which would add no value to the patrons of the park, including tearing up portions of Princes Street, restricting access to the Lane Cove River from the site, not providing proper access and parking improvements off Park Road and to Boronia Park Oval 3 and most importantly, not providing proper upgrades to the sporting facilities and amenity buildings for the more than 1500 club members who use the park regularly.’ Clr Miles seems to be expressing his personal views here, views that differ from the recommendations of the Draft Plan, made after consulting Councillors, sports clubs and the public (as documented in the Draft Plan).The Draft Plan (Action Plan, Section 4.5) explains the reasons for each of these recommendations:‘tearing up portions of Princes Street, restricting access to the Lane Cove River from the site’:The Draft Plan states: ‘Alteration of Princes Street road downhill from the second vehicle exclusion gate to allow for improved pedestrian amenity and experience, reducing road width to create 3m meandering trail and low indigenous vegetation to sides and improved swale to assist with storm water sediment control’ and to Install appropriate and sensitively designed park infrastructure reflective of natural setting to encourage water’s edge picnicking, including tables, seats, small shelter and bins’ (p42)These measures would assure access to the river.For access by car, there is a carpark and facilities to launch canoes and small boats immediately opposite, in Cunningham’s Reach Park (across Figtree Bridge).

not providing proper access and parking improvements off Park Road and to Boronia Park Oval 3′:

The Draft Plan states: ‘Pedestrian safety concerns associated with the use of Princes Street for overflow parking during community and sporting events’ (p45)

‘not providing proper upgrades to the sporting facilities and amenity buildings’:

The Draft Plan states: ‘Internal pavilion facilities are outdated, in poor condition and underutilised by sports clubs. Investigate opportunities for refurbishment of internal facilities for improved and additional uses, including provision of a meeting room for rugby club’ (p39)

Clr Miles’ claim of ‘more than 1500 club members’ seems rather optimistic!

‘These are basic requirements for any modern sporting ground; as a matter of safely (sic) we must at least include emergency and disabled access in the plan to Ovals 2 and 3 and provide adequate change room facilities, especially given that currently young sportspeople have to get changed outdoors which is certainly not safe in a public park.’ The Draft Plan allows for access by emergency vehicles, [‘Princes Street to be …  used for maintenance vehicle access and emergency use’ (p35)].It recognises the need for toilets between Ovals #2 and #3 (and costs this project at $350,000 (p38), but suggests that changing/showering facilities should be centralised at the grandstand/pavilion: ‘Internal pavilion facilities are outdated, in poor condition and underutilised by sports clubs. Investigate opportunities for refurbishment of internal facilities for improved and additional uses’ (p39)My observations are that child players arrive already in playing dress.
‘Boronia Park has been the home to Hunters Hill Rugby and Ryde Hunters Hill Cricket for over 125 years, and these two clubs have regularly funded major improvements to the infrastructure at Boronia Park.’ Yes, the Rugby and Cricket Clubs have funded certain capital works at Boronia Park (by their own fund-raising, and via grants from the NSW Government). But other capital costs, and the overwhelming proportion of the cost of maintenance, is borne by Council. For example the Council mows the turf, maintains the cricket pitches, and waters the Ovals; metered mains water for the ovals alone costs over $20,000 (@$2.23/kL) last year.
‘In my time on council they have completed the works on Boronia Oval 3,’ Council approved this project (bypassing the Development Application process) to be funded and managed by the Rugby Club. It was so poorly managed that Oval #3 was out of use for over 3 years, and the work is still incomplete and in need of amelioration. For example the Draft Report states that ‘Erosion in areas along top of bank due to plant failure and surface water flows over bank and lack of adequate drainage’ (p40), and there is no path from the temporary stairs at the southern end of Oval #3 to Boronia Ave.Rectifying the inadequate drainage of Oval #3: ‘low use by sporting codes due to poor drainage’.(p37).is costed at $250,000.Although allocated to the rugby club, many aspects of the work on Oval #3 were performed and/or funded by Council, including donation of the trees and shrubs, and high-quality turf.
‘built a new cricket shed, new cricket nets,’ The cricket club commenced work on the new shed without seeking a development approval, or permission to cut down casuarina trees on the site. The cricket shed and nets may benefit the club, but not the general public, in spite of sitting on public land.The Draft Plan notes ‘Cricket nets are locked, and not readily available for public use during times outside formal club practice’ (p40)
‘provided lighting to community facilities and levelled Oval 2.’ The lighting on Ovals #1 and #2 was found offensive because of light ‘spill’ over surrounding streets and houses, and recently has been replaced by Council, at their cost.
‘Both clubs also have a proud history of supporting the preservation of bush-land and conservation areas in Boronia Park, recently having planted over 1000 trees and shrubs along the edge of Oval 3 reintegrating it into the bush.’ These seedlings were provided by Council, and Council had to rectify the planting. A great many of the seedlings were washed away soon after planting, and the areas above the sandstone retaining walls are now weed-infested and unstable. The Draft Plan notes: ‘Inadequate stability of bank at oval #3’; ‘Erosion in areas along top of bank’;(p40); and ‘Low success rate of bank planting’, repair costed at $25,000 (p40).
‘IT WAS disappointing that some groups are distributing inflammatory documents in relation to the draft plan, blaming club sport for damaging the parks character and community value.’ No, the purpose of public exhibition of draft plans is to allow public discussion and comment. Members of the rugby and/or cricket club also have let the community know of their views via their Facebook page and a leaflet letter-boxed in the Boronia Park areas.
‘The clubs have always sought to develop this great community facility through continuous improvement and enhancement of the active space.’ The clubs are concerned only with that portion of Boronia Park used for competitive sport (a quarter of the total area) while the Plan of Management covers the whole of the Park:Bushland Zone = 55%, Active Recreation Zone = 25%,Passive Recreation Zone =­ 20% (from Fig 3, Draft Plan]
‘To this end, it is time that the Council pulled its weight and supported the clubs in this process rather than being distracted by nonsensical proposals to destroy existing infrastructure, restrict access to the facilities used by park patrons and stifle the active use of the park currently enjoyed by so many young sportspeople.’ There is no proposal in the Draft Plan to destroy existing infrastructure.There is no proposal to restrict access to facilities (private cars have been excluded from Princes St for most of the time during the last 3 years)The Draft Plan proposes major expenditure on the Park, primarily for club sport, as follows:Bushland Zone: $181,000 (= 7% of total)Active Recreation Zone: $1,555,000 (= 60% of total)Passive Recreation Zone: $855,000 (= 33% of total)
‘The community at large must use this opportunity to provide a clear future for Boronia Park and make sure that all of the groups who operate off of (sic) the site are well looked after; be they conservationists, recreational park users or our wonderful sporting groups.’ Council’s Brief requires the consultants to do just this. The Draft Plan considers separately the needs of each of the park’s three zones, and recommends projects for each.It is unfortunate, however, that it shows little support for girls’ and women’s sport at Boronia Park.

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  .

 

 

Bookmark permalink. Post a comment.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>