Survey 4 - ranking of Stage 1 Work Plan items
Flowing water in Stage 1 precinct
(December 2021, west of Armidale Central shopping centre)
In November 2021, we conducted a survey of our members to see what they thought of Council’s work plan for Stage 1 of the Creeklands Master Plan.
Note: this Work Plan was written by Council officers and adopted by Council with no opportunity given to our association to comment on it prior to it being put before Council.
We trust that the newly appointed Council will remedy the situation by ensuring that community associations such as Visions for Armidale Creeklands are invited to work with Council - so that the ideas put forward by our members (see below) are given serious consideration - before any Stage 1 Work Plan is implemented.
The results are shown below in a chart of all items ranked from highest to lowest.
The highest ranked items relate to vegetation changes.
The lowest ranked item is for the concrete based labyrinth.
Following the chart are a full listing of the comments received from members.
Our association believes that these results show which items got the most support but also, importantly, a considerable level of concern about some items, their costs and the process. This survey supports our suggestion made in our August 2021 blog that Council should engage with community groups in implementing its plan.
Survey of members of Visions for Armidale Creeklands (November 2021)
Ranking of Agreement with 20 items listed in adopted Work Plan (see Appendix below) for Rehabilitation Stage 1 Work Plan of the Creeklands Master Plan
Comments received from members in November 2021 survey about plans for Stage 1 of Creeklands Master Plan
Any comments on the re-constructed cycleway (uncosted)?
The cycle way doesn’t get flooded often and the money could be used for other projects along the creek.
Shared cycle way is very important for safety. Very important. More important than labyrinth. Labyrinth a waste of money and could do a maze with that money.
Cycleway needs to be above 5 year Average Recurrence Interval but also the roads need to be similarly (say 10 year ARI) designed, as Jessie, Faulkner, Dumaresq and Taylor Sts are closed due to flooding several times a year i.e. ARI less than 6 months. Cycleway needs to be wide for pedestrians too. Rubbish bins need to be provided along the cycleway near road crossings.
Does this also mean resurfacing the existing sections of the foot path/cycleway that will not be subjected to relocation. Many sections of the path are in a poor condition and are in need of maintenance
Perhaps not a priority when including establishment of pools, riffles and pumped recycling of water for Dumaresq Creek.
Need to know the cost before deciding
23. Please provide any additional thoughts you have about the Indicative Costs for any of the items above
I believe I can make a statement or answer these questions but it won’t make any difference to the decisions you have made already and things that have to be done.
I can’t see on a map what you are talking about sometimes so that is difficult also.
Most people would have no idea about how much each bit of work would cost, especially when there is no itemised scope of work. Also your survey questions are confusing. E.g. "pedestrian access from Dumaresq st to Markham St, including Dumaresq St". Do you have a plan that shows the extent of pedestrian access and which side of the road?
Concern that one third of costs are for unknown costs.
Not qualified to comment on costings.
I have no idea about costs. Please see my comments about calling for tenders in my answer to Q26.
Where are the provisions for ongoing maintenance and development?
The council already have all the facilities to do all the work that is required.
I am unsure of many of the costs - surely there is a way to get tenders to make sure of value for money?
24. What in your view are the best features of this Proposed Implementation Plan for Stage 1?
The opening up of the creek and make it more attractive to users.
A crossing to skate park. Shared bike and pathway for safety. I sometimes feel uneasy on the path when bikes are around.
Eliminate weeds, provide native vegetation, improve access.
Upgrading of western area of creek which has been a problem area.
Remediation of contaminated soil and clearance of creek.
I believe that this section of the creeklands requires the upgrading and modernization of facilities and that many of the works proposed will provide greater opportunities for users of the creeklands. The removal of weeds and woody weeds from the creek banks will allow greater access and improve stream flow and water quality.
VERY hard to determine
All features have some merit and some are essential (eg Gasworks remediation)
The aim of developing a 'family friendly' precinct that is likely to get more usage of the creeklands.
25. What in your view are the worst features of this Proposed Implementation Plan for Stage 1?
Upgrading Labyrinth and working on the Spanish arch. I feel are a waste of time and money that could be spent elsewhere.
Too much cost on exercise stations and fixing crumbling ruins.
Lack of imagination in terms of the creek itself and no consideration of water management
Lack of community consultation. Expenditure on exercise stations and labryinth and concern that expenditure is being syphoned into Council's responsibilities.
1) I believe that the plan has missed a great opportunity to provide more water in the landscape by the construction of designed water bodies that are connected to the creek that would not exacerbate flooding and would not become stagnant.
2) I am also disappointed the the plan proposes to use the funding for the construction of a traffic island across Dumaresq Street. Although it is obvious that this structure is required I believe this should be funded through Council's recurrent road budget as it is and has been a safety feature for many years. The foot paths at the causeway on Dumaresq St adjacent to Centro should be the subject of a complete redesign to improve safety and function.
3) Very disappointed that there wasn't a more enlightened vision for the duck pond with a possible enlargement or a second larger pond closer toward the creek with reticulating water.
4) Maybe the maze could have been replaced with an Aboriginal cultural feature and information providing an opportunity to express the importance of the original inhabitants of the area.
5) There is a wealth of knowledge and resources on the European history and use of the creeklands and no provision has been made to provide interpretative displays."One of the interesting features is the amount of detail given to infrastructure works rather than consider the environment value of landscape and water flow.
Anything associated with walkways
No pools and riffles. No planting of deciduous exotic trees in areas needing shade in summer and sun in winter while providing a highly attractive environment changing with the seasons.
The lack of any provision for healthy, aerated water to flow continuously through the precinct even during drought times.
26. Please provide any thoughts you have about Council's decision to use NSW Public Works Advisory and the Soil Conservation Service to carry out the design and management of the implementation of Stage 1
I think that is okay
I don’t know enough to answer this question.
It seems like an opportunity for government to waste money on themselves.
need independent advice
It would be great for Armidale if locals could be involved and employed for all of this work. It might end up being much cheaper.
I assume with the issues of contamination within the creek and surrounding soils that the SCS is an appropriate organization to carry out the works within the stream bed and be the project managers for the construction phases of the project.
Any Government Service is certain to waste time, stuff up the investigation and waste money.
Unfamiliar with details
I don't have any experience or qualifications to comment, other than to say ALL work, including project management, should go to tender, with a public, clear and appropriate tender process to select all involved.
I am unsure of their landscape design skills and commitment to listening to the community
27. Any other thoughts, feedback or suggestions?
Toilets and facilities around skatepark would be great. Maybe more families would use this area then.
I'm concerned that in making the creek more meandering, the slope of the creek will be made flatter (culvert invert levels across roads are at fixed heights), and therefore very little opportunity to have a "bubbling brook". The creek may become more stagnant.
Council should be encouraged to establish a community group to consult with on the Creek Lands and other issues within the city. With regards the creek lands this funding is only for stage 1. Why wait for years before getting community input in to planning for stages 2,3 and 4.
The modern definition of consultation is that administrators make decisions then inform the public. I thought that consultation means consult at the start of the process.
Nope
The council should continuously do the required work.
I hope that Council decides to take a more active role in coordinating things and especially to encourage input from relevant community groups to ensure an outcome that will please the broader community.
Appendix. Rehabilitation Stage 1 Work Plan (adopted by Council on 25 August 2021)
