North West Coastal Pathway Project Stage One – Emerging Issues and Themes Introduction The North West Coastal Pathway Project commenced in 2009 as an initiative to plan the manner in which the coastal towns of North West Tasmania could be connected through walking and cycling facilities and to capitalise on research efforts over a number of years that suggested the concept has broad community and strategic support. The project will provide a framework for the development of a regional shared walking and cycle pathway along the North West Coast. It will enable key stakeholders to make informed decisions in relation to route selection, supporting infrastructure, budgets and construction standards by:
consolidating previous work and project outcomes;
supporting planning and feasibility for those sections yet to be considered;
focusing current interest and activity on critical decisions;
providing a regional approach to the resolution of key issues relating to access to road and rail easements and bridges, investment attraction, construction standards etc;
providing a sound basis for informed budgeting and estimation of construction and lifecycle costs for specific elements or complete sections of the pathway.
The Cradle Coast Authority have created a project Steering Committee and appointed a Project Manager to drive the project. Key to the project is ensuring that it delivers workable outcomes which value add to the current effort of Local Government to develop critical pieces of pathway infrastructure that could potentially be linked together to create a regional route.
Project Background The idea of a regional coastal walking and cycling pathway is not new and was first formally mooted by the former regional organisation of Councils in 1997. Since then, several strategic recreational planning studies have made recommendations in relation to conducting a planning process with the specific outcome being the development of a regional pathway route.1 The more recent Trails Tasmania Strategy suggested such a route could become a champion regional trail. 2 Other processes, such as the UTas Greenways Project, also recognised the importance of such a pathway as an alternative transport route. 3
1
2 3
2003 Cradle Coast Tracks Strategy
Inspiring Place, 2007, Trails Tasmania Strategy UTas Bachelor of Regional Resource Management students, 2009, Greenways Project.
1
Infrastructure development and strategic planning undertaken by Local Government within the North West region of Tasmania has also highlighted the significant support that exists for walking and cycling pathways and is reflected in a number of on the ground pathway developments along the North West Coast. The research to date has highlighted the existence of strong evidence to suggest that a coastal pathway would deliver substantial community benefits through improving community connectedness, increasing lifestyle options and providing an alternative transport opportunity. The project aims to develop a plan to guide, in an integrated manner, the development of pathway infrastructure across municipal boundaries, ensuring the delivery of wide ranging health, transport and lifestyle benefits. In recognition of the potential benefits of a regional shared pathway project, and in response to the studies that recommended its delivery, Cradle Coast Authority has established a Steering Committee and appointed a Project Manager to drive the process. Funding has been contributed from the CCA, the Latrobe, Devonport City, Central Coast, Burnie City and Waratah Wynyard Councils, and the State Government to ensure the pathway planning phase can progress. A project work plan has been developed to guide the delivery of the project and articulates three stages of work. The stages are briefly outlined below: Stage 1 Information Gathering Collection of information from a range of sources, including literature review, discussion with key local government stakeholders (path owners/maintainers), data collection and inventory creation, and mapping of existing and proposed pathway infrastructure and projects. Stage 2 Information Analysis Analysis of information collected in Stage 1, identification of constraints and opportunities, further (wider) stakeholder liaison to resolve issues raised, consideration of planning issues and alignment to strategic funding priorities. Stage 3 Plan and package Creation of a finalised map showing regional route and supporting package of information to assist route developers. At the completion of the three stages, the project will deliver: 
an integrated package of design, planning and feasibility work covering the full extent of the pathway including route alignment and supporting infrastructure and cost estimates suitable for use in detailed implementation proposals, requests for quotations and funding applications;

resolution of access, approval and ongoing management arrangements or options across different land tenure, asset types and planning jurisdictions, including crown land, railway corridors, highways and bridges;

recommendations regarding strategic priorities, linkages and outstanding issues that need to be addressed in relation to the establishment of the shared pathway but are outside the scope or influences of this project.
2
Project Communications In conjunction with the Project Steering Committee, a communications plan has been developed for project by CCA‟s Communications Manager. Effective communication and the engagement of stakeholders are critical to the success of the project. Communications planning has included the development of key messages for the project, a question and answer document for Steering Committee members and an information kit tailored to various stakeholder interests. Communications objectives were identified as follows:
increase awareness of the project purpose and deliverables so as to effectively manage expectations among target audiences.
enable path owners and maintainers to be engaged with all phases of the project so that they develop a sense of custody of the outcomes.
create a transparent project environment that supports a „no surprises‟ way of working with all audiences.
Key messages have been identified as follows:
the recreational shared pathway concept is not new but displays continued broad community and strategic support over many years;
research over this period has suggested that the concept could become a champion regional trail;
local government infrastructure development and strategic planning continues to highlight the support that exists for walking and cycling pathways as an alternative coastal transport route, for health and wellbeing purposes and as potential tourism assets;
there is strong evidence to suggest a coastal pathway could deliver substantial community benefits through improving community connectedness, increasing lifestyle options and providing alternative transport opportunity;
the project aims to develop a plan to guide the development of pathway infrastructure in an integrated way across municipal boundaries.
Project Status Stage one, information gathering, is almost completed. A literature review has been conducted and provides both background and reference documents/information for future use in the stages two and three. In consultation with Councils, an inventory has been prepared of local government infrastructure that currently exists, infrastructure under planning and/or development and desired future infrastructure. This inventory should be circulated to participating councils to ensure its currency.
3
Initial stakeholder discussions have been held with local government. This has been written up and includes experiential information around route planning, construction standards, community liaison, data collection and future desirables. All Councils involved in the project have been consulted with the exception of Latrobe Council who only recently agreed to participate in the project. Consideration has been given to the need to undertake data collection exercises beyond that which exists through national, state and regional exercises. An Action Plan has been developed to guide the future progress of the project and to highlight issues identified in Stage 1 that need further action. Literature Review A range of literature sources has been located and analysed, with the specific intent of determining relevance to the project for generic information, relevant data and for reference material as the project develops. A tabulated reference document has been developed out of the review and is attached as Appendix A. The literature review capitalises on learning and experience from a variety of sources. Local experiences documented by councils and Sport and Recreation Tasmania staff have provided some immediate context to the issues and challenges identified more broadly in the literature. These broader examples include best practice guidelines produced by several Australian and NZ organisations, public health strategies, cycleway network strategies and broader strategic recreation and trail planning exercises from around Tasmania. The documents have been reviewed with a focus on their relevance to this shared pathway project. The outcomes have been documented in a table, which will provide an accessible reference point when working to resolve particularly technical issues. The literature review has highlighted the considerable resources available that can be positively applied to the project development, and potentially allows the project to apply this information directly. In particular, the South Australian Guidelines, which are currently being interpreted for Tasmanian use, can provide the framework for the supporting plan to be developed as part of the projectâ€&#x;s third stage. 4 Further to this, the work carried out as part of the Trails Tasmania Strategy has direct relevance, especially when considering how to prioritise projects and what criteria to apply to this task. Inventory of Infrastructure and Projects As part of the initial consultation process, discussion has been held with participating councils to identify existing and planned infrastructure as well as desirable projects. The resultant tabulated inventory highlights the amount of activity that is currently occurring, either in planning or construction of shared pathways, associated 4
South Australian Government (undated) SA Sustainable Recreational Trails – Guidelines for the planning, design, construction and maintenance of recreational trails in SA (http://www.southaustraliantrails.com/resources.asp), accessed 17 March 2010.
4
supporting facilities and/or as part of broader open space and recreation strategies. It also highlights the significant resource commitments that councils are making to the roll out of pathway projects. The inventory is attached as Appendix B. The inventory should now be reality checked by each participating council to ensure its correctness. Once this has been done, it will form a basis to underpin a status map showing what infrastructure has been constructed, what is to be constructed and most importantly, when applying a regional perspective, where the gaps will be. Consultation Initial stakeholder consultation has been restricted to representatives of the participating councils. This has been a deliberate strategy to allow the gathering of as much information as possible from the asset owners/developers in the first instance, prior to talking with those agencies/organisations/individuals with a role or interest in pathway development. Further targeted consultation will be necessary as part of the second stage of the project, and should include government agencies and land managers, community organisations with a specific cycling/walking focus, community members with a specific project focus and in relation to particular issues outlined in the themes, those who hold technical expertise within local government, such as engineers (i.e. pathway construction standards) and planners (land use mechanisms to preserve/protect a regional pathway corridor). Initial comments of Council representatives are included in the consultation document for information. This is attached at Appendix C. Data Collection The project has reviewed the amount of available data around participation in sport and recreation and in particular walking and cycling activities. Information around participation is most recently researched and collated in the documents listed below. Of particular interest, the Tasmanian ERASS data outlines that in 2008, approximately 42.1% of respondents to the survey (or 162,200 people) indicated they took part in some form of walking activity (non bushwalking) and 9.6% (37,000) in cycling activity. Key data sources for cycling and walking participation levels are listed below. Australian Sports Commission (2009), Participation in Exercise, Sport and Recreation Survey 2008 (ERASS) Australian Sports Commission (2009), Participation in Exercise, Sport and Recreation Survey 2008, Annual Report, State Tables for Tasmania Inspiring Place (2007), Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007, (Tasmanian Government). The issue of data collection has been discussed several times with the Steering Committee during Stage 1. A decision was taken that due to the amount of available data and anecdotal evidence around participation and community demand for pathway facilities, it was not necessary to undertake a major data collection exercise 5
to underpin the project rationale. Discussions with participating councils and representatives from state government have affirmed this approach. In developing pathway projects, councils have responded to their own community consultation outcomes, anecdotal comments/evidence and use observations. These have also been formally documented by way of strategic plan references and funded actionable commitments to pathway roll outs. It is important that the decision to utilise what is available rather than building new data around demand and participation does not affect the level of community engagement in the project. There is recognition of the need to inform the community on a regular basis of the project‟s progress as well as potentially providing opportunities for comment when a proposed route is closer. This activity has been planned for in an ongoing manner and is not necessary for the purposes of determining participation levels, use trends etc. There is enough data and information to support the project aims and objectives as well as to underpin future funding applications that may be made. The information collected from the research sources to date has been analysed for the purposes of providing a synthesis which highlights emerging themes and issues that the project must consider and resolve. A detailed explanation of these emergent themes and issues follows below.
Synthesis - Emerging Themes and Issues Drawing together the data and information that has been collected to date highlights a range of emerging issues and themes which have resonated frequently during discussions and review of existing status. Some of these themes are universal to shared pathway projects, no matter where they occur. Others are locally and/or regionally specific, and in the main these issues/themes will require particularised action and a higher degree of liaison and consultation to resolve. These local issues are often the ones which could potentially provide the biggest wins for the project planning phase and include resolution of the rail and land use planning issues that are discussed in more detail below. The emerging themes and issues arising out of the process to date can be articulated and categorised as follows:
project benefits/drivers health and wellbeing; environmental (especially alternative transport modes); tourism and economic opportunities; integrated community benefit.
community expectations capturing and managing community expectations; opportunities for community involvement in pathway planning/delivery processes; ensuring community is informed about pathway planning developments;
6
route planning (land management) the rail corridor; land tenure.
route planning (technical issues) mapping the route; planning for technical issues; dealing with the “sticky points”; planning toolkit.
regional shared pathway delivery land use planning processes; funding issues; project prioritisation; pathway management and maintenance.
A discussion of these emerging themes and issues follows below.
Project Drivers Active communities are those that provide built and natural environments that promote physical activity, social and mental well being and community interaction. Important elements shown to assist this are access to open space and recreational facilities, good pedestrian facilities, urban design that encourages connecting paths for pedestrians and cyclists and proximity to walkways and paths.5 There is widespread agreement on the benefits of shared pathway infrastructure and the drivers for projects across the nation. The literature and consultation highlights recurrent unifying themes around the desire to develop recreational walking and cycling pathway facilities for communities. These benefits and drivers can essentially be categorised in three ways:
health and wellbeing;
environmental benefits, particularly an alternative transport mode;
tourism and economic benefits.
Health and Wellbeing A key driver for the roll out of new shared pathway infrastructure is the desire to positively impact on the health and wellbeing of Tasmanians. Participation rates for exercise and physical activity in Tasmania are the second lowest in the nation and figures quoted in various documents highlight that 71% of Tasmanians do not undertake sufficient physical activity to meet the national guidelines of 30 minutes per day.6
5 6
Tasmanian Government (2005), Tasmanian Physical Activity Plan, 2005-2010, p.11. ibid. p.3
7
Key benefits of trail infrastructure have been summarised in the background documentation to the Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007 (Inspiring Place for Sport and Recreation Tasmania 2007, p.3) as well in documents such as the Tasmanian Physical Activity Plan 2005-2010. In relation to health and wellbeing, these are outlined below:
participation improves fitness, health and wellbeing;
increased recognition of healthy design considerations by planners, with the resulting recognition of the need to design safe and accessible activity environments that encourage physical activity and improved health and fitness outcomes for local communities;
the need to reduce the number of Tasmanians suffering from a range of lifestyle related health issues;
national physical activity trends indicate that participation in unstructured recreational activities is increasing;7
research has shown that trails/pathways provide a strong incentive to exercise and are used by many as a means to spend time with family and friends. 8
The health and wellbeing benefits of this type of recreation infrastructure are not contested and there is a range of statistical and anecdotal evidence to support their role as a pathway project driver. Environmental Benefits Environmental benefits have been identified throughout the planning process to date and take several forms. Alternative Transport Modes The potential to develop an alternative transport mode through the provision of shared pathway infrastructure has been highlighted as both a project driver and benefit through the literature and the consultations to date. There is widespread agreement on the need to facilitate alternative transport forms with lower emissions as a method of reducing the carbon footprint of our current transportation methods and providing a local response to concerns around climate change. One way to do this is to provide increased shared pathway infrastructure which connects towns and cities externally and internally and facilitates easy use for those who wish to use it. Key to this is the delivery of opportunities for cyclists and pedestrians who wish to commute to and from work which are able to replicate the streamlined nature of highway travel, are readily transitable in terms of access and connectivity and provide supporting infrastructure, such as bicycle lockers, at the end of trip points. Shared pathway infrastructure can also reduce congestion in terms of road use and parking facilities. Another key benefit of providing an alternative transport mode is affordability in relation to vehicles and petrol costs. Walking or riding is a more accessible and 7 8
See ERASS data for statistical indicators. Research undertaken by Market Equity in 2004, quoted in SA Government, undated, p.4.
8
cheaper mode of transport for many people and provides a greater degree of mobility where public transport is poor or unaffordable. 9 Climate Change Considerations Well connected pathway networks have been found to decrease the use of motor vehicles for transportation and recreation, with associated positive impacts on emission production, climate change impact and health problems related to emissions. General Environmental Awareness and Enjoyment Other environmental benefits that can be identified include the opportunity to develop a greater awareness of the natural environment, by providing opportunities for the community to enjoy important environmental features and minimise the impact of visitation and usage of areas of environmental value along the pathway route. Tourism and Economic Benefits Pathway infrastructure in the form of regional trails can provide positive tourism and economic benefits to communities. The 2008 Tasmanian Visitor Survey reported that 21,600 visitors engaged in a cycling experience whilst in Tasmania, spending $47m and accounting for 376,400 room rights.10 Pathway infrastructure provides opportunities, where they are strategically planned, to connect to key pieces of tourism infrastructure, such as an attraction, or for high value tourism experiences in their own right, by way of scenic views or adventure tourism for example. The opportunity for visitors to traverse a regional trail, connecting from town to town has been identified by some stakeholders as a key tourism benefit of a regional trail for backpackers and those who come to Tasmania for walking experiences and has yet to be capitalised upon. In a wider economic context, the broader benefits of regional shared pathway infrastructure arise from several sources including the spending of tourists and non resident visitor to towns connected to the pathway, the opportunity to reduce healthcare expenditure for communities through the encouragement of healthier lifestyles and the potential for business enterprises to develop out of the pathway infrastructure. Demonstrating Integrated Community Benefit Finally, a regional shared pathway allows local communities to achieve an integrated benefit (combining the health and wellbeing, environmental and economic benefits outlined above) through the provision of one recreational facility. Again, the literature and the consultation to date support the value of shared pathways in delivering such integrated benefit, as this enables a multipronged strategic alignment to be demonstrated when securing funding to deliver projects. In this way, local government providers have been able to argue for a range of community benefits to be delivered under the umbrella of one project and maximise the achievement of 9 10
Inspiring Place, 2007 Quoted in LGAT News, 12/2009
9
strategic imperatives of their own and other levels of government. This has been successfully carried out by several councils to date and highlights an appropriate and acceptable rationale for future funding submissions.
Community expectations The development of a regional shared pathway has been mooted across the North West coast for some years now and it is clear from initial consultations and the review of literature that this is a project that rates highly in terms of community expectations. How these community expectations are captured and managed becomes extremely important and consideration has been given to the manner in which pathway providers are going about this task at present. All Councils have captured community expectations around the provision of shared pathway infrastructure within their strategic and operational objectives articulated through their five year and annual planning processes. They are also further detailed in capital works plans and budgets and funding commitments sought from state and federal government election processes. Much of the community input has come from recreation/strategic planning processes and/or informal discussions with stakeholders (individuals and formal groups). There has been little by way of formal localised data collection processes to determine community expectations and demands around shared pathway infrastructure. Much of the evidence utilised for funding processes, either within Councils or by way of external funding submissions, has relied on anecdotal evidence, national sport and recreation participation trend reporting and use observations for existing infrastructure. Much of the literature includes statistics around walking and cycling participation and this has been used to draw conclusions around demands and expectations at the local level. More recently, at least one formal area specific data collection exercise is underway and, when completed, will provide a localised snapshot that will assist in drawing conclusions relevant to the broader regional area. Community expectations have been managed by facility providers to date in several ways:
providing facilities in line with what the community has asked for, as funds become available;
inviting community stakeholders to join in planning processes for shared pathway infrastructure, through information gathering processes or on the ground route delineation;
highlighting infrastructure costs and the need to secure funding;
ensuring communities are kept informed of planning and developments around shared pathway infrastructure;
celebrating successes through community information and events.
The information gathered to date highlights the importance of managing community expectations through communication and involvement. One example of this was 10
highlighted in relation to the development of a local pathway. Over the years, coastal pathway projects have been discussed with a subsequent growth in expectation around the alignment of the route along the coastal strip. Whilst to pathway planners it was evident that a fully coastal pathway may be compromised for various reasons, it became evident that some in the community had an expectation in relation to the path alignment and its desired footprint along the coast. The final route whilst relatively coastal does not follow the coast in its entirety, due to land tenure and planning issues. This experience highlights the importance of clearly articulating the concept and thinking carefully about the pathway description. Both are factors that will have impact on community expectations. The positive in this situation is that the final pathway route has been delivered and received enthusiastically by the broader community. Critical to managing community expectations throughout the regional shared pathway project is the development of a communications plan to guide the provision, content and quality of communications for the life of the project. Three objectives have been identified for project communications which include:
increasing awareness of the project purpose and deliverables so as to effectively manage expectations among target audiences.
enabling path owners and maintainers to be engaged with all phases of the project so that they develop a sense of custody of the outcomes.
creating a transparent project environment that supports a „no surprises‟ way of working with all audiences. 11
Key planks of the communications plan include the development of key messages and frequently asked questions documents for Steering Committee members and briefing information for participating Councils. This material will be supported by information for media release and the broader community. Communications for the project will be delivered from a central point to ensure continuity of message and the achievement of the communications objectives above. Also critical is the manner in which the Project Manager and Steering Committee involve those that may be directly affected by the proposed pathway route. Pathway routes usually have some connection to private land, frequently adjoining it. It is not unusual for planning processes to have to deal with community members who do not wish to have a pathway adjoining their back fence or similar. In some cases, residents believe that, rightly or wrongly, they will lose their privacy, amenity or security. Management of community expectations in this regard will be important to the success of the pathway planning process, should ensure that residents are able to become engaged in discussion on these matters and allow residents to be part of the solution.
Route Planning (Land Management) The planning process to date has highlighted issues around land management that represent considerable significance to route planning and the likelihood of a 11
Cradle Coast Authority (2010) Communications Plan - Regional Shared Pathway Project.
11
workable route being achieved. In the main, these issues fall into two categories – those relating to the rail corridor and those relating to land tenure. The Rail Corridor Issues surrounding the rail corridor (rail reserve) were raised almost universally during the initial local government consultations. Identified as both an opportunity and a constraint, the lack of an articulated policy position on the part of the rail operator appears to create considerable uncertainty among shared pathway planners in terms of project and route feasibility. In fact, the ability to utilise the existing rail corridor is seen as one of the most major issues for some local government stakeholders. There is no doubt that perceptions around rail have been influenced significantly by previous stakeholder attempts to consult with and involve former rail operators. Most of these efforts were considered to be less than adequate in terms of the outcomes they delivered. More recently however, some positive outcomes have been achieved in projects such as the Turners Beach to Ulverstone pathway which secured access to parts of the rail corridor. The role that the rail corridor may play in the development of a regional shared pathway can be explored from both a geographical and an issues perspective as follows. Issue1
The future of the un-used portion of the corridor west of Burnie
The Burnie to Wiltshire rail line was closed to rail traffic from approximately 2003, having previously been closed for three years between 1996 and 1999. The line formed part of a larger rail corridor known as the Far Western Line, which originally included connections from Wiltshire to Smithton (25.6km) and to Stanley (8.8km). The line between Burnie and Wiltshire is estimated as being 80.3km in length and is the only part of the Far Western Line still relatively intact. This section of track is owned and managed by the Tasmanian Government, who now acts as owner/manager of main line rail infrastructure and rolling stock under the banner of the Tasmanian Rail Company. 12 The rail route west of Burnie has been described as follows: From Burnie to Wynyard, the line closely follows the coastline of Bass Strait, for the majority of route between the main road and the water, before turning inland and passing through the south of Wynyard township. From here the line continued generally westward along the Inglis River valley toward Flowerdale, before commencing the curvaceous climb in a south-westerly direction to the summit beyond Myalla. This sets the scene for the next few sections of the line, which descends to Hellyer (north/northwesterly direction), then again climbs to Mawbanna (westerly) before descending to Black River (almost northerly direction). These sections of the line pass through a mixture of farmland and forest. From
12
Rails Tasmania 2009, Far Western Line, http://www.railtasmania.com/lines/farwestern_line.htm accessed 2 April 2010.
12
Black River to Wiltshire, and then to Stanley the line passes through rough costal scrub and generally follows the line of the highway. From Wiltshire the line first runs almost south, then west to Irishtown, and then north to Smithton. Proposals to rebuild the line in recent years have suggested a new alignment following the highway nearer the coast. 13 Since the Wiltshire lineâ€&#x;s closure in 2003, the track and rail corridor has not been used for any purpose, other than by individuals who cross it to access coastal reserves/beaches, or who use it as an informal walking track. Closure of the track is achieved by signage and barricades at various points along it but the track infrastructure itself appears to have remained mostly in place. The consultation process identified however, that crossing infrastructure and ad hoc pieces of track in some township areas may have been removed. The intentions of the Tasmanian Railway Company in relation to the Burnie to Wiltshire line are critical to the pathway planning process west of Burnie. Discussions with the Waratah Wynyard Council have indicated their desire to redevelop this unused rail corridor into a coastal shared pathway which would connect to Burnie and potentially to the western end of the region. At this stage, the Councilâ€&#x;s pathway route planning is focused very much on the rail reuse option and includes considerations of both removing the track and constructing a pathway in its place, or alternatively the less attractive option of laying a removable form of pathway over the top of the track to cater for any need to use the rail infrastructure again in the future. Provisions for the management of obsolete, unused or rail infrastructure in disrepair are included in the Rail Infrastructure Act 1997 and include powers to remove infrastructure that falls into the above categories. Issue 2
Access to rail reserve edges
For those pathway planners east of, and including, Burnie, there is a need to understand the potential to access the unutilised edges of the rail corridor for shared pathway developments. As mentioned above, local government has traditionally found it difficult to secure agreement from previous rail operators for this to occur. The scale of maintenance that the rail operator must undertake on a statewide basis meant that the unutilised sections of the rail reserve were often unkempt, overgrown, a potential safety and/or fire hazard and a cause for community concern. Discussion with pathway planners/developers has indicated the desire for knowledge about the potential to utilise the edges of the rail corridor for route development. This would allow significantly increase the likelihood of the regional route being achieved given the established nature of the corridor. It would also potentially facilitate a coastal setting for a large part of the regional route, given the current rail corridor hugs the coastline in a number of places.
13
Ibid.
13
Progress on this issue would be indicated by the articulation of agreed guiding principles in relation to the area of the corridor that may be usable, the parameters around its use and the manner in which any proposal to use it would need to be presented. Inherent in this would be consideration of the responsibility around developments within the corridor for maintenance and issues of risk management. Issue 3 Rail crossings There is a lack of clarity currently around the issue of rail crossings, given the number of different styles of crossings in use and difficulties that have been experienced in relation to the addition of rail crossing points when planning route alignments. One council provided information that the position of the rail operator is that there will be no additional crossing points, however this does not seem to have been communicated formally to pathway planners. Further, there is no clarity around what type of crossing should be proposed in what area and this is reflected on the ground with a range of different crossings evident. Sport and Recreation Tasmania have documented the range of crossing types in use (of differing legal status) and examples are included below. 14
West Park Beach Burnie
Don River Railway Devonport
14
Sport and Recreation Tasmania, unauthored document.
14
Oakleigh Park Burnie
West Ulverstone
15
Devonport Western Bank Mersey River
Devonport Western Bank Mersey River
Turners Beach
16
Turners Beach
Key to future developments is an understanding of what is required by the Tasmania Railway Company in relation to crossing points and from council perspectives, ensuring that crossing points maximise safety and access for community members. Necessary then, is a clear position from the rail operator in relation to railway crossing points and preferred style to assist shared pathway planning. Issue Four
A Clearly Articulated Policy Position
Discussions with local government stakeholders highlighted that pathway planning processes are suffering from uncertainty and delays as a result of the lack of a clearly articulated policy position in relation to the use of the rail corridor and associated issues. This is a significant issue for the regional project and a resolution would represent a major win for both the regional pathway project as well as stakeholders involved in pathway planning. Discussions need to be held with the Tasmanian Government/Tasmanian Rail Company to understand the positions and policy of the operator on these issues and determine a way forward that can work for all parties. At present, the lack of utilisation of some areas of the rail corridor creates inefficiencies for the rail operator, in terms of maintenance of areas it is no longer using. This may be used as a positive lever to open discussions about these areas. It is clear from the documentation reviewed that the need for a clearly articulated policy position on rail futures (as they affect pathway route planning) is not a new concept to State Government. Securing such a position would greatly facilitate route planning by clarifying the situation in relation to the above issues. Land Tenure The issue of land tenure has been raised as critical to the successful resolution of pathway routes and something which needs to be dealt with during the planning 17
phase of the project. In essence, with the exception of rail, land that is flagged for shared pathway development will reside in local government and/or Crown and there may be a need to consider acquisition of private lands at some stage (as a last resort). A number of stakeholders referred to a desire to plan for a route that maximises its relationship to the coast and capitalises on the scenic and aesthetic values inherent in this. Pathway planning to date has, however, in highlighted that the mix of land tenures can add a higher and sometimes undesirable degree of difficulty in terms of gaining access to that land and developing the pathway. For this reason, some proposed routes have deviated from a coastal alignment or have been realigned to ensure that there is no encroachment on private land. In cases where this has occurred, pathway planners have reported that managing community expectations around route alignment and delivery has been critical and requires communication with and engagement of those that may potentially be affected. Issues around the usage of Crown land were raised in consultation processes in relation to the potential for pathway routes to cross or utilise parcels of land in Crown ownership. This has ramifications especially where a pathway route corridor is adopted, but not developed for some time. There are several mechanisms that can be utilised by pathway planners to access/preserve parcels of land integral to the proposed pathway route. Crown Land Services has established application and approval processes to enable organisations to seek approval for the use/occupation of Crown land by way of purchase, licence or lease.15 An additional mechanism may be through the use of local government/regional partnership agreements to negotiate agreement on the future use of Crown land for pathway development projects.
Route planning (technical issues) A range of technical issues in relation to shared pathway route planning have been identified as a result of consultation and literature review processes. These are discussed below. Mapping the route An initial output of Stage 1 was the development of a status map which displays the pathway infrastructure currently in place, infrastructure under development and desire future pathway infrastructure. This map would essentially highlight the gaps in route development that the regional shared pathway would seek to fill, initially in a planning sense. There have been several attempts at mapping shared pathways in recent years, most recently through the Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007 and a further attempt as
15
The Northern representative for Crown Land Services is Sophie King, who can be contacted on 6336 4978.
18
part of the UTas Greenways project. A hard copy map has been produced as part of the latter project. Consultation has identified differing views on the most appropriate manner of producing such a map. Mapping data on The List is incomplete, and whilst work is underway to improve the capability in relation to pathway mapping, it has not yet been completed. Further complicating the situation, North West Councils use different GIS platforms and this makes the production of a streamlined map somewhat more difficult than expected. An alternate suggestion has been to use Google Earth as the mapping platform and upload pathway information onto it but this has not yet been explored in any detail. As a result, a regional status map is yet to be produced. Discussions with Cradle Coast Authority representatives on this matter have indicated that the Authority has a technical services working group that may best provide advice on the appropriate way forward with this matter. Alternatively, there is an opportunity to source out this work however this will come at a cost to the project. This matter has been flagged for further action in the Action Plan that overlays this document. Planning for Technical Issues Planning for the technical issues in relation to the regional shared pathway involves resolving a range of development issues prior to the selection of any preferred option. A range of literature sources has been reviewed to provide an overview of the types of matters that require consideration. 16 These matters link into the land use planning aspects and will include consideration of the following:
environmental matters: are there any no go areas? protection and potential improvement of areas of environmental significance; consideration of sea level rise impacts, flood potential and coastal erosion processes on route alignment; impacts in relation to threatened species and protected areas, including coastal reserves;
cultural and heritage considerations: will the project have any impact on areas of cultural and heritage significance? where the route provides greater access to areas of known significance, what safeguards will be incorporated;
trail access and sharing opportunities: accommodation of multiple users in a safe and effective manner;
on ground conditions:
16
Of particular use are the South Australian Guidelines that have been referred to previously.
19
once preferred route is mapped, consideration of on ground conditions to ensure that physical constraints and opportunities are understood and incorporated into the technical planning process;
concept technical design: physical specifications of the trail need to consider length, width, surface materials, drainage, trail heads, signage and markers; required standards of construction should also be considered in line with Australian Standards and in the case of this regional process, whether a minimum standard needs to be adopted; road and rail crossings if necessary;
management and maintenance planning: who will take responsibility for what parts of the regional pathway; what are the likely maintenance costs of different materials; what will the ongoing maintenance cost for the pathway be once constructed?
capital cost: what is the expected capital cost for the project, including sections.17
Included below is a section of the checklist included in the South Australian Guidelines which provides a broad overview of processes involved in the development planning phase of the pathway planning process.
Utilising this checklist in addition to the list of issues that any land use planning process would require for pathway development should ensure that the approach to technical issues is thorough and also that any fatal flaws in relation to the selected route can be dealt with prior to finalisation of the regional route alignment.
17
SA Government, (undated) pp.27-28.
20
The “Sticky Points” The research into the development of shared pathways in North West Tasmania to date, has shown that prioritisation of pathway infrastructure projects has been mainly limited to areas that:
can capture a significant number of users within the community;
act as connections and linkages between key points of the area, such as into the CBD, between significant community attractions or sites, or connect townships within a municipality;
can be relatively easily developed in terms of topography, available land footprints and environmental impact.
UTas Greenway‟s Project (2009) adopted the concept of “sticky points”, i.e. those parts of a shared pathway route which provide a high degree of difficulty in resolving.18 Good examples of these locations are river crossings, such as the Forth and Blythe Rivers, where bridge infrastructure has made no provision for pedestrian or cycle users. The concept of sticky points can be further expanded to include those potential connections in the regional route which may be deemed of low value for money in terms of development cost and user population, such as the edges of municipal areas where resident populations are small or where traversing the terrain may be complex, or achievable only at high cost. In this first cut approach, there are a number of sticky points evident in route selection. These include:
river crossings, which in the main have no current capacity to provide for pathway infrastructure;
lesser populated areas, such as the linkage between the Devonport and Central Coast municipalities;
topographic issues, where alternative routes are also relatively steep or winding;
These issues create sticky points because of their cost to resolve, their general complexity and the subsequent negotiations that will be necessary for their resolution. However, if the regional project can find the solutions to these sticky points, it is expected that this will be a major win for the regional pathway project. Action will be required on several fronts, including consultation with the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, the Tasmanian Rail Company, participating councils and potentially private landowners. Initially, action should include the working group of those with engineering and technical expertise to work through the route planning issues and eventually determine some solutions in relation to these points.
18
UTas (2009) Greenways Project: The Spine – Groundwork.
21
Pathway Planning Toolkit The initial project plan for the regional pathway project identified the need to develop a planning toolkit to assist the future development of the pathway as an outcome of the third stage of the project. Whilst this has not as yet been achieved, the investigations undertaken in this first stage of the project has highlighted that one of the recommendations of the Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007 was the development of such a planning toolkit. As a result of a request for progress, Sport and Recreation Tasmania has advised that a Tasmanian toolkit is currently under development and will be based on the South Australian trail guidelines which have previously been referred to. Permission has been secured to adapt/copy these guidelines for Tasmania and a review of content is underway. Given the effort being made to provide the toolkit, it is suggested that the initial project plan be reviewed in relation to refining this planning objective.
Regional Shared Pathway Delivery Land Use Planning Processes The pathway planning process must consider two key issues in relation to land use planning and make decisions initially on the sequence and timing of development approval processes. Essentially, if development approval processes are delayed whilst funding is sought/awaited, then consideration needs to be given to the manner in which the selected route corridor can be embedded and preserved to ensure that the route remains intact until such time as it can be developed. Development Approval Process A statutory development approval process will be required for the development of the regional pathway and will involve approximately 6 councils. At present, these councils have different requirements and prescriptions around the development of recreational pathways, including what process the planning scheme requires, what use category they are considered under and what zone they are most usually located in. In at least one case, the planning scheme prescriptions in relation to the rail corridor prohibit any other form of development occurring, which has implications for unused edges of rail corridor in this area. The statutory development process will require the proposed route to demonstrate that it meets the requirements of all these planning schemes which are underpinned by the sustainable development objectives of the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993. Each planning scheme at present outlines the requirements for development on land that will become part of the regional pathway corridor and these requirements will need to be addressed as part of any development application. A decision will need to be taken on how development approval will be sought, given that the use or development approved in a planning permit must be substantially commenced within two years of the permit being issued. Will an application be lodged for approval of the shared pathway in total, or will approval be sought for different parts of the route as funds become available for its development? If the Committee decide that the first approach is preferable, then what arrangements will 22
be put in place to ensure that the proposed route continues to meet the land use planning requirements and remains the most suitable option? The magnitude of the project means that a decision to secure development approval for the whole project as part of one process is, under the current parameters, a significant and complex task. This underscores the need to investigate the potential for a regionally combined assessment to streamline the process and ensure that a consistent set of land use planning parameters are applied across the region. 19 The regional planning process currently underway also offers an opportunity to ensure that a consistent approach to the development of the regional shared pathway can be achieved. Discussion is needed on this matter with those involved in the regional planning process as a matter of priority. Route Preservation The second critical element in relation to land use planning issues is how to preserve the preferred route so that it is available for future shared pathway development. If the decision is made to await funding prior to seeking development approval for the whole regional pathway, then consideration must be given to this key issue. Connecting to the regional planning process to investigate ways in which this might occur represents a suitable way forward in terms of exploring opportunities for corridor preservation. Funding Issues Funding mechanisms The availability of external funding will be critical to the final development of a regional shared pathway as pathway providers all report delays to the roll out of their wish lists due to funding constraints within council capital works budgets. Councils have been successful in seeking and gaining external funding for pathway planning and development through formal government funding programs (such as the Jobs Fund and the Trails and Bikeways Program) and leveraging off the political desires of both levels of government during election periods. Council processes have included the development of detailed strategic and feasibility documentation to support the funding proposals submitted. With a Federal Government election due in or around August this year, it will be critical to have a project plan which illustrates the proposed route and provides a set of documentation supporting its feasibility, potential and its ability to be implemented. This is considered achievable in terms of the timeframes available for project completion. Consideration will need to be given to the funding approach in consultation with the participating councils in the project. Options to be considered will include seeking funding for:
19
Legislative powers to facilitate the development of regionally significant projects are included in the Land Use Planning and Approvals Act 1993 at Division 2A, commencing Section 60B. This enables projects to be declared as Projects of Regional Significance and undertake a combined assessment process. To utilise this process, the project must be of regional planning significance, require high-level assessment or have a significant environmental impact.
23
all the undeveloped elements of the trail, regardless of whether they are earmarked for council funding;
resolution of key sticky points only as the pieces in the jigsaw that will prevent the achievement of a connected regional pathway;
resolution of the parts of the trail that councils are unlikely to fund for some time.
Relationship between funding and technical design The initial consultation process has highlighted that the amount of available funding for shared pathway projects may at times drive decisions around the selection of construction surface materials, the amount of interpretative signage and other aspects of the pathway design process. At present, pathway materials consist of asphalt and concrete and whilst no gravel pathways were identified, at least one pathway proposed may potentially use some form of gravel aggregate product. In the main, these decisions are driven by the amount of funding available. Opinion is divided amongst council pathway planners over the most appropriate material to use. Concrete, whilst the most expensive, reduces the ongoing maintenance burden and can be replaced in small sections if necessary. Asphalt pathways, on the other hand, are cheaper to develop but, it was argued, have a higher maintenance burden and can be greatly impacted by tree roots and ground based impacts. Funding availability can also impact on the nature and extent of interpretative signage, supporting infrastructure and the contribution of landscape design aspects to pathway projects. The desire to avoid the need to fund land acquisitions can also impact on the route selection process by requiring an alternative solution which negates the need to purchase parcels of land. Strategic alignment with funding programs An opportunity exists to ensure that the shared pathway project plan articulates its alignment with the key strategic goals and objectives of governments and their funding programs. The expected benefits of a regional shared pathway, outlined earlier in this document, will provide the basis of explaining this alignment. Key to this is the ability of the project to deliver an integrated range of community benefits. A set of statements should be composed as part of the final project plan, which are directly connected to council‟s strategic objectives and assist them when seeking funding for pathway projects. Project prioritisation The matter of prioritisation has been raised both in the consultation to date and the literature review and discussed with the Steering Committee and flagged for further consideration. The project needs to determine the manner in which the shared pathway route will be prioritised and developed if a total funding package is not secured or preferred as the way forward. The Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007 considered the prioritisation issue and included criteria to assess trail proposals (primary and secondary) which could be adopted to
24
assist the prioritisation phase of the project. 20 An early appraisal of this approach indicates that it may not provide clear enough parameters around prioritisation as some of the criteria are difficult to measure. However, using the Steering Committee‟s discussion of this matter and the checklist as a basis for determining the prioritisation of the pieces of pathway, key considerations will include:
benefits – widest community use/benefits;
supply – whether the trail fills a considerable need or gap within trail supply;
ease of development – whether matters such as land tenure, environmental impact, consistency with land use planning prescriptions, etc. have been resolved with the result the project is “shovel ready”;
funds – whether the stage is able to funded;
degree of difficulty – related to the ease of development, such a criteria would integrate a range of aspects, such as those above, to determine the priority of the pathway.
Pathway management and maintenance Both the consultation to date and the literature reviewed stresses the need for adequate consideration of how the shared pathway will managed and maintained in an ongoing sense. Whilst not identified in the project plan, it would be useful to develop a draft memorandum of understanding and/or partnership agreement at the conclusion of the planning process which would consider and formalise the following aspects:
trail development priorities (if a one off route delivery process is not agreed upon);
maintenance responsibilities (including where rail/road reserve may be utilised);
trail maintenance and risk assessment schedules;
education and interpretation strategies, including conflict management;
monitoring and evaluation;
marketing and promotion, including a recognisable brand for shared pathway promotion if possible.
The development of such an agreement would ensure that all land managers have input into a set of clearly articulated strategies which outline who does what in relation to the shared pathway project. It is expected that within each municipal area, arrangements for ongoing maintenance would remain fairly similar to those which currently exist and would not create any new maintenance responsibility beyond that which is currently created when local government develops its own infrastructure.
20
These criteria were adopted from a system developed and utilised by the West Tamar Council. For further information see Trails Tasmania Strategy 2007, Attachments, incorporated into Attachment 6 - Recreational Trail Planning Toolkit.
25
The SA Guidelines for Sustainable Recreational Trails provide considerable guidance on the manner in which pathway management and maintenance arrangements can be planned for. As mentioned, these guidelines will form the basis of a set of Tasmanian specific planning processes. Whether the Tasmanian guidelines will be available to assist this regional project or not, it would be sensible to ensure that the final project documentation aligns with it.
Conclusions to date Work to date has been focused on gathering and synthesising information from a range of sources to inform the development and progress of stages 2 and 3 of the project. It is clear that some outputs identified in the initial project plan will not be required to the extent previously assumed and as a result it is recommended the project plan be revisited to ensure that the expenditure on the project maximises the project outcomes. In particular, the desire to create a toolkit is an example of where existing information fills a gap identified as part of the project plan and may be modified rather than created from the start. An Action Plan has been developed which will propose the next steps of the projects and ensure that the emerging issues and themes are dealt with and resolved where possible. This will also ensure that the project planâ€&#x;s general objectives remain in focus and are met within the timeframes required. In summary the range of the expected benefits of the project can be achieved with cooperative and coordinated route planning and there is widespread support from both local and state government stakeholders as well as community organisations and individuals for this to occur.
26