43
Currie Multi-Purpose Recreation Complex: Feasibility Study HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd Suters Prior and Cheney September 2008

Currie Multi-Purpose Recreation Complex: Feasibility Study · Currie Multi-Purpose Recreation Complex: Feasibility Study ... (Town Hall) or too small (KI ... Currie Multi Purpose

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Currie Multi-Purpose Recreation Complex:

Feasibility Study

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd Suters Prior and Cheney

September 2008

Table of Contents 1 Study Purpose ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 The Background to the Study .................................................................................................................. 1 The Study Process .................................................................................................................................. 1 The Benefits of Recreation ...................................................................................................................... 2 2 Factors Impacting on the Need for a Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex in Currie .................................................................................................................................. 3 The Culture and Social Values of the Community .................................................................................... 3 The Natural Environment ......................................................................................................................... 3 Changing Leisure and Recreation Determinants ..................................................................................... 4 Broad Recreation and Leisure Trends ..................................................................................................... 4 Community Demographics ....................................................................................................................... 6 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 8 3 Community Needs for a Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex in Currie ................. 9 The February 2008 Feasibility Workshop................................................................................................. 9 Submissions .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 15 4 Indoor Sporting, Leisure and Recreation Facilities in Currie: An Assessment .............................. 16 Currie Recreation Reserve .................................................................................................................... 16 The Existing Indoor Venues ................................................................................................................... 19 The Integrated Services Centre Project ................................................................................................. 24 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 25 5 A Strategy for Action ........................................................................................................................... 26 Principles to Guide the Development Process ....................................................................................... 26 Currie Recreation Reserve .................................................................................................................... 26 New Building Works ............................................................................................................................... 29 Other Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex Components ............................................... 33 Funding the Initiatives ............................................................................................................................ 33 Management .......................................................................................................................................... 38 Summary and Next Steps ...................................................................................................................... 39 Next Steps ............................................................................................................................................. 40

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 1 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

1

Study Purpose

Introduction This report presents the findings and recommendations of a study into:

1. A master plan to guide the development of the Currie Recreation Reserve over the next 15-20 years, and

2. An assessment of the feasibility of developing a multi-purpose community and recreation complex at the Reserve through either or both of the refurbishment and expansion of the existing buildings or the development of new buildings.

Currie Recreation Reserve is the major outdoor sporting venue on King Island. It has one oval which caters for outdoor field sports; two netball courts; three tennis courts with a small clubroom, and a major pavilion and club room which support users of the playing field. The netball courts have a small and inadequate weather shelter. In addition to the formal sporting facilities, the Reserve has a modern playground and extensive areas of mown lawns and bushland. Several informal trails traverse the bushland. Unformed and unsealed car parking services all sporting uses. A detailed assessment of the facilities and their development opportunities and needs is provided in Chapter 4 of this report.

The Background to the Study The Brief for the present Study indicates that King Island Council has undertaken a number of consultations with key stakeholders regarding the future of the Recreation Reserve over the past 2 years. The consult-ations have indicated that there is a sufficient need for preparation of a Master Plan which will encapsulate improvements in the range of, as well as access to, participant opportunities.

The consultations with user groups concluded that any upgraded or additional space provided at the Recreation Reserve must be multi-functional in order to create a suitable, central location for a variety of group activities. These activities were considered to possibly include strength training, fit ball classes, yoga, darts, and indoor bowls. These identified needs reflected the fact that the facilities which are currently used are generally regarded as being unsuitable because they are either too large (Town Hall) or too small (KI Hospital & Health Centre Day Centre Room). Further, the consultations indicated that any new development should provide better opportunities for new indoor activities such as cricket and volleyball.

It warrants noting at this point that the mix of needs identified is such that the description “multi-purpose recreation complex” is something of a misnomer as it is far to narrow a description of the needs which have been identified. As a result, the phrase “multi-purpose community and recreation complex” is used in this report.

The Study Brief also indicated that during the football off-season, some of the existing facilities at the complex have been used to run programs and activities for young people, particularly during school holidays. This is generally unable to continue during the football season due to limited program and storage space. Thus, a multi-functional space with adequate and secure storage facilities would overcome this problem.

Finally, the Study Brief indicated that provision of a fitness gymnasium has been high on the agenda for young people on King Island. This has usually been relegated to the "too hard basket" for a number of reasons including liability and insurance issues, accreditation and viability as a non-commercial venture. More recently, local professionals providing health and physiotherapy services in Currie have suggested that a commercial gymnasium could be established as part of a multi-purpose recreation complex at the Recreation Reserve if an appropriate space was available.

The Study Process In order to address the issues detailed in the Brief, five stages of work were undertaken, several of which were prepared in parallel with the updating of the 1999 King Island Recreation Plan. The Study stages were:

1. Preparing a brief review of recent trends in recreation participation and provision in Australia and assess the implications to provision initiatives at the Currie Recreation Reserve, and, as deemed appropriate, elsewhere in Currie

2. Reviewing the demographic characteristics of the King Island and Currie communities and assessing the implications to current and future recreation provision

3. Reviewing the past consultations and assessments of recreation need in the Currie community which relate to the Recreation Reserve and update these through a review program with the community

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 2 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

4. Undertaking a program of personal interviews with key stakeholders and individuals and clubs interested in having a range of recreation development issues considered as part of the masterplanning and feasibility study or as part of the wider updated King Island Recreation Plan

5. Holding a public meeting to review and confirm community needs

6. Undertaking a detailed assessment of the assets of the Recreation Reserve with regard to their capacity to sustain redevelopment in a way which would contribute to the creation of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex

7. Undertaking an assessment of other indoor resources in Currie which might be capable of sustaining wider community use, and

8. Reviewing the 2006 Wise Lord and Ferguson Consulting report, Services Integration Report, into the feasibility of developing a’ “integrated services centre” in Currie.

The findings of this research program are brought together in the following Chapters and the recommended actions are presented in Chapter 5.

The Benefits of Recreation Before proceeding to the main research findings, it is worth highlighting some of the benefits of good recreation planning and of recreation provision.

Recreation planning and the provision of recreation opportunities in a community are important because of the far-reaching benefits which recreational involvement provides to the community. There is now extensive research to demonstrate that while recreation participation is a valid end in its own right, it is also a means to major social benefits which reach far beyond the individual activities being pursued. These include:

Improved personal and community health and wellbeing

Social and community cohesion

Economic wellbeing and development, and

Environmental protection and enhancement. (1)

Recreation and leisure are recognised by the United Nations as human rights and there is extensive evidence to show that societies which have limited or poor access to recreation opportunities suffer as a consequence. A recent Australian book by Gaté and Moodie, Recipes For a Great Life 2, is an excellent introduction to some lighthearted and serious ideas on recreation benefits. Significantly, it uses something as simple as cooking to introduce healthy food recipes and tips for healthy eating, along with practical steps for getting more out of life by improve your relationships, being physically active, being intellectually curious, culturally active, seeking spiritually enrichment and being happy in your workplace.

Another major benefit of effective and appropriate recreation planning and provision is that they build “social capital”. Social capital can be defined as the value of social networks in a community as opposed to physical capital and human capital. Research shows that participating in recreation activities and in particular, being a member of a recreation group, builds social capital. Social capital builds things such as trust, reciprocity, acceptance, good behaviour, tolerance, responsibility, trust of others, personal capacities, diversion from negative activities, empowerment, new abilities, community understanding, community health and wellbeing, an entry to participation, skills, friendships, belonging, career development, fun, fitness, purposeful use of time, sociability, commonality of interest, cohesion, learning, self-efficacy, and optimisation of performance. Where these values are strong, people live healthier, happier lives, they live longer, and are more successful,

As such, the planning and provision of recreation opportunities is a major tool in enhancing the quality of life of a community. Because of its isolation and small population, whatever action can be taken to enhance leisure and recreation opportunities will be of major value to the King Island community and to its long term viability.

1 For a broad review of the benefits of recreation see: Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2001: The Social Impact of Sport and Physical Recreation. Ann Annotated Bibliography, National Centre for Cultural and Recreation Statistics; Canadian Parks/Recreation Association, 1997: The Benefits Catalogue, Canadian Parks/Recreation Association, Gloucester, Ontario. To acquire copies of this excellent report visit http://www.lin.ca/benefits.htm; Driver, B. L., Brown, Perry J., Peterson, George L., 1991: Benefits of Leisure, Venture Publishing, State College, Pennsylvania; Parks and Leisure Australia and Sport and Recreation Victoria, 2002: Benefits of Aquatic and Indoor Recreation Facilities, Parks and Leisure Australia, Melbourne 2 Gaté, G. and Moodie, R., 2008: Recipes for a great life : simple steps to wellbeing and vitality, Hardie Grant Books, Prahran, Vic. 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 3 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

2

Factors Impacting on the Need for a Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex in Currie

A number of factors influence the leisure interests and behaviour of a community and these will have a bearing on the likely success and the viability of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie, King Island. The most important influences on the leisure interests and behaviour of a community are:

• The culture and social values of the community and the leisure interests and activities associated with that culture

• The natural environment in which the community lives and the opportunities and barriers this generates

• Changes in the factors impacting on leisure interests, with the most notable being socio-economic and cultural changes, technology, work patterns and education

• The demographic characteristics of the population and any trends in these

• Leisure participation trends as a result of the above influences, and

• Leisure provision trends.

These issues are reviewed briefly in this Chapter.

The Culture and Social Values of the Community King Island has a strong Anglo-Saxon community. At the 2006 Census, 1,481 people or 82.1 percent of the total King Island population of 1,6393, was born in Australia, compared with the national average of 70.9 percent. A further 103 residents, or 6.3 percent of the total, were born in the United Kingdom and New Zealand. The single largest non-Anglo-Saxon group of residents was from the Philippines, although there were only 14 people in this group.

As such, it can be expected that the King Island community will have a strong interest in traditional Australian and British recreation activities: tennis, football, walking, cycling, horseriding, hunting, fishing, swimming, reading, visual and performing arts, music, dance, gardening and family activities. Other more recently emerging sports which reflect the same origins include netball, basketball and skateboarding –to list but a few.

Of equal importance in terms of the influence of the cultural background of the community is the limited constraints which the Anglo-Saxon background of the community places on recreation activities. In modern Anglo-Saxon communities, people are seen to have the right to pursue whatever activities they wish –so long as they do not break the law or impact detrimentally on others—and there are few if any cultural or religious taboos or expectations which prohibit some activities or demand that everyone pursues others.

As such, King Islanders are free to choose whatever recreational activities interest them, and it is evident from the range of activities which are pursued that residents choose widely, but still with a strong Anglo-Saxon flavour. The major constraints on this choice come from the influence of the environment and the small population numbers available to support certain activities.

The strong cultural homogeneity of the Island community means that provision which reflects this focus will have a greater chance of success. At the same time, modern planning and recent social research has shown that opportunities which allow a community to broaden its leisure interests are beneficial in many ways and will help strengthen the viability of what is provided.

The Natural Environment The natural environment in which the King Island community lives creates a number of opportunities but also generates substantial barriers to recreational activity. The major opportunities include the high quality of the coastlines –for walking, fishing, conservation and heritage activities, surfing and swimming—the remaining forested areas of the island, and the availability of land for further development if the need arises. The barriers however, are also substantial. Most significant are the isolation of the Island and the need to travel by plane or boat to access many of the activities which cannot be supported by the small Island population. The weather, the small size of the Island and the limited terrain variations also restrict opportunities.

In summary, while King Island has some excellent recreation opportunities, the barriers to participation mean that greater effort has to be put into recreation provision, management and programming if the community is to reap the considerable and far-reaching benefits it will deliver.

3 As recorded in Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2006 QuickStats: King Island. Local Government, March 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 4 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Changing Leisure and Recreation Determinants There have been substantial social changes over recent decades which have impacted widely on the leisure and recreation interests of the community and in the types of leisure and recreation opportunities available to the it. These social changes are still occurring and include:

• Higher education levels and the requirement that children stay at school far longer than in the past

• Changed work and business hours with the freeing up and extension of work hours and shopping hours

• Greater personal and community affluence as a result of better education, technology, and national economic and population growth

• A strong focus on personal experiences and lifestyles and less commitment to “community”

• The changed cultural mix of the Australian community, which while not reflected in the make-up of the King Island community, has through the flow-on effect, led to a far wider range of leisure opportunities becoming available to the community

• Greater expectations of quality and professional service –and a willingness to pay for these-- as living standards and educational levels have improved

• Modern technology eg: computers and telecommunications, modern farming and industrial equipment, fly-in fly-out workforces, global markets, mass production

• Insurance and litigation issues and drink-driving legislation and regulations

• A greater awareness of the benefits of recreational involvement, and

• The changing structure and characteristics of the population, which will be reviewed in further detail in later paragraphs.

These influences continue to have far-reaching effects on the nature, patterns and levels of recreational participation. Not all the effects have been good, and in fact some –such as students leaving the Island for higher education, and longer business trading hours-- have been unintentionally quite detrimental. However, the local and wider impacts of all need to monitored so that what is provided is able to continue to cater effectively for changing needs in the community.

Broad Recreation and Leisure Trends The broad social, economic and attitudinal changes summarised above have led to the following changes in community leisure behaviour:

• A trend towards participation in non-competitive and passive activities

• Continuing participation in traditional formal sports but with a growing focus on elite performance

• A search for more flexibility and diversity in leisure pursuits rather than a commitment to a small number of activities

• Dramatic falls in a number of traditional team and small group sports –including tennis and lawn bowls— but with the recent exception of junior soccer and Australian Rules Football

• Significant increases in non-competitive, active pursuits such as cycling, walking, travel and swimming

• Greater support for and more involvement in informal, community-focused activities including community days, carnivals, friends groups, festivals, music concerts and markets

• Participation in recreation activities across a wider period of the day and week with a major move to weekday evening sports participation and weekend involvement with non-sporting pursuits and spectating

• Continuing growth in home-based leisure: social activities, educational pursuits, hobbies, crafts and entertainment

• A search for more personalised leisure venues and services, as evidenced by the use of personal trainers, 'boutique' health and fitness providers, fitness videos and home gyms

• A significant growth in concern for the protection of the environment, and energy and resource use

• Acquisition and use of a wide range of recreational equipment: computers, video/DVD equipment, SCUBA gear, boats, hang gliders/aircraft, off road vehicles, and metal detectors

• Provision and use of a wide diversity of culturally and socially-focused recreation resources including restaurants, bookshops, amusement parlours, music outlets (recorded and live), hotels, theatres and galleries, and

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 5 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• A growing trend for families to share recreational activities or to pursue related activities at one venue rather than pursuing a wide range of different activities.

The size of the King Island economy and of the King Island community means that not all the above trends are evident there. However, if leisure and recreation provision does not respond to these changes or make provision for the different patterns of activity which are emerging, it may well fail. The commonly heard statements that “we used to do such and such” and “all we need is for people to put in a bit more effort” are no longer a useful guide to the future. Changed communities need changed responses.

Some of the possible program, service and facility responses to these trends on King Island include:

• Add to the mix of recreation opportunities available by actively supporting the development of, or by providing, programs which reflect the characteristics and interests of particular sub-sections of the community eg: older residents, teenagers, children, musicians, artists, elite performers so their skills and interests are developed and so they do not feel a need to travel off the Island to pursue their interests

• Develop a focus on informal recreation programs and social opportunities as much as on formal pursuits. Programs should be suitable to and attractive to a wide range of ages, offer interesting user experiences and deliver long term personal and community outcomes

• Initiate programs which are an “extension” of home-based pursuits as a means of attracting people into community venues

• Focus on the integrated provision of and the scheduled use of recreation facilities, pro-grams and services opportunities to optimise resource use and family and social outcomes

• Use of venues both as a destination in their own right and as a base for other programs, and

• Program venues for different users and uses at differing times of the day and week.

A final group of trends which it is important for King Island Council and the wider community to recognise are those relating to the design and provision of recreation facilities, programs and services. These include:

• Provision of higher standard facilities and services (parking, toilets, paths, lighting, signposting, kitchens) so as to provide optimal user benefits, optimal access and to avoid issues of litigation

• Provision of facilities which comply with disability discrimination legislation and which minimise energy use

• Provision of facilities which are of a flexible design so they can be used by different groups for different types of activities at different times of the day and week

• The increased application of professional or semi-professional management in place of committees of management and the application of tight use scheduling so that wider and more intensive facility use can be achieved

• The 'packaging' of programs and services to make venues more attractive

• The co-location of a wide mix of facilities, programs and services as a means of encourag-ing “cross-pollination” of use, of avoiding the duplication of services (such as sewerage, parking, lighting and water), and as a means of staying in a central location

• The assessment of broad community characteristics, existing provision and community needs as a basis for provision decisions and priorities

• The co-location of education, recreational, health and retail services in order to present a more attractive, functional and viable mix of opportunities to the community; to strengthen the social elements and benefits of recreational participation; as a means of tapping more diverse funding sources, and in order to share costs more widely, and

• The provision of quality café and childcare facilities (now mandatory in some states) as a means of diversifying the cross-section of the community which can have needs met and as a means of ensuring social justice in provision.

These changes have been driven by the burgeoning cost of facilities; safety regulations which require higher standard facilities; Councils’ taking a “harder” line in terms of financial viability because of the growing costs and the diversifying of demands, all of which simply cannot be met through individual sites; the cost of land; constraints on land availability; State government agencies wanting assurances that any financial assistance will benefit the whole community and not just small, self-interest groups or groups whose “needs” are not supported by research; concerns about the financial viability of single-use facilities; and the increasing difficulty of getting volunteers with the time and willingness to run sporting and recreational activities.

These changes do not mean that recreation provision is cheaper, and in fact, a number make it more costly. However, they do ensure that better opportunities can be provided and that they will deliver better outcomes

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 6 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

and stronger benefits to the community. In a sense, these changes reflect the realisation that recreation is so important to the community it can no longer be treated as a hobby. It has to be treated professionally.

These trends have been taken into consideration in reaching the conclusions and recommendations presented in this report.

Community Demographics The demographics of a community have a major influence on what can and cannot be supported and what types of recreational needs are likely to exist. Features such as population numbers; age distribution; household make-up; education, occupation and income levels; length of residence; types of home and home ownership, and rates of car ownership are all known to influence the types and levels of recreational activities which a community pursues. However, care must be taken not to over-emphasise the influences: people are known to have dispositions towards some types of activities and away from others and these are often very stable throughout their lives. Someone who enjoys the natural environment will enjoy it in different ways regardless of their changing age and family responsibilities. Someone who enjoys sport will play it, then read about it, then maybe umpire it and become a spectator: they just express their disposition in different ways. Only occasionally do people consciously move away from or to a location because their recreational interests and needs.

Further, people show significant flexibility in what they can and do pursue. If one activity is not available, they find another which fits the types of benefits they seek from recreation and leisure.

The King Island Council and community has recently had an excellent and detailed review of its population undertaken by Dr Robyn Eversole of the Institute for Regional Development at the University of Tasmania (July 2008) 4. Rather than repeat that analysis, key elements of the powerpoint presentation on the review are summarised in the following chart (with the relevant powerpoint slide number provided) and comment is made regarding the recreation and leisure implications. Additional points of relevance which were not included in the University of Tasmania analysis are included in italics.

Demographic Characteristic Possible Recreation Implications

Population size: at the 2006 Census King Island had only 1,639 residents. This was a drop from 1,797 in 1996, to 1,687 in 2001 and to in 2006, a fall of 8.8% over the 10 year period. (Slide 7). However, between 2001 and 2006 the decline was a little more than 1/3 of the 1996-2001 decline

The small size of the total population means that many recreation activities would not be viable as the majority of sports attract well less than 10 percent of the Australian population.

Strategies to overcome this disadvantage include:

• Running programs under modified team sizes, competition rules and perhaps, season lengths. Cricket has already taken the initiative along these lines

• Holding sports festivals over several weekends wherein lightening championships are held between “scratch” teams

• Using a co-operatives approach, as taken by the Community Arts Centre, where a number of individuals and groups work together

• Funding off-island travel assistance for elite performers

• Supporting those activities which are known to attract larger proportions of the community eg: the arts, performance, music

Another implication of the small population is that built resources should be located together to save on costs and to increase viability. The Currie township has an excess of indoor venues and as maintenance costs continue to grow, these will become unsustainable and rationalisation and further co-location may be necessary.

Finally, if population decline continues in future years, efforts will be needed to offset the negative effects. Promotional actions to encourage more participation may be needed as might the introduction of activities which require fewer participants to be viable. Council may also need to consider a special grants and support program to ensure that an equitable mix of opportunities is available for all age, interest and ability groups. This may also mean more sharing and the loss of some activities for which there are acceptable alternatives.

4 Dr Robyn Eversole, King Island: Knowing Our Place. Regional Atlas Presentation. Institute for Regional Development, University of Tasmania, July 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 7 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Population distribution: at the 2006 Census, 746 or 45.5 percent of the Island population lived in a 4.8 sq. km. area defined as Currie by the Bureau of Statistics. Another 220 (or 13.4%) lived in Grassy (defined by the Bureau of Statistics as the whole area south of Yarra Creek and Ettrick River, covering an area of 207.7 sq. km.). The remaining 673, or 41 percent, lived in rural areas across the remaining 881.4 sq. km. of the island.

The fact that less than half the total King Island population lives in Currie means that the majority have to travel to reach the recreation opportunities provided in and around the town as there are few built facilities elsewhere on the Island.

While all residents living outside Currie are thus somewhat disadvantaged, children, older people, single parents and families without cars would be particularly restricted in the opportunities they can pursue on a day-to-day basis.

Although further research may be needed before specific actions were taken, consideration may warrant being given to providing transport assistance to potentially disadvantaged groups living outside Currie who wish to take part in particular programs or events. Alternately, certain types of one-off events may be “taken to the country” to provide more accessible experiences to rural residents. As an example, in many Councils, Councillors hold community picnics as part of their community liaison programs and barbeques and other events are held in association with these.

Age distribution: the King Island population is somewhat older than that of Australia as a whole and the number and percentage of children and young adults aged 25-34 years decreased over the 1996-2006 period. (Slide 6, 11). The fall in the number of young adults was almost twice as great for women as for men so that in each of the 25-34 years and 35-44 years groups there were 20 more males than females

The median age of King Island residents in 2006 was 41 years compared with 37 years for Australia as a whole. There were fewer children under 14 years (17.6% vs 19.8%), far fewer young adults (10.7% vs 13.6%), almost identical percentages in the 25-54 years family group and far more residents aged 55 years and over (29.8% vs 24.3%). King Island now has North West Tasmania’s fastest growing aged population

These data reflect the fact that young families leave the island in search of a range of services while young adults and young women in particular, leave for higher education, more social opportunities and work purposes –given the predominance of male jobs in the island’s primary industries. The higher percentage of older residents reflects the loss of younger residents.

Addressing these age distribution patterns requires actions well beyond recreation provision and includes wider educational and employment opportunities, more and diverse health and children’s support services and more jobs. From a recreation perspective, the age distribution means that special support grants and initiatives may be needed to ensure that children’s and youth programs can continue to be provided. The high proportion of older residents –who accounted for not much less than 1/3rd of the total community at the 2006 Census-- means that greater effort may need to be made in future to provide activities and opportunities suitable to this group. These may well be active but they will be increasingly less sporting with age and they may well need to include more and more health and wellbeing related pursuits: walking, strength training etc as well as creative arts, cultural, hobby, and men’s shed style opportunities. The 1996-2006 fall in children and teenage numbers will make these types of actions even more important

Population mobility: 29% of the Island population left between 2001 and 2006 and 25% of those living on the Island had moved there from elsewhere in Tasmania (8%), interstate (14%), or overseas (3%) since 2001. (Slides 8, 9, 16). Significantly, losses of those aged 15-24 years were almost totally offset by arrivals in the same age group

This high rate of population turnover means that over 1/4 of the population is likely to have very little or no knowledge of recreation opportunities on the Island or, if they are returning residents, a less than complete knowledge.

This means that more detailed attention may need to be given to recreation information services and to “come and try programs” for new residents. These initiatives may be particularly important to the larger numbers of males and those in rural agricultural industries.

Home ownership: in 2006, 44% of homes on King Island were fully owned and another 23% were being purchased. Only 29% were being rented. (Slide 18)

People who own or who are buying their homes are generally far more committed to a community than those who are renting, as rentiers have the option of moving on if their expectations are not met or if an alternate opportunity arises. The high home ownership rate on King Island suggests a strong commitment to the community

Household composition: at the 2006 Census, 34% of King Island households had children, 33% did not and 28% were lone households. (Slide 19)

The percentages of households with and without children reflects the usual patterns for Australia with, as might be expected, a substantial proportion of older families having adult children and others still having children at home.

The most significant household figure was the 28% which were lone person house-holds, this being well above the national average of 23%. It is almost certain that a substantial proportion of these were older, female residents and these people may well need increasing levels of social and community support. However, the second most significant lone person household group is likely to be young, male, primary industry employees –who could well be relatively new Island residents and not highly skilled. This group may well need targeted programming initiatives to attract them into recreation activities. Experience shows that many such residents do not want to commit to a sport or other activity for a whole season or term. In the face of this, the concept of shorter seasons and “lightening premierships” and try-out

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 8 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

programs across a range of sports may well be appealing.

Employment: Agriculture and Forestry (29%), Manufacturing (esp. food processing), retail (7%), public administration (6%) and health care/social assistance (6%) are the main occupations on King Island. Agriculture has remained the main and a stable occupation for many years while the employment of women in manufacturing nearly between 1996 and 2006 (Slides 22, 24, 25, 29, 35).

Labour force participation on King Island is high compared with the rest of the North West.

Employment as managers and in skilled trades were well above the Tasmanian average in 2006. At the same time, over 30% of all employees were doing low skilled, labouring jobs

Of employed people over 15 years, 35% had incomes of less than $400/week compared with 41% Australia-wide

The employment data have mixed implications regarding recreation provision and needs. The strong emphasis on agricultural and manufacturing occup-ations and the high percentage of workers in low skilled jobs suggests, on the experience of other regional communities across Australia, lower incomes and a low demand for cultural opportunities and a greater interest in team sports and traditional Australian activities. At the same time, the importance of managers and skilled tradespeople and the higher than national incomes, suggest a potentially quite high level of disposable incomes in the community and hence, a capacity to afford higher levels of recreation expenditure and more expenditure on higher quality items.

The implication of this situation is that in combination, the Island community is likely to look for quite a diversity of pursuits ranging from low cost traditional activities through to far more expensive, modern and capital intensive opportunities. Of course, King Island Council does not need to support or service the latter group of residents, although providing the support infra-structure these residents demand could be costly while every resident in this category is one less available to support other mainsteam pursuits.

Car ownership: some 45 of 645 households on King Island in 2006 did not own cars. Another 213 had only one car.

Although more data would be needed to fully evaluate these figures, the total lack of a car or access to only one car in a household can be a major restriction on accessing recreation opportunities. This would be particularly so for rural residents.

Conclusion In summary, the demographic data for King Island indicate that the total population size is small and quite dispersed. Further, the size of the population has been in decline for some years –although the rate is now quite slow—and the community is ageing faster than other communities in North West Tasmania. Significant-ly, the proportion of young children and young adults in the community is very low by regional and national standards while the proportion of residents over 55 years is high and increasing. The Census data show that population movement away from and to the Island is high and that while there are nationally-equal rates of family make-up and high home ownership, there are also high rates of lone households, these most probably being concentrated amongst older residents and the more itinerant male agricultural workers.

While occupations are heavily concentrated in agriculture and manufacturing –with the later focused on the processing of agricultural produce—there is also a high percentage of the population in managerial occupations and skilled trades. Yet 35 percent of employed people had incomes of less than $400/week compared with 41 percent Australia-wide and at the same time the percentage earning more than $400 a week was well above the national average.

In all, the demographic data raise some significant challenges with regard to the future provision of recreation opportunities on King Island and for the retention of the existing mix. They suggest that if recent trends continue, there could well be some significant changes in the level of interest in the current mix of opportunities and that some opportunities may be lost while others –especially for children, teenagers, lone household members and ageing residents-- may need targeted support and programming action. Further, the trends suggest that greater efforts to consolidate provision may be needed in future and that any new initiatives should pay close attention to the opportunities for co-locating a mix of recreation activities and other community services.

From the perspective of the current multi-purpose community and recreation complex feasibility study, the demographic analyses indicate that where possible co-location and upgrading of existing resources should be sought ahead of yet more provision. It also indicates a need for a strong emphasis on programming and good servicing of what is provided if a sufficiently diverse cross-section of the community is to be attracted to achieve a viable outcome. This suggests that in addition to sporting activities, a successful complex will need to provide health and wellbeing programs; social and cultural and hobby and exercise programs for older residents; social and come-and-try opportunities; short season competitive activities for teenagers and young adults; family and social opportunities, and stimulating activities and events for children. All will need a significant level of resourcing, coordination and promotion.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 9 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

3

Community Needs for a Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex in Currie

A considerable amount of planning work aimed at identifying community needs for an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie has been undertaken over the past two years. The findings of that work –plus an updated list prepared from the community meeting held as part of the present study in July 2008-- are summarised and evaluated in this Chapter.

The February 2008 Feasibility Workshop The most notable assessment of needs prior to the present study was that undertaken through a community workshop held at Council in February 2008. Facilitated by an external consultant, the workshop was attended by the Mayor of King Island, Cr Charles Arnold and representatives of Council, sporting clubs, health and youth services providers, the Recreation Reserve Management Committee, teachers and police.

The report on the workshop indicates that its focus, as detailed by the Mayor and Council officers was to determine the works to be undertaken in keeping with a $25,000 capital commitment from Council; to “consider a proposal to construct a new building to accommodate the needs of users at Currie Oval”, although “funding to complete this was outside the resources of Council”. The Mayor also indicated that $125,000 had been included in King Island Council’s Annual Plan and Budget Estimate for refurbishments at Currie Oval. $25,000 of this amount was carried over from the 2006/07 budget and was to be partially used “to assist with preparation of a proposal” while the shortfall of $100,000 was to be included in any funding submission.

The meeting was advised that to be successful in achieving external funding assistance, any submissions would need “strong community support… a collaborative approach and flexibility in the utilisation of space to enable multi-purpose use and access”. The meeting acknowledged that the project focus would be on meeting the needs of football, netball, tennis and cricket but that “other emerging needs” would need to be considered over time.

The workshop then identified a range of benefits which it was projected would flow from the initiative, these being:

• Keeping 20-35 year olds busy

• Supporting active lifestyles

• Retention of families on the Island

• Supporting all year use

• Duplication of facilities will be avoided

• A community hub will be provided

• If done well, it will attract all ages

• Flexibility of use can be achieved

• The venue would provide an opportunity to engage parents

• The proposed venue would allow all year use

• The proposed venue would better cater for all club needs including storage

• The proposed venue would have long term sustainability.

The core needs identified through the workshop were:

• Change rooms

• Toilets

• Catering

• Flexible spaces

• Storage

• Spectator areas.

It was also agreed that ease and simplicity of management and cost were issues of concern.

The workshop agreed on a set of “minimum critical specifications”. These were listed in the report as:

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 10 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

“• Male and female toilets (plus possibly, a baby change room)

• Male and female showers and change rooms

• Food serving facility – canteen / kitchen facilities

• Multi-functional space – meeting room, function room, exercise room

• Spectator seating

• Storage areas

• 2 large change rooms (2 x 35)

• Umpires/officials changing room /administration area/ first aid/ media centre/managers office (?)

• Redevelopment and relocation of netball courts

• Youth / community clubrooms

• Environmental and energy efficiency

• External, independent sporting/recreational facilities (cricket nets, exercise stations)

• Ambulance access

• Low maintenance / low running costs

• Ownership of club –management

• Cover spectator area

• Netball court upgrade (includes all weather).”

In addition to this list, each club or group participating in the workshop identified individual needs and concerns with regard to the development. While many of the items in the chart are the same as those listed above, the following additional needs were cited:

• Gym, fitness facilities

• Hydrotherapy pool

• Opportunities for use by the wider community eg: boxing, weights

• Space for indoor bowls

• Practice wickets for cricket

• Upgraded referees/umpires area for tennis near court 3

• Upgrading court 3 as a show court (for use by netball as well as tennis)

• Ease of access

• Develop a venue which is welcoming

• Ensure there is choice and options for involvement, and

• Ensure opportunities for parental involvement.

The wider concerns with regard to the development identified by the clubs and groups in the February 2008 Workshop were:

• Lack of a sufficient population to support the proposals and consequently, whether the development would be sustainable; “there may not be enough people participating in sport to warrant the development”

• Loss of control (presumably, to a wider range of groups, clubs)

• Whether the development would be big enough

• Whether the development would be completed as one entity/building

• Securing sufficient funding to “get the job right”

• The cost to users (presumably both from a capital cost and user fee perspective)

• Use supervision and the need for qualified staff/community members

• Vandalism and security

• A development between the oval and courts or at the football pavilion would be too far from the netball courts

• The proposed components (and location?) would “exclude elements of the community”

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 11 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• Management issues and strategies will need to be resolved

• A mechanism for meeting on-going costs will need to be developed

• It may be better to refurbish the old facilities, and

• “A white elephant could be created”.

The following chart lists the items recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

A review of the foregoing listings of issues was undertaken at a further public meeting held in Currie in July 2008 as part of the present masterplanning project. The list of “needs” was confirmed at that meeting and only three additional issues were identified. They were:

• Child Health Association. Play group with equipment nearby

• Provide disabled access and seating, and

• Bring netball facilities closer to the football ground.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 12 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Comment is warranted on a number of items in the overall list of needs which were identified.

Catering: Catering for Recreation Reserve users when they use the Reserve through eg: a kiosk and kitchens must be addressed. However, “catering’ in the sense of a capacity to accommodate functions and events should be given a very low priority compared with providing good quality, diverse recreation opportunities. There is already several venues and clubs in Currie which can cater for functions and events and providing yet another competitor will only reduce the viability of these. As a result, this item has not been included in the masterplanning of those components of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex which are considered to be appropriate to provide at the Recreation Reserve

Hydrotherapy pool: King Island already has two public/semi-public indoor pools (at the High School and in Grassy). Both need significant work to make them more effective yet both are in a sufficiently sound condition to justify this. It could be expected that the cost of upgrading one or other of the pools to hydrotherapy standards would cost anywhere from $200,000 to $500,000 and unless the facility was redeveloped as a health and warm water program pool –rather than as a full hydrotherapy pool-- it would automatically exclude a range of other uses and users. A third, specialised hydrotherapy would not be viable because while it would offer significant benefits to users, there would not be enough of them to generate the demand needed

In the light of this, a hydrotherapy pool has not been included in the masterplanning of the components of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex which are considered to be appropriate to provide and issues relating to pools on King Island have been discussed further in the updated King Island Recreation Plan

Flexible spaces: Modern facility design focuses heavily on flexibility so that as needs change, so a venue can be modified to serve different purposes and different users. This is given a high priority in the multi-purpose community and recreation complex designs. It needs noting, however, that flexible spaces which are not “owned” or managed by one group can quickly stop being used unless someone accepts or is given responsibility for encouraging use, identifying needs in the community and initiating programs. That person must also ensure that equitable access is given to different types of groups and needs through a tight control over the scheduling of use. Allowing one or a small number of groups to take control is as detrimental as no control at all

Storage: Many facilities fail to effectively meet community needs because they do not have adequate storage. This is included in the multi-purpose community and recreation complex designs

Spectator areas: Given the King Island climate and changing leisure preferences, shelter-ed spectator areas are an increasingly important way of attracting use. However, they should not be given priority ahead of other key user facilities

Ensure opportunities for parental involvement: These are important and rely heavily on the flexibility of what is provided and the approach to their programming. As noted in a later paragraph on management, proactive leader will be needed to achieve the desired out-comes. An approach which simply provides a facility and then expects the community to know how to use it in an effective and creative manner, will fail

Environmental and energy efficiency: State and federal legislation now makes action on these issues mandatory

Ambulance access: This will be addressed through traffic and parking management at the Recreation Reserve

Ownership and management: These are critical to the long term success of any new initiative. Assets built on the Recreation Reserve are automatically the property of Council as it owns the Reserve or is the delegated authority for the Reserve from the State. As implied under the discussion of ”flexible spaces” above, Council must ensure that the management of the Reserve is structured in a manner which does not let any user groups assert undue control over parts or all of the venue. Ideally, Council should create an officer responsibility for this job or appoint an independent member of the community on an honorarium. This person could be expected to seek operational advice from Council and Councillors and to meet regularly with an advisory committee which has representation from user groups and the wider community

Space for indoor bowls: There are already a number of indoor venues in Currie which do or could cater for indoor bowls. No benefit will be gained from duplicating this provision. It is therefore not given a priority in the multi-purpose community and recreation complex designs

The cost to users: It will be essential to establish an agreed regime of charges for use of any new facilities and one which is sufficient to cover operational costs and insurances at

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 13 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

the very least. Current user fees are inadequate to make a useful contribution to the operation or maintenance of the Recreation Reserve

Lack of a sufficient population: This is a real concern. As indicated in Chapter 2, King Island has a very small and declining population and less than 50 percent of residents live in Currie. If an excessively large development is proposed it will not be able to be afforded and if it was built, it would be unlikely to be viable as well as weakening the position of other existing facilities and venues

Child Health Association playgroup: it is understood that the Child Health Association playgroup is having difficulty finding a suitable venue in town and felt that new facilities at the Recreation Reserve could potentially be suitable if play facilities were provided. As argued in the following Chapter, it is considered that a range of shortcomings at the Recreation Reserve make it unsuitable for playgroup use. Further, there are venues in Currie which could be used immediately while the additional non-Recreation Reserve elements of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex proposed for a site off the Reserve could meet these needs, and

Providing disabled access: this is now mandatory under the Federal Disability Discrimination Act of 1996.

A number of further points warrant recording with regard to the findings of the February Workshop and the additional items added in the subsequent review meeting:

• The budget earmarked for the development ($125,000) is significantly less than that which would be needed to provide the identified facilities. It is our understanding that the Island incurs a building cost penalty of around 30 percent over mainland prices. As such, the $125,000 budget is only equivalent to $87,500 elsewhere

• A significant group of the identified needs already exist at the Recreation Reserve and it appears that the listing of needs has been developed on the assumption that these should be replaced. However, a detailed inspection of the facilities has indicated that with the possible exception of one of the tennis courts and both netball courts, they can be upgraded and extended far more cheaply than replacing them. This particularly applies to the football pavilion and the tennis club rooms

• A number of the needs which are listed would not in themselves create a “multi-purpose community complex”. Rather, they would simply provide new, higher quality service and support facilities for existing users

• Several items listed in the February 2008 consultation report are already provided else-where in Currie. These include multi-functional spaces, an indoor pool (although not a full hydrotherapy pool), a range of clubrooms, and areas used for indoor bowls. These venues have the potential to be developed in a way which will more effectively meet some of the needs which were identified through the workshop

• Although it can be upgraded and extended, the space adjacent to the existing football pavilion at the Recreation Reserve would be difficult to use for the full mix of facilities identified for inclusion in a multi-purpose sporting, recreation and community complex. This is because of private land ownership to the east and the need to undertake considerable excavations to the west

• Parking adjacent to the football pavilion is limited

• It would be difficult for one new building sited between the oval and the tennis courts to effectively provide for and service the needs which have been identified without consider-able earth works. Even then it would be remote from netball which would continue to need a separate shelter

• The construction of a new building in the area between the oval and the tennis courts would eliminate the long term capacity to extend the oval to full size

• Representatives of the Tennis Club have indicated that the Club does not need a new, larger building

• While mould infestation may mean that there is a need to redevelop the netball courts, the reason for their “relocation” is not provided

• Parking adjacent to a new, larger building constructed between the oval and the tennis courts would be limited

• The Recreation Reserve is not the most appropriate location for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex if such a facility is to meet a wider cross-section of community needs. The reasons for this are discussed in the following Chapter

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 14 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• It would be difficult to “bring the netball facilities closer to the football ground” unless netball and tennis were to share the same courts

• The need for a central “show court” for tennis and/or netball must be questioned, and

• Although Child Health Association/play group facilities could be provided at the Recreation Reserve, this would commit most mothers to using vehicular access except in good weather. Use of a building with related facilities and services within the township would be more appropriate.

Finally, several needs at the Recreation Reserve which it would be expected would have been included in the list have not been. The most significant of these which were identified from site inspections are:

• Walking and bicycle tracks to and within the Reserve

• Adequate formed and graveled or sealed car parking

• Pathway and road safety lighting

• Security lighting

• Signage, and

• Care and maintenance of potentially dangerous, ageing cypress trees.

These have been included in the masterplan recommendations.

Submissions Four submissions were received in relation to the multi-purpose community and recreation complex Study. These are summarised below with a response in italics:

• Ms Anna De La Rue, the Specialist Rural Worker at the King Island District Hospital and Health centre proposed that “…in preparing a communal room at the multi-purpose complex, some thought be given to a quiet space for yoga, relation, meditation, and tai chi classes…”. This need has been endorsed by the wider consultations program and has been addressed as part of this Study

• Ms Shirley Stebbings, Secretary, King Island Pegarah CWA Branch. This submission indicated that the Branch does not support a multi-purpose recreation complex at the Currie Recreation Reserve. It indicated that the existing facilities should be repaired instead as rising food, services, power and Council rates mean that the cost would impact badly on local families. The current Study recommends the repair of the existing facilities as well as limited additions to them in order to meet wider community needs. This will minimise expenditures

• Currie Football Club. The Football Club indicated that it had intended to seek Council approval to build stand-alone club rooms on the Recreation Reserve but that it will not do so pending the outcomes of the present Study and the possibility that it might be able to use the existing kiosk and change rooms as its club facility. Although the provision of football club clubrooms are an important part of club activities, they have not been endorsed here as there are more pressing needs in terms of upgrading the service facilities (toilet, change, kiosk) at present than in providing club rooms. Further there are potentially significant opportunities to work with the King Island Club in the development of a joint Currie Football Club and King Island Football Association venue as the King Island Club is less than 100 metres from and directly linked to the Recreation Reserve. Such an initiative would be a boon to both organisations. If this opportunity is pursued and is successful, it is recommended that in the longer term, the Norths Football Club clubrooms are removed and that the Club also integrates its activities with the King Island Club. A further point needs to be noted here: modern planning processes (as detailed in earlier sections of this report) do not support the provision of stand-alone club facilities as they are wasteful due to the duplication of toilets, parking ,service connections, security, management etc. The Recreation Reserve already has four separate buildings and efforts should be made to ensure that no more are added.

• Ms Claire Perry, Netball Association. The submission indicated support for the multi-purpose complex masterplan and for the updating of the Island’s recreation Plan but noted that in the short term, the Association was suffering because while players would rather play outside, they were having to use the indoor court at the school because of the slippery and dangerous state of the outdoor courts. This is a high priority need and Council has commissioned tests to assess the capacity (or not) of the netball courts to be restored to a safe condition.

In addition to the above, comment is warranted on a recent letter to the press (King Island Courier, 20.08.08) regarding the condition of the facilities at the Recreation Reserve. There, an anonymous writer criticised

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 15 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Council for not maintaining the facilities at the Reserve. The writer argued that “the recreation buildings we have now are not maintained by or even updated” and that “what we have… is not looked after by Council”. The football change and tennis club building came in for particular criticism.

While the letter writer is correct in that the existing facilities are not well maintained, it is general practice that user clubs accept this responsibility. If the facilities are “disgusting”, this is almost certainly because over the years, user groups have not played their role in undertaking regular maintenance. While Councils can often afford to provide, or to assist with capital works and capital maintenance items which protect the physical structure of facilities, it is essential in small communities like King Island that user groups play the major role in terms of facility maintenance. This issue is returned to in the final Chapter where management issues are addressed. Further, it must be acknowledged that it is King Island Council which has commissioned the present study to identify the most effective way by which the Recreation Reserve facilities can be both updated and diversified so they better meet wider community needs.

Conclusion The community consultations undertaken with regard to a multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie have identified a significant number of recreation facilities and a range of support services and amenities at the Reserve which need to be upgraded and enhanced. The consultations have also identified a range of other facility, program and service initiatives which should be developed if a true multi-purpose complex is to be achieved.

A significant upgrading of most of the Currie Recreation Reserve facilities is needed and some of the components of an integrated multi-purpose community and recreation complex can be provided through the upgrade. These include a multi-user fitness and program gym, youth drop-in and activity areas, improved netball and tennis facilities, improved sports training facilities and upgraded toilet and change facilities. However, the nature of the present uses and the nature of the other needs which have been identified (such as educational and training rooms, community/social areas, mothers and aged activities etc) renders the Reserve unsuitable for a range of the other elements of an integrated multi-purpose complex.

In the light of this, the following Chapter provides a detailed review and assessment of the resources of the Recreation Reserve and of other venues in Currie in order to assist in identifying the most effective way of achieving a multi-purpose community and recreation complex in the town.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 16 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

4

Indoor Sporting, Leisure and Recreation Facilities in Currie: An Assessment

This Chapter reviews the existing provision of indoor venues in Currie which can be used by the King Island community for sporting, recreational, cultural and community activities. However, as Currie Recreation Reserve is a key focus for new indoor provision initiatives, it is reviewed first. The analyses are used as a key tool in assessing the most effective course of action to be followed in developing a multi-purpose indoor community and recreation complex in Currie.

Currie Recreation Reserve Currie Recreation Reserve is the largest formal Council-owned recreation reserve in Currie. The Reserve, which is located in the southern section of the township, is bounded by the rear of housing along Beach Road in the west; Owen Smith Drive in the south (except for a wooded area in the south-west corner); Netherby Road in the east, and the rear of housing along Lighthouse Street in the north. An aerial photograph of the Reserve is shown below.

Currie Recreation Reserve, its components and neighbouring facilities (see following page for details)

Oval, pavilion, viewing area

(foreground), driveway, carpark and road exit

Tennis courts and clubroom (front) with netball courts and

shelter at rear

Lawn areas and playground

adjacent to Lighthouse Street

Norths Football Club rooms

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 17 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Currie Recreation Reserve falls within a far larger area of open space on the southern and western boundaries of the town. South of Owen Smith Drive is Currie Golf and Bowls Club which stretches to the coast, while to the east of the Reserve and via the golf course, there are links to extensive informal, historic and conservation reserves along the coast. All vehicular access to the Reserve is via Owen Smith Drive with egress only permitted onto Netherby Road. There are no footpaths to the Reserve.

As the aerial and ground level photographs on the previous page indicate, Currie Recreation Reserve has a number of elements. These are marked from 1. to 12. on the aerial photograph and briefly described below. Notes are also provided on remedial works which it is considered are needed and on any redevelopment opportunities.

1. The sports oval. The oval is quite attractive and has a good base. However, it is under-sized and would benefit from an east-west extension and land should be reserved for this.

The playing surface is in reasonable condition although turf improvements are warranted. The oval has a traditional but outdated steel pipe fence around it.

The oval is predominantly used for Australian Rules Football and cricket although it is also used for a range of other sports and community events

2. Sports pavilion. This is a substantial brick/concrete building which contains two full sports team change rooms with toilets and showers, a large semi-commercial kitchen and a media room

This brick building is structurally sound and the change facilities should be steam cleaned and repainted. New flooring may also be required. The toilet and shower facilities are in very poor condition and should be gutted and totally replaced

The kitchen is very large (8 by 10 m.) and could be used for other purposes if a smaller, timber frame kitchen was provided adjacent to the main building

There is no storage provision in the pavilion and this needs to be provided for all user groups

It is doubtful if the pavilion could be extended to the east due to a private property boundary very close to the building. The acquisition of the rear of adjacent properties may be warranted in this area as the land is flat. However, there is some capacity to extend it to the west although removal of a steep embankment will be needed if an extension of more than 5 metres is required

3. Pavilion car park. The sports pavilion is poorly served with parking with what is provided being dirt-based and informal. There are no formed paths or lights leading to the pavilion

4. Public toilets. A concrete block public toilet has recently been constructed on the higher land between the sports oval and tennis courts. This is in good condition

5. Norths Football Club social room. The Norths Football Club social room is a metal sheet which was previously the Currie Scout Hall. This building has no outlook onto the reserve and no formalised parking. This building is quite unattractive and does not integrate with the reserve. It should eventually be removed with the services it offers being incorporated into a redeveloped and expanded main pavilion

6. Currie Tennis Club. The tennis Club has a small timber clubroom, kitchen and viewing area overlooking three asphalted courts. The Club has reported that this is quite adequate for its needs. The most easterly tennis court (No. 1) is subject to water collection and is not used as it is deemed to be unsafe. Council is presently assessing the cost of testing the court (and the netball courts) to determine whether they can be repaired or whether they need to be replaced

Car parking to service the tennis and netball clubs is sited on sloping, bare ground to the south. This is badly eroded and suffers from waterlogging

7. Currie Netball Club. The Netball Club has two courts with a synthetic surface and a small, inadequate weather shelter. Both courts suffer badly from mould infestation which renders them dangerous when wet. One court is badly cracked. The courts are also being tested to determine whether they can be upgraded or need to be replaced. Due to the poor weather protection and mould, netball is frequently played in the indoor court at the secondary school

If testing finds that both the tennis and netball courts are capable of being reinstated to a sound and safe condition, the Tennis Club rooms could readily be relocated to the level of the netball courts several metres to the west and be restructured and have verandahs added so they service both clubs. Play equipment could usefully be provided for parents with children and other users of the rooms. However, if testing finds that either or both sets

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 18 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

of courts need to be replaced, the options are for the two clubs to work together to share the remaining safe courts, to totally rebuild the courts, or to commence a relocation to alternate, better locations. One location which has been identified is that adjacent to the indoor sports court at the King Island Secondary School, where an integrated indoor/outdoor venue could be created

8. Lawn areas and playground. The Reserve has extensive and very attractive mown lawns areas on quite undulating terrain along its northern side. Some sections have been given separate names although they are an integral part of the Reserve eg: Jaycee Park on Lighthouse Road. A small gravelled car park off Lighthouse Road services this area and could be enlarged

Scatters clumps of trees throughout the lawn areas reduce visibility and view lines through the parkland. They also heighten user risk and as a result some thinning may be warranted

A very attractive playground has been provided in the Jaycee Park section of the reserve

The lawn areas are inaccessible to many users as there are no formed paths and slopes are quite steep in some areas. There is no path to the playground or from any point in the northern section of the Reserve to the sports facilities. One or more safe, lit pathways should be provided. These could begin from either or both of Lighthouse Road or the rear of the King Island Club

9. Bushland. There are extensive areas of dense bushland in the Recreation Reserve, particularly on a steep slope around the southern arc of the oval and to the south-west of the tennis and netball courts. Although the taller vegetation species (predominantly melaleuca with some outstanding eucalypts) are healthy, the ground cover is heavily weed-infested

A number of tracks through the bushland are used by motor vehicles making them rough and subject to erosion. Bollards and other controls are need to address this. Track remediation is needed to improve access and safety for walkers.

Related recreation assets. The Recreation Reserve is close to several other significant recreation assets. These are:

10. King Island Golf and Bowls Club immediately south of Owen Smith Drive. This club has a very attractive 9 hole course, a large single bowling green and a substantial club house with an attractive social/function area, and sealed car parking.

The Club owns its site and has undeveloped land to the west between the bowling green and the privately-owned Boomerang Motel

11. King Island Club. The licenced King Island Club is on Netherby Road about 80 metres north of the road exit from the Recreation Reserve. The rear of the Club abuts the north-eastern corner of the Recreation Reserve

12. Walking trails. As noted previously, trails through the Recreation Reserve bushland link to a trail west past the Boomerang Motel and west to a series of formal and informal coastal trails.

In overview, a number of initiatives are needed at the Recreation Reserve to enhance and diversify its use. These can also meet a number of the needs identified through the various consultative programs, without the need to develop a totally new multi-purpose complex. The initiatives are:

• Upgrading and renovating the existing pavilion toilet/change, kitchen and storage facilities

• Providing a spectator verandah

• Replacing the existing kitchen with a smaller facility and converting the 80 square metre space to other uses

• Relocating and upgrading the tennis clubrooms to serve both tennis and netball, if the condition of the courts justifies their retention and upgrading. If the courts need to be replaced, other site options warrant assessing

• Installing a range of fitness, walking and cycling tracks around the Reserve and linking these to wider regional trails

• Providing seating and signage

• Improving car parking

• Improving vehicular access to the reserve

• Providing for expansion of the playing field to full size

• Protecting and rehabilitating bushland areas

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 19 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• Thinning out of bushland in some areas to enhance viewlines and improve safety

• Acquisition of land to enhance ease of access.

Use of the Reserve should be further enhanced and diversified by construction of pathways to and through the venue, by upgrading and regulating carparking, and by restricting vehicular access to the bushland.

Further, a longer term extension to the existing pavilion could be used to create an integrated sports club venue serving each of the three football clubs on the Island, the King Island Football Association, cricket and potentially, other sports. That said, and as was argued in the previous chapter, creating social club facilities in association with the pavilion would be costly and would duplicate other venues in Currie. It could not be seen as a core element of or need of a multi-purpose community complex. As also noted in the previous chapter, one alternative which warrants assessing is provision of social club facilities through an extension (to the rear) of the Currie Club which is less than 100 metres to the north-east on an abutting property. The advantages of this strategy are that potential competition between the two venues would be eliminated, liquor could be removed from the Reserve, and the future of the King Island Club and the service it provides to the community would be strengthened. If planned carefully, a number of additional facilities could also be provided at the King Island Club so that it became the core of other elements of a multi-purpose centre for the Currie community. A negative aspect of this strategy is that some uses of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex would not sit well with a licenced venue.

Although the initiatives outlined above would not create a multi-purpose community and recreation complex at the Recreation Reserve, the incorporation of the King Island Club could achieve a significant proportion of the desired outcomes. Further, and has been noted previously, it is the view of the authors of this report that the Reserve is not the most appropriate location for all the multi-purpose community and recreation complex elements and needs which have been identified. This is because:

• The current mix of uses do not sit comfortably with some of the activities and uses proposed for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex

• If football club facilities are further developed and extended at the Reserve and if no joint action is taken with the King Island Club (or another venue in Currie) competition will be increased and viability reduced

• There are strong community perceptions that the Recreation Reserve is a sports venue and this would deter use, and

• A large, outdoor recreation reserve is not a good location for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex due to the high levels of night time use, even if security lighting and good paths were provided.

In the light of the above, it has been concluded that while a number of initiatives need to be undertaken to upgrade the assets of the Currie Recreation Reserve and while some of these will meet needs identified for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex, the actions will not create a “complete” venue. As such, it could be argued that they should be funded or part funded by the user groups and not be funded from Council. That said, if the funding initiative was shared over several venues, the desired mix of provision could be achieved in a manner which more effectively meets community needs, which meets a wider mix of needs, which can be better staged and which can, possibly, attract funding from a wider mix of sources.

Further, it has also been concluded that the Recreation Reserve is not the most appropriate location for all elements of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex and that while many of the needs which were identified can be met there, other locations would far better suit other needs. In the light of this, the following section of this Chapter provides an evaluation of the capacity of other existing venues in Currie.

The Existing Indoor Venues Currie has a substantial array of indoor venues capable of supporting community activities including sporting and recreation pursuits, and cultural, educational, social and health and wellbeing activities. The venues are recorded in Table 3.1 in summary form below although details are lacking on some venues.

Venue Details

7th Day Adventist

Cnr Albert & Horace St

6462 1576

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities: Hall seats a maximum of 40 people. Kitchen attached to hall contains a gas stove, kettles and a deep freeze. Amenities include one female and one male toilet.

Capacity to expand venue: Unknown

Constraints on use: Unknown

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: Unknown

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 20 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Venue Details

Cultural Centre Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

A former Marine Board building and house, this venue has 3 bedroom size rooms approx 4m x 4m. The converted lounge/ dining room is used as an artist studio/ bedsit residence. Two of the three bedroom areas are used for Exhibition/ Workshop space. The other is used as the administration office for Council’s part time (3 days per week) Arts & Cultural Officer/ Cultural Centre Coordinator. The facility has a generous kitchen and a separate bathroom, toilet and laundry at the rear of the Centre.

Capacity to expand venue: Constrained by port location and surrounding uses

Constraints on use:

Location: access and weather wise

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: The building is already too small for a number of programs and activities to meet its role of providing workshop and exhibition space. The location is poor due to prevailing weather and non-vehicular access

CWA Hall Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

The CWA Hall features a floor area of 5m x 8m, giving it a max capacity of 25/30 people. The Hall also boasts a standard kitchen containing a stove, urn and fridge with an area of 2.5m x 3m. The CWA Hall also contains a shower and shared toilets (3)

Capacity to expand venue: Limited by property size and location

Constraints on use:

Property size and predominantly residential land uses in adjoining areas

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue

Low to medium capacity due to venue size limitations; other and owner group programs; inability to expand due to small site; residential land uses adjoining

KI Golf and Bowls Club

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

• Dining room of 22.7m x 9.3m serviced by a commercial kitchen and a capacity to seat 80/100 people. There is also room for a further 20 people on the outside Deck area which is the designated smoking area. There is a dance floor area of 8m x 4m as well as a Juke Box and Pool table. The commercial kitchen has significant cupboards and benchtop space, a domestic electric stove with oven, commercial deep fryer, commercial grill and hotplate, two exhaust fans, a microwave, urn and kettle.

Amenities include a male and female member’s rooms that incorporates toilets, shower and dressing room.

• Full sized lawn bowls green

9 hole golf course (which can be played as an 18hole course).

Within the Golf and Bowls Club complex is a separate building that houses two full size squash courts which are no longer in use. Adjacent to this building is a shed with separated sections for housing green keeping machinery, equipment and tools.

Capacity to expand venue:

The Club owns substantial undeveloped bushland to the west which could be used for further facilities. Facilities could also be developed on or above the sealed car park. Land to the immediate north of the bowling green may accommodate tennis / netball courts

Constraints on use:

The Club is outside the immediate town perimeter and is not serviced by footpaths or lit street lighting

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue:

The out-of-town location of this facility is a barrier to further development to meet community needs. However, the existing facilities could be programmed for specific day time activities.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 21 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Venue Details

King Island Club

6462 1124

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

This is a licenced club with full catering facilities. The building has:

• an 8 m. by 5m. dining room capable of seating approx 40 people which is open 6 days a week for lunch and dinner

• a multi-purpose room (Cabaret Room) of 11m x 20m which is presently used for indoor bowls (2 nights/week) and also boasts a high roof which is set up for technical lighting and mirror ball etc. When used for a seated function the Cabaret Room can host 120 people. There are male and female toilets specific to the Cabaret Room. There is a separate small function room (between the Cabaret Room and Kitchen which can seat up to 30 diners and is available for private functions.

The Bistro area can seat 25 diners. Separate male and female toilets are available for patrons across the hallway from the Bistro. Adjacent to the Bistro is a Public Bar and a TOTE area and 2 Pool tables.

The KI Club has 3 separate toilets for both Female and Male each one containing 3 toilets.

Capacity to expand venue:

Vacant land at the rear of the building could be developed to provide a range of additional indoor and outdoor facilities and spaces which could complement the Recreation Reserve

Constraints on use:

Availability of liquor may deem the venue to be inappropriate for some uses and user groups

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue:

This venue has a capacity to meet some indoor sports eg: darts, carpet bowls and to be further developed to provide a wide range of sporting club social needs because of its licence, dining facilities and its close proximity to the Recreation Reserve

King Island District High School sports complex

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities: The school complex has an indoor sports court which is of high quality and of full basketball dimensions, except for a lower than usual roof height. The court is several metres short of full netball court size but this has not been identified as a barrier to use.

The venue is supported by a good foyer, male and female toilet/change facilities, a disabled toilet and a manager’s office. Staff parking for the school is used by evening users of the venue

The school also owns a small indoor heated pool which is adjacent to, although physically separate from the stadium. The pool enclosure has been funded for a redevelopment in 2010

Capacity to expand venue: There are significant opportunities to expand the school facilities. The stadium could be physically integrated with the pool and there is sufficient space surrounding and to the north of the building to provide one or more multi-purpose rooms for a variety of indoor training, health, recreational and educational program. A second additional indoor court could be accommodated to the south of the existing building, the existing court could be expanded to accommodate a full-sized netball court, and social, foyer and broader management areas could be accommodated on the site.

Land to the north of the existing facilities could be used for parking and access from Shaw Street. There is sufficient space to the east of the complex to provide outdoor netball and tennis courts and a support building for these if the courts at the Recreation Reserve are found to need extensive repairs.

All facilities provided for community use could also support school uses.

Constraints on use: The only apparent constraints on the expansion of the school facilities to provide a multi-purpose indoor community and recreation complex (apart from funding –which could, in fact, be facilitated by a school-based, health and education-focused initiative— are negative community perceptions regarding initiatives on an Education Department property and concerns regarding school controls over use and daytime access to the venue

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: The school facilities already attract wide community use, with netball using the facility in wet weather. In its current condition, the facility forms an excellent base for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex and has the capacity to support extensive additional facilities and their services

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 22 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Venue Details

King Island Racing and Jockey Club

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities: The club rooms have 2 office size rooms (jockeys, officials, weigh-in etc.), a small storage room, 2 separate changing rooms (one being 5m x 4.3m while the other is much smaller at 3.5m x 3m). A larger open plan space that serves as a canteen/bar is 9m x 9m in size and has a kitchen area that has a microwave, oven and fridge.

Capacity to expand venue: There is room to extend out onto the covered/cemented veranda area that runs in an L shape at the front and side of the building.

Constraints on use: Unknown

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: The venue is too far out of town to be accessible by the projected user groups

MF Best Stand Room

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities: The room has an open area of 8.6m x 18m and hosts a small kitchen area off to one corner. The kitchen has an oven, microwave, Urn and 3 fridges. The room has 4 Televisions for use. There are separate male/female toilet facilities .

Capacity to expand venue: Unknown

Constraints on use: Unknown

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: Unknown

King Island Show Society

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities: The Show Society has a pavilion (shed) that is 12.6m x 30m. This houses the art & craft, food and agricultural entries on Show Day. Adjacent to the pavilion, a separate building runs along the 30m side. This building houses several spaces with latched windows which are used as kiosks on Show Day. There is a roller door at the southern end of the pavilion for vehicular access.

Capacity to expand venue: There is a significant capacity to expand this building.

Constraints on use:

The facility is 1km out of town and as such has significant access constraints. Secure lighting, parking and perhaps, supervisory staff may need to be provided.

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: The venue is too far out of town to be accessible by the projected user groups

Parer’s KI Hotel

6462 1633

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

The Dining Room seats a max of 80 people and includes a small stage area of 3m x 2m. A private function room and second restaurant space has recently been converted to a separate gaming room to allow for the extension from 12 to 20 gaming machines at this facility.

Capacity to expand venue: Unknown

Constraints on use: Being a licenced premises would deter some user groups

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: Unknown

Library and RSL Rooms

6462 1750

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

This complex/building houses the Currie Library, a Memorial Board Foyer area, RSL Rooms, a Parents Room and male and female toilet facilities. The building is approx. 14m x 20m. There is a ramped entry to the building that opens into the Foyer which is approx 3.5m sq. The Library area is approx 9m x 14m. The Parents Room is approx 6m x 3.5m and adjoins a small hall area that leads to the male and female amenities.

The RSL Rooms (2) are approx 7m x 4m each in size. One room has a small bench top and sink with kettle set up. There is a separate rear entry to the RSL rooms from a built in covered foyer area.

Capacity to expand venue: To be assessed as part of integrated service centre study in association with the present study

Constraints on use: Building and site capacities

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue:, The buildings have the potential for a multipurpose community facility focused on learning and development and health & wellbeing.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 23 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Venue Details

Town Hall

King Island Council

6462 1177

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

The hall complex incorporates a foyer area of 7.8m x 6m which opens up to the hall that is high roofed and 21m x 11m in size. The hall accommodates theatre style seating for up to 300 people. It will accommodate up to 200 people seated at tables. The stage is 11m x 6m and has male and female Dressing rooms with toilets to the rear. There is also a separate Lighting Box that overlooks the Stage area.

There is a Supper Room adjacent to the hall that is available for separate hire, is 9m x 9.1m and has a kitchen off to the side that contains a large commercial oven, a refrigerator, a pie warmer and urns, as well as cutlery and crockery. The kitchen is 4.4m x 5m in area.

Amenities include male, female and a disabled toilets which are located in the Foyer area.

Capacity to expand venue:

Unknown

Constraints on use:

Acoustics are poor

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue: The form and shape of the building make it unsuitable for this purpose without extensive rebuilding

Uniting Church Fellowship Room

Cnr Edward & George St

Rev Coral Davies

6462 1294

Description: dimensions, roof height, amenities:

This building is approx 16m x 7.5m. The facility is open plan in an “L” shape with an area 7.5m x 4m abutting an area 12m x 4.5m. This space is able to be separated, through the use of concertina doors, into 2 rooms – one 7m x 4.5m and the other 9 x 4.5m. Seats a maximum of 50 people. The facility has a kitchen as well as 1 x male and 1 x female toilet. Good off street parking capacity.

Capacity to expand venue: Unknown

Constraints on use: Church uses and use regulations

Assessment of capacity/usefulness as a multi-purpose venue:

Low to medium due to other and owner group programs

It is evident from the (almost certainly incomplete) table above that the Currie community has access to a diverse range of indoor facilities. In fact, it could well be argued that the town has a surfeit of venues. On a simple demographic basis, there is one indoor public venue for every 117 Island residents while on a Currie-only basis, there is one indoor venue for every 53 residents. This is unlikely to be sustainable and adding more venues will almost certainly spread the “market” more thinly, although this has not been fully realised because most of the facilities function in a non-profit environment. However, the fact that several of the recreation service providers which do have to take a commercial approach to their operations are struggling, highlights what is essentially a scarcity of users and an excess of supply.

At the same time it warrants noting that with the exception of the Town Hall, the library and the Community Arts Centre, all the facilities listed in the Table are owned by or managed by other organisations. Most therefore have needs, uses and priorities which are not entirely compatible with full community use or with recreational uses. Further, many of the venues, while having excellent capacities within themselves for fuller and more comprehensive use, are constrained by site size restrictions, surrounding land uses, parking issues, the serving of alcoholic drinks and their out-of-town locations.

The venues already support quite a range of use opportunities and their size and cost differences offer a good mix to the community. Unfortunately, the present use is quite variable and it appears that there has been no action to coordinate community access to the facilities. As a result there is in one sense quite considerable duplication of provision. Consideration should therefore be given to establishing a coordinative committee or liaison process for this purpose. This would strengthen the ability of the existing venues to meet a number of multi-purpose centre needs which have been identified through the consultative program. Further to this end, if any of the venues became available for acquisition or for Council to assume responsibility for their schedul-ing and use, serious consideration should be given to pursuing this opportunity. As part of this process or regardless of it, it may also be possible to modify some buildings so they better meet community needs. This has been done, in fact, with the Community Arts Centre at the Currie pier.

Another issue which should be addressed and resolved by a consultative/liaison committee is that of the degree of personal “control” over and “ownership” of the various buildings. The consultations program found that owner/manager attitudes toward outside user groups often created a substantial barrier to use. This could be addressed through the formulation of a set of user “rules” which apply to each or groups of venues. It may even be possible to establish an external manager of the use of some facilities. Until this issue is

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 24 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

addressed optimal use will not be made of the existing resources in the community and there will be continuing requests and initiatives from sporting and other groups to build yet more facilities. Such an approach is simply not sustainable.

The Integrated Services Centre Project In 2004, King Island Council established a working party to assess the opportunities for developing a centre for life-long learning in the community. The initiative was driven by the Tasmanian State government’s vision for post-year 10 education, training and information and its desire to provide a diverse mix of post-compulsory education learning opportunities.’

King Island Council identified the War Memorial Library site as a potential location for the initiative. The company Wise Lord and Ferguson Consulting were appointed to:

• Review the services provided from the King Island War Memorial Library

• Evaluate synergies with services provided through King Island District High School, King Island Regional Development Organisation and the King Island Workplace Learning Service

• Provide a recommendation as to whether an integrated services venue would be beneficial to the community, and

• Evaluate funding opportunities for such an initiative.

Although the origins of the project and the research process meant the Wise Lord and Ferguson Consulting study had a strong focus on learning and development, these are closely linked with community health and wellbeing, the development of personal and community skills and capacities, economic growth, environmental awareness and protection, and the development of social capital which are outcomes of recreational pursuits. For many people in fact, lifelong learning is a major recreational pursuit. As such, the study findings are particularly relevant to the present multi-purpose community and recreation complex feasibility study as the objectives overlap significantly.

The integrated services centre study process entailed workshops to assess learning and development issues and opportunities on King Island, a brief review of societal trends, a review and assessment of existing learning and development services and providers on the Island, and assessments of the existing provision.

The report reached a number of conclusions and recommendations which are pertinent to the present feasibility study. These were:

• That King Island Council develops the King Island War Memorial Library into a multi-purpose, integrated learning and community development centre which brings together many of the services currently available at other locations and provides the opportunity for the development of new services in the future, and

• That King Island Council contacts all major (a) providers and (b) consumer stakeholders to clarify the expectations and opportunities to be provided by the development of a Learning and Development Community Centre.

A number of operational recommendations addressed the formation of a committee to guide the implement-ation process, appointment of a manager, project funding research, promotion of the concept within the community, processes to guide the formation of partnerships, volunteer capacity assessments and development timelines.

Unfortunately, the Wise Lord and Ferguson Consulting research barely scratched the surface of some of the key issues associated with the concept of an integrated learning and community development centre and as a result, there are a number shortcomings in their report. These are:

• The very broad and vague notion of what an integrated learning and development community centre is. There is, understandably, a heavy “educational” focus yet there appears to be no attempt to assess what else may be appropriate to include and there is nothing relating to community strengthening, to the development of social capital or to leisure and recreation. Rather, it seems that the proposed venue would be little more than a centre which largely brings existing services together at one location

• No rationale is provided for the co-location of most of the elements flagged for possible inclusion nor are any beneficial outcomes identified. As such, there is no rationale for building –or at least, enlarging-- yet another public building

• No consideration is given to the alternate uses which might be made of the venues which the services presently occupy and whether some might be usefully sold to help pay for the new initiative

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 25 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• The heavily abbreviated presentation of information and the lack of explanation of the findings and conclusions makes large sections of the material difficult to understand or evaluate eg: “Stakeholder Impact Analysis –Providers” p. 16),

• The extensive use of jargon eg: recommendation, top p. 16

• Perhaps most importantly, there is a failure to detail (a) the mix of components (b) the space requirements of each component and (c) costed designs for the recommended learning and development facility

• The failure to assess the capacities or constraints associated with the War Memorial Library site, and

• The failure to evaluate potential alternate sites (such as the school).

Despite these shortcomings, the findings of the report have relevance to the present study. A number of the services or facilities suggested for inclusion in the learning and development centre would fit comfortably with and could be shared with those identified for inclusion in a multi-purpose community complex. This is particularly so with regard to those items which would not “fit” well at a Recreation Reserve venue: drop-in spaces, indoor and outdoor playgroup areas, counselling and support services, social areas, community training spaces and so forth. Further, the community library provides an excellent “core” component of such a venue.

In the light of the above, it is recommended that action on an integrated learning and community development centre and those components of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex which are not suited to the Recreation Reserve is combined and that King Island Council extends the concept of the learning and development centre to encompass health, wellbeing, personal and social development and community wellbeing.

If the above recommendation is accepted, it is further recommended that Council undertakes a review of the capacity of the library site and other sites to accommodate a combined learning and development centre and those indoor and outdoor elements of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex which are not appropriate for provision at the Recreation Reserve. To do this effectively it may need to more precisely identify what components of an integrated learning and development centre are seen as “mandatory” and which can be “left out” if there is insufficient space.

Conclusion This Chapter has provided an assessment of the condition and redevelopment capacities of the existing resources at Currie Recreation Reserve, of other buildings in Currie which could meet some or all of the needs identified for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex, and of the feasibility study into the development of an integrated services centre in Currie.

The review of the Recreation Reserve assets found that there are substantial opportunities to develop and enhance the assets so as to strengthen the role it plays in the Currie and wider Island community. Yet the assessment also concluded that while the Reserve has substantial potentials for further development in a number of ways, the nature of the existing uses, its location, access to the Reserve, the topography and physical space constraints in particular parts of the venue mean that only some elements of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex should be developed there. These were in particular, the opportunities for a multi-use gym and fitness facility for use by the existing Reserve users and a range of other programmed groups (including the school) and individuals. The specific recommendations and designs are presented in the following Chapter.

Further, the assessment concluded that the average to poor condition of the tennis and netball courts was such that they needed engineering tests undertaken on them to assess their capacity to justify further redevelopment and that if this found that redevelopment could not be justified, then consideration warranted being given to the relocation of these sports off the Reserve. It also concluded that whether these courts remained on the Reserve or not, they did not need to be serviced by a new multi-purpose building and that the relocating and redevelopment of the existing tennis clubroom would meet club needs.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 26 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

5

A Strategy for Action

This Chapter presents a strategy for action toward achieving an integrated multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie. It commences with a set of planning principles to guide the design and development process and then proceeds to recommendations for particular sites.

Principles to Guide the Development Process The following principles have been used in making decisions about the most effective mix of facilities and the most effective sites for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie.

1. Protecting and strengthening existing leisure, sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, programs and services

2. Improving the quality of the existing leisure, sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, programs and services

3. Retaining and, if possible, diversifying, the mix of sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, programs and services available to the community so as to reflect the characteristics and needs of the community

4. Using leisure, sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, programs and services as tools for community strengthening and community building

5. Using leisure, sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, programs and services as tools for economic development

6. Using partnerships between the community and sporting and recreation groups, Council and other organisations and agencies as a means of enhancing recreation and leisure facilities, programs and services

7. Strengthening the operational viability of leisure, sporting, recreational and cultural venues in the town

8. Ensuring that in the development of new, or in the upgrading of existing sporting, recreational and cultural facilities, appropriate attention is paid to ecologically sustainable design, and minimising environmental impacts, and

9. Strengthening the operations and viability of sporting, recreational and cultural groups and activities through improvements to committee operations, asset maintenance, the recruitment and use of volunteers, the management of finances, and the provision of relevant, attractive and good quality programs.

Currie Recreation Reserve Built Facilities

The review of the Currie Recreation Reserve assets concluded that while the Reserve has substantial potent-ials for further development, the nature of the existing uses, the Reserve location, access to the Reserve, the topography, and physical space constraints in particular parts of the venue mean that only some elements of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex should be developed there. These were in particular, a multi-use gym and fitness facility for use by the existing Reserve users and a range of other programmed groups (including the school) and individuals and the upgrading of the outdoor facilities and program support areas . The following initial draft concept design shows the recommended indoor improvements. These are:

• Total renovation of the existing change rooms and their relocation to the west so that one now occupies the present kitchen

• Reconstruction of the change room toilets and showers

• Provision of umpire change facilities

• Conversion of the eastern change rooms into a multi-purpose conference, training, social space

• Creation of a new smaller kitchen serving both outdoor and indoor areas within the redesigned former eastern change rooms

• Construction of a new multi-purpose program/fitness gym area to the immediate east of the existing building

• Provision of a restructured timekeeper area

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 27 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

• Provision of toilets for users and storage areas for user groups/clubs

• Construction of a covered verandah and spectator around three sides of the building for use for activities and as a covered spectator area, and

• The reservation of space for further health and fitness training areas.

It may also be possible to construct a more permanent and safe filming platform on the roof.

The restructuring of internal space use and the provision of new buildings on the eastern side of the existing pavilion reflects the fact that the recommended upgraded carparking, changes to Netherby Road access to and egress from the Reserve and provision of lighting an safe pathways will make the complex far more town-focused and accessible to the community. It will also avoid the need to excavate the site if land to the west was used.

It is noted that sports club social rooms have not been included in the designs. This is because:

• They are considered to have a lower priority for action

• The two change rooms and/or conference space could be used for occasional social events, and

• Alternate strategies have been recommended for the provision of sporting club social facilities in association with the King Island Club.

These conclusions do not preclude the longer term provision of social facilities if alternate solutions are not found to be effective: as the design is capable of accommodating further extensions to the east for club and wider program activities dependent on need.

The chart following the design concepts for the Recreation Reserve pavilion upgrading and expansion indicates the cost of the recommended actions. The chart indicates that the overall cost of the proposals would be $1,274,520 at 2008 prices.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 28 28 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 29Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Currie Multi Purpose Recreation Complex

September 4th, 2008 Element Total Area Rate Amount m2 $/m2 $ New Building Works

Committee/Club Room 65 $ 1,600 $ 104,000 Operable wall say $ 30,000 Timekeeper 9 $ 1,950 $ 17,550 Public/Disabled Toilet 6 $ 2,600 $ 15,600 Stores 22 $ 1,200 $ 26,400 Circulation 5 $ 1,500 $ 7,500 Kitchen 15 $ 2,000 $ 30,000 Covered viewing area 250 $ 500 $ 125,000 Existing Building Works Demolition and make good say $ 20,000 Form Conference area from Change room say $ 30,000 Upgrade existing toilets/change say $ 40,000 Form new toilets/change rooms say $ 50,000 Total Building Works 372 $ 1,333 $ 496,050

External Works & Services Site Preparation allow $ 15,000 External Services allow $ 20,000 Total External Works & Services $ 35,000

Sub Total $ 531,050

Allowances Locality allowance (Nominal) 80% $ 424,840 Design Contingency (Nominal) 20% $ 106,210 Total Allowances $ 531,050 Cost Escalation Cost Escalation $ 0-

Construction Cost $ 1,062,100 Contract Contingencies (Nominal) 5% $ 53,105 Consultants Fees (Nominal) 15% $ 159,315

Total Project Cost - Current day $ 1,274,520

The costs set out above do not include GST; any adverse site conditions; removal of contaminated material; removal of any asbestos; upgrading of services infrastructure; car parking and access roads; loose furniture and fittings; landscap-ing; cost escalations.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 30Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

The Reserve Masterplan A masterplan for the overall upgrading and enhancement of the Recreation Reserve has been prepared in association with the upgrading and expansion of the Recreation Reserve pavilion and this is attached. The key elements of the masterplan are numbered and described in the following Table.

Column 4 of the Table provides an indicative priority for each component based on the importance of the initiative rather than timing. In the Table, A = High Priority, B = Medium Priority, and C = Low priority. Thus, although considerable effort and time will be needed to achieve some initiatives, they are still of high priority. Achieving some initiatives will also take time as action will be dependent on the financial resources available. Finally, column 5 suggests a responsibility for each action.

Map No.

Item Details Priority Responsibility

1 Pavilion Redevelop pavilion as detailed previously to create a part multi-purpose community and recreation complex

A Council, committee of manage-ment, individual sporting clubs and wider community

2 Playing field Upgrade surface and fencing B Council, committee of manage-ment, user clubs

3 Vegetation and roadway

Progressively push vegetation back from the reserve to permit nose-in parking, provision of a pathway around the field and eventually, enlargement of the oval to full size

C As above

4 Carparking Upgrade, drain and surface carpark. Use concrete barriers to mark spaces and thereby reduce hoon behaviour

B Council

5 Carparking Enlarge carpark, provide a gravel surface and defined parking bays, fence

B Council

6 Playground Provide seating, tap and shade at playground A Council, Child Health Association and community

7 Tennis and netball courts

Following concrete testing, upgrade the sur-faces of courts 2-5 as required, totally rebuild, or initiate planning for longer term relocation to school adjacent to indoor sports court

A Clubs with Council assistance

8 Tennis club room Relocate tennis clubroom to the level of the netball courts and provide surrounding verandahs and steps so the building can service both tennis and netball users

B Clubs with Council assistance

9 Sealed walking/ cycle paths

Provide sealed, lit and signposted walking and cycle paths. Ensure all trails within the Reserve allow disabled use

A Council with service club input

10 Gravel-based walking/cycle paths

Provide gravelled and signposted walking and cycle paths. Ensure all trails within the Reserve allow disabled use

A Council with service club input

11 Barriers Install vehicle access barriers B Council, committee of management

12 Land evaluation Assess opportunities for buying this site to ensure permanent access to the Reserve from the western part of the town

A Council

13 Reserve entrance

Regrade and widen entrance on Netherby Road to permit safe access to and exiting from the Reserve. Ensure safe ambulance access

A Council

14 Tree management

Remove all damaged trees and lower branches to permit safe installation of an access path, lighting, upgraded carparking and view lines into the Reserve. Develop outdoor social areas

B Council with service club input

15 Land evaluation Assess opportunities for leasing/buying rear of properties facing Netherby Road to ensure adequate space for the Recreation Reserve buildings and direct links to the King Island Club

A Council

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 31Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Map No.

Item Details Priority Responsibility

16 Norths Clubrooms

Close this building and integrate services with an expanded King Island Club to serve all three football clubs and other sporting groups

C Norths Football Club with Council assistance

17 King Island Club Expand and redevelop to serve wider sporting and recreation needs

B King Island Club in association with other sporting and recreation groups

18 Tennis court 1. Convert this court to 2-3 cricket practice nets (depending on action on 24. below)

B Cricket Club

19 Exercise stations Establish a series of exercise stations along Reserve pathways

B Community service groups

20 Vegetation management

Undertake weed control initiatives and vegetation replanting

B Council, State government agencies, school, Field naturalists and other service clubs

21 Creek Revegetate creek course and integrate with parklands

B As above

22 Path link Assess the capacity to acquire or lease access rights via a pedestrian/cycle path to the Reserve from the town centre

B Council

23 Lighting and signposts

Install lighting and signposting at key points throughout and to the Reserve

A Council

24 Cricket pitch Resurface or relocate cricket to the High School to create a football-only playing surface

B Cricket Club

Top Masterplan Priorities for Action A number of top priorities for action on the masterplan have been identified. The top 10 are listed below. It should be noted that the priorities may not be resolved in exactly the order listed as design time lines, funding issues, the ability of local clubs and groups to the work and planning approvals etc can all affect the immediacy with which action can be taken.

Map Number Priority Recommended Action

1 1 Redevelop pavilion to create a multi-purpose indoor community and recreation complex

7 2 Tennis and netball court and shelter redevelopment (subject to concrete testing)

9, 10 =3 Pathway construction (gravel and sealed)

23 5 Install lighting and signposting at key points throughout and to the Reserve

13 6 Regrade and widen entrance on Netherby Road to allow two way traffic

12, 15 =7 Evaluation of opportunities to lease/buy land to improve reserve access and development

6 9 Provide seating, tap and shade at the playground

4 10 Upgrade, drain and surface carparks

.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 32 Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 33Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Other Multi-Purpose Community and Recreation Complex Components As indicated previously, it was determined from the site assessments and the nature of the core uses of the sporting facilities at the recreation Reserve, that the Reserve was not the appropriate location for a number of the recommended components of a multi-purpose community and recreation complex.

It was further determined that these needed to be provided in a different “softer” setting and format and in a venue located closer to the centre of Currie.

Finally, a review of the integrated learning and community development centre proposals suggested that it probable that many if not all of the other components which it was not appropriate to provide at the Recreation Reserve might very effectively co-locate with that centre.

The integrated learning and community development centre is presently earmarked for development in association with the library although the Wise Lord and Ferguson Consulting research report into the initiative failed to assess the capacity of this site or its comparative merit ahead of others.

The multi-purpose community and recreation complex components identified as being appropriate for provision at this “second” site are:

• Social and community drop-in spaces

• Indoor and outdoor playgroup areas

• Mother’s/baby change area

• Counselling and support services rooms

• Multi-purpose activity areas

• Community training spaces, and

• Storage.

Of the existing venues in Currie which were reviewed as part of the present Study, the following potentially offer the opportunity for further development to meet the identified needs:

• King Island District High School sports complex

• Uniting Church

• King Island Club, and

• Library.

Several other venues, including the Show Society and Race Club buildings, were excluded largely on the grounds of location and accessibility.

All four of the venues listed above warrant further assessment although ownership, current uses and licencing issues may make it difficult to either use or gain wide community support for use of the King Island Club or the Uniting Church building.

Further planning and site capacity assessments need to be undertaken at the library site before any commitment is made to it as there will be a need for indoor and outdoor spaces. An assessment may also need to be made to traffic and parking capacities in the surrounding areas. While the venue was proposed as the site for an integrated services centre in a 2006 study, no design or siting assessments were carried out.

The King Island District High School sports complex offers an excellent base for a multi-purpose community and recreation complex as it already has a high standard indoor court and an indoor pool which could readily be improved for wider and more targeted use. Further, the site has a capacity for considerable additional indoor and outdoor development including multi-purpose and social areas, training rooms and the like. Outdoor facilities could include new netball and tennis courts (if those at the Recreation Reserve are found to be beyond useful repair), beach volleyball and social areas. The site has a capacity for the provision of access and parking separate from the present school services. An initial concept sketch for this site was prepared as part of the research for the present report and this is presented below. However, issues of ownership and location weaken this site to some extent although it warrants further assessment along with the library.

Funding the Initiatives Funding the initiatives which have been identified will be a difficult task. As the costing of the initial designs for the sporting pavilion component alone have indicated, a total budget of possibly $1.2 m. can be expected for all components to be completed, not including new or repaired tennis and netball courts or any of the wider Recreation Reserve components.

A range of funding sources are available for the projects. These are reviewed briefly below.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 34Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Community Fundraising. Community and club fund raising will be essential if the proposed initiatives are to be achieved. It is recommended that the King Island Council works with the King Island Youth Centre Management and the wider community to establish a fund raising group and that that group assesses the following strategies:

A community giving scheme

A gifts catalogue

Major raffles

Using reserved resources

User fees

Naming rights and sponsorships

Tourist donations, and

Associations and cooperatives.

Community giving schemes operate through a community-based not-for-profit organisation which initially solicits 3-4 years of annual contributions toward the project from leading residents and then all other residents. The leading residents may be asked to commit to donating say $2,000, $4,000 or $10,000 pa. (or some other amount which is determined through a process of enquiry) over the 3-4 year period while other residents are asked for $100, $500 or whatever they can afford. Substantial amounts can be, and have been raised using this approach elsewhere in Australia.

A gifts catalogue entails the venue planning committee identifying the cost of unique individual components of the project which need to be funded. These items and their costs are then published and residents, tourists and others are asked to either fund them outright or to help pay for them. Items might include flooring at say, $100,000, a kitchen fitout, at $20,000, or toilet equipment at $10,000.

Major raffles succeed by raffling something which enthusiasts really want: a boat, an historic car, a block of land: which preferably, has been restored locally or donated. Tickets are sold at $100 to $400 each.

Unused resources might include an empty shop, a boat or a house. In northern Victoria, a retiring farmer donated the use of several paddocks for fundraising purposes. The community farmed the land and sold the grain grown on it to help fund a community hall. A house in Currie donated as a fundraising tool, could generate a substantial rental income each year or could be raffled or sold. An empty block of land which had several cabins built on it could do the same.

User fees and charges. Council records show that at present, users of recreation facilities pay very low if any fees. In fact, it is probable that the present users of the Reserve pay less than $1,500 in total a year for use of an asset which, if they had to be re-acquired and rebuilt, would be worth several million dollars. If new facilities are to be viable, this will need to change and it will be essential that a fee structure is developed and applied to all users. The structure should be simple and readily applied. An operational and maintenance cost recovery figure of 25 percent is now used by many Australian Councils and this warrants review at the Recreation Reserve.

If a nominal use fee of say $1 per child and $2 per adult was applied to each use of all sporting and community facilities on King Island and if this money was invested in a community fund, it is highly likely that it could generate thousand dollars every year. If a range of other educational, training, and commercial uses of the venues were developed, these could also generate fees. It has been claimed that fees for use kill off clubs on the Island: yet, Bureau of Statistics data show that Australian families spend tens of dollars weekly on videos, video game hire, alcohol, cigarettes and other forms of recreation. A strong case needs to be developed to explain why paying higher fees is important and also to explain precisely where monies collected will be used. The consultations revealed that at least some of the opposition to paying fees stemmed from the fact that a lot of the money went to pay affiliation and insurance costs. As discussed elsewhere in this report, if ways were developed to eliminate these expenses, a lot more money might be freed up to pay for the use of and support of leisure and recreation facilities. Finally, it warrants noting that while it has been claimed that higher fees will “kill off” sporting club memberships, the demographic analysis presented earlier in this report indicates that overall, Island incomes are high. While this is not necessarily the case for sports participants, it raises the hope that altruistic, better-off members of the community may be able to assist in supporting initiatives which will help to keep the overall community active, vibrant and healthy.

Given the critical need to raise funds for the project, it is recommended that the simple fee structure outlined above (with perhaps, slightly higher fees) is applied to existing sporting and community recreation facilities in Currie as soon as is practical. This will raise a significant amount in the pre-development period and get the community accustomed to paying a more realistic fee for use.

Naming rights and advertising. Numerous community buildings across Australia are named after major sponsors as this can generate either or both of a capital development contribution or an annual operational subsidy. Naming rights can be auctioned or tendered initially and should only apply for three to five years before they are again put out to tender. Advertising signs from centre sponsors should also be let at an agreed price.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 35Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 36Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Tourist and business donations. Tourists and business people visiting King Island can be asked to assist the town by making a donation toward the new facilities. Although it is unlikely that a substantial amount would be generated using this approach, a promotional campaign could be mounted at little cost. A clear message as to what the development will provide, how it will benefit the community, and hence, tourism, and what and why tourists are being invited to contribute would assist and any contributions would be valuable. Use of the gift catalogue approach amongst tourists and business people could also attract some major contributions. Other strategies may include special events at the new facilities marketed at tourists or the provision of discounted fees to residents versus tourists.

Associations and Cooperatives.

Tasmanian law provides for the forming of associations and cooperatives as a means of undertaking fundraising for community projects. Details are available at www.consumer.tas.gov.au where the left column provides details on each approach. Associations are recommended over cooperatives in terms of the paperwork and time required.

Many clubs and special interest groups become Incorporated Associations to benefit their members and to protect them from the debts and liabilities of the association. Incorporation is a voluntary, simple and inexpensive means of establishing a legal entity and is an alternative to forming, for example, a company limited by guarantee or a cooperative. It is particularly suitable for small, community-based groups.

Incorporation establishes as a legal entity, which allows the association to:

• Continue regardless of changes to membership

• Accept gifts and bequests

• Buy and sell property

• Enter into enforceable contracts

• Sue or be sued, and

• Apply for Government grants.

Incorporated Associations must be non-profit organisations. This means that any profits made should be used to further the objectives of the association, not provide personal gain for its members and should be passed to another community body if the association is wound up.

The Associations Incorporation Act 1964, Associations Incorporation Regulations 1965, Associations Incorporation Direction 1999 and Associations Incorporation (Model Rules) Regulations 1997 create the framework for Incorporated Associations registration in Tasmania.

Corporate Funding.

Corporate donations should be sought from all King Island businesses and employers. To successfully solicit funds, however, it is important to be able to demonstrate how contributions will ensure the successful implementation of the proposed developments and that the project will be viable. It is thus better to seek corporate donations once substantial funds have been raised from within the community and from Council. Benevolent Trusts. There is a wide range of benevolent trusts in Australia, many of which fall under the auspice of Philanthropy Australia (see www.philanthropy.org.au). These should be reviewed and funding submissions should be prepared and submitted to them. As with corporate donations, philanthropic trusts prefer to see grants used to complete projects rather than to start them and to be used for specific provision initiatives.

Council Contributions. All Councils contribute toward community development initiatives and it can be expected that the King Island Council will do likewise. This is particularly so when it is evident that a new multi-purpose sporting and community centre will contribute significantly to sports, community health and wellbeing, community education and training, and possibly, tourism. It may also be that during emergencies, the enhanced Recreation Reserve facilities could serve as a useful base for emergency organisations.

However, the capacity of Council to contribute is limited and as with many other Councils, it may be restricted to providing in-kind assistance, such as allowing use of the Recreation Reserve, regrading the oval or assisting with loan applications. Thus the Currie community and the King Island Youth Centre Management committee will need to meet with Council to determine what capacity it has to contribute to the development project.

It is possible that Council may be able to identify land holdings on the Island which could be sold or raffled to assist with funding the project.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 37Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

Partnerships. An increasing number of partnership arrangements are used in developing community facilities in Australia. These entail:

• At the “major projects” level, governments licencing the development and operation of major infrastructure for a period of say, 30 years, after which ownership reverts to the government (“Public, Private Partnerships” or “PPP”)

• Smaller organisations investing in the provision of specific built components of a venue

• Individuals or management specialists funding the fitout and operation of a venue, and

• Individuals or small businesses leasing part of a venue and using it to provide a service to the community.

All but the first of these opportunities warrants exploring in Currie. The consultations program conducted as part of the present study identified several possible opportunities where partnerships in both program/service provision and management may well be possible.

Examples in other Council/community venues include ladies hairdressers, fitness/wellbeing programmers, physiotherapists, youth services programmers, café/ retail services, and child care providers. A number of similar businesses could be offered through the proposed new facilities in Currie with the providers sharing the facilities on a timetabled basis and paying a lease fee, a levy per client, or paying “in kind” through the management and programming of some or all of the venue outside their booked use times. There is no fixed approach to the financial arrangements which can be used and in some instances, partners are paid to offer various services whereas in others, they pay a lease or user fee. Where it has been found difficult to set a price or fee for partnerships, some Councils have adopted an “open book” approach over the first year so that the success or failure of the partnership can be monitored before an appropriate and equitable financial arrangement is put in place.

It is recommended that as soon as King Island Council and the Currie community determine to proceed with the development of the proposed facilities, expressions of interest are called so that parties interested in partner-ship options can be identified and appropriate use rights and funding/fees arrangements put in place.

State and Federal Governments.

State and Federal Governments contribute substantial amounts to community initiatives. In Tasmania, the State government distributes around $3 million to organisations through six grant programs, the aim of which is to improve opportunities for Tasmanians to participate in sport and recreation activities. Further details can be obtained from: http://www.development.tas.gov.au/sportrec/grants, [email protected] or 1800 252 476. The categories relevant to the current proposal are:

Category 1. Community Recreation Grants Program

Most grants in this category are in the range of $500 and $50 000, and are made to clubs, associations, local government, private companies and registered charities. Projects must address barriers to participation in sport and recreation. Barriers can include, but are not limited to, such things as gender, age, disability, isolation, health issues, cultural or linguistic diversity, and socio-economic circumstances. The Community Recreation Grants Program is continuous and applications will be accepted until 30 April 2009.

Category 3. Major Grants Program

Grants of between $6,000 and $80,000 made to clubs, associations, local government and other not-for profit providers of sport and recreation. Projects include equipment purchases, facility developments or upgrades, targeted participation projects and other development initiatives. Applicants must contribute at least half of the project funding. There is one funding round per year.

The 2009 Major Grants Program opens on 1 July 2008 and closes on 30 January 2009.

Category 4. Minor Grants Program

Grants of between $250 and $5,000 made to clubs, associations, local government and other not-for-profit providers of sport and recreation. Projects include equipment purchases, facility developments or upgrades, targeted participation projects and other development initiatives. Applicants must contribute at least half of the project funding.

The Minor Grants Program is continuous and applications are accepted at any time. Applicants are advised of outcomes within three months of lodging their application.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 38Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

6. Trainee Subsidy Program

Grants of between $2,125 per part-time trainee and $4,250 per full-time trainee, are made to clubs, associat-ions, local government and other not-for-profit providers of sport and recreation. Funding is provided to subsidise the employment of trainees in the sport and recreation sector, and is distributed on a first-come first-serve basis to those organisations that meet the criteria.

The Trainee Subsidy Program is continuous and applications are accepted at any time until 30 April 2009. Applicants are advised of outcomes within six weeks of lodging an application.

The Currie community could take advantage of this grant given the wide role envisaged for a new venue. However, funding for the remainder of the employee salary would need to be sought locally.

Tasmanian Community Fund. This fund was established under the Trust Bank Sale Act in 1999 with the objective of “responding to the needs of the Tasmanian community and enhancing the services, opportunities and amenities available” through a grants program. There are usually two rounds of grants a year. Contact is via www.tascomfund.org or at GPO Box 1350, Hobart, 7000

In summary regarding State government sources, it warrants stressing that funding opportunities for large facility developments through the grant programs run by Sport and Recreation Tasmania are limited to the Major Grants Program. Unfortunately, this program has a small pool of funding (<$500,000 per annum) and the maximum grant on offer at present is $80,000 on a dollar for dollar basis. Proponents of large projects there-fore often take a political approach to securing funding from the Tasmanian Government through the annual State Budget process. Projects put forward through this avenue will have a greater chance of success if the need, viability and sustainability are supported by thorough feasibility and business planning, if there is widespread and demonstrated community support, if the project is part funded by the community, and if local government or the Australian Government and broad political support for the project is secured. Projects wishing to be funded in any particular financial year, are best submitted around October of the previous financial year. Thus, as well as commissioning the present Study, King Island Council and the Currie community will need to make continuing representations to State and Federal members of Parliament regarding the project and the benefits it will deliver to the region.

Until recently, the Federal government funded a regional partnerships scheme to assist with the development of community projects in remote areas. The scheme was abolished by the new Federal government and while it has indicated that it will be reinstated in one form or another, the structure has yet to be announced and implementation has not been given a high priority. However, funding may well become available from a number of other community development and health program sources and these should be explored and pursued by the King Island Youth Centre Management committee, the community and Council.

Funding Summary.

In the light of funding review, it is recommended that a Council/ King Island Youth Centre Management committee / community fundraising group is formed to review each of the strategies outlined above, to determine the most appropriate mix to be used, to estimate the amounts which might be achieved through each, and to implement a fundraising program. The almost universal experience these days is that where a community has not demonstrated a commitment to and some initial success in local fundraising, it will not attract wider governmental or commercial support.

Management

The management arrangements established for a new indoor recreation and community centre in Currie will be important to its success. This is because the small size of the community means that a proactive approach will need to be taken to programming the venue to ensure it is viable. What this means is that rather than relying solely on existing and other groups or individuals to book use of the venue, someone will also need to be actively assessing needs in the community and wherever possible, establishing a range of activities and programs which meet those needs. This person will also need to promote the availability of the venue within and beyond the community in order to attract users.

Given the importance of this programming and marketing approach to the success and viability of the proposed new facilities, management arrangements must be put in place before the venue opens.

The management options available to the venue include:

• Full time professional management

• Partnership management

• Community-based management

• Club management.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 39Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

The cost of full time professional management is almost certain to be beyond the capacity of the venue to fund. However, King Island Council may be able to part fund such a position or to locate Council staff at the venue for part of each day or week.

Partnership management entails one or more commercial or semi-commercial users assuming responsibility for the booking and supervision of the venue (or other parts of the building when they are using it), for some or all times outside their use period. Partnership managers also take responsibility for identifying needs and initiating new programs and where they do, they earn a commission from each use which is generated. Other members of the community who also assist in generating new uses could also share this commission.

An advisory committee of users is generally formed to liaise with a partnership manager regarding user needs, use rights and other responsibilities. In the present case, the existing King Island Youth Centre Management committee would be a good starting point. This group would play an important role in setting user fees and use rules.

A community-based manager is essentially an honorary position in that a full salary is not paid, although an honorarium is usually paid. The individual given the position assumes responsibility for approving and supervising uses and for inviting new and additional uses as would a partnership manager. Such an individual would also work closely with the existing King Island Youth Centre Management committee.

Club management works through a committee of management which has representation from each user group. This approach generally means that each user group also has keys to the venue and opens up and operates the building during its allocated times or season. While this approach can be effective when one or two groups use a venue, it is unlikely to be effective at the proposed new venue as different activities will be using different parts of the venue at the same time, and as significant efforts will constantly need to be made to program in new uses and to attract new and varying events and programs. At their worst, committees of management made up of user group representatives actively work to exclude new users. This is in no way a reflection of the existing King Island Youth Centre Management Committee as it has been a key driver of the present project. However, operational management one step removed from the vested interests of individual clubs will almost always be more successful.

In the light of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Council and King Island Youth Centre Management Committee assume responsibility for assessing the management options outlined above. The partnership management or community-based manager approaches should be given preference for adoption as these will attract the most able and motivated people. A professional service provider living and working in Currie has expressed a strong interest in assisting with the operation of the venue along the lines of a partnership management model and this should be given serious attention.

Once the approach to be used is determined, consideration will need to be given to selecting the most appropriate person for the role. A set of criteria for selection should be established, submissions called and possibly, interviews held. Sport and Recreation Tasmania and Council officers may usefully be invited to assist with these processes. It is recommended that an appointment be made at least 4-6 months before the new centre is opened so that operational budgets, use scheduling, equipment purchases and the identification of new programs and user activities can be undertaken.

Summary and Next Steps This report has presented a feasibility assessment of the development of an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie. The report commenced with a detailed evaluation of the past, current and projected population of the community, of the existing indoor venues in the town, of the wide-reaching benefits which a venue would provide and of the needs for such a facility which exist in the community.

The program of consultations with the community identified a need for a range of upgraded sport and community facilities capable of meeting a range of sporting, health, fitness and community wellbeing needs. Young people, parents with young children, sporting groups and older residents were seen as being sections of the community having particularly substantial provision needs. The facilities were seen as the means for developing a healthier and happier community, for providing a wide range of sporting and social activities for young people, for use for child care and family activities, and community development activities.

The detailed analysis of a range of sites identified Currie Recreation Reserve as the most appropriate location for some of the new facilities –particularly those focused on sport and fitness-- and a costed master plan for the redevelopment of the sports pavilion has been prepared. While the costs are high, these are impacted by the remote location of King Island and reflect the medium quality building which is recommended. Construction of anything less or of “make-do” facilities would be a false economy and would set back meeting the real needs in the community by many years. In addition to the facility designs, an overall reserve masterplan has been prepared to guide the development of the wider reserve. This has sought in particular, to make the venue more accessible to the community, to allow it to support a greater diversity of uses, to link it more effectively to the town, to enhance its quality, and improve its safety.

Because the Recreation Reserve was not assessed as the most appropriate location for some elements of an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex --and particularly, for child care, mothers and aged

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 40Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008

programs and services, children’s activities and social support initiatives—a range of alternate venues was assessed. It was found that Currie has a surfeit of indoor venues, none of which really fulfills the roles needed of an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex. However, of these venues, the Uniting Church, the school sports complex, the King Island Club and the library –the subject of the 2006 integrated services centre study—were deemed to be the most suitable because of their location and assets. The library and school site were recommended for further detailed investigation ahead of the church and King Island Club due to ownership and licencing issues.

A review of funding opportunities identified a range of sources which will need to be actively pursued by the Currie community with the backing of Council. The competition for grants and other funds is strong and the amounts available from each is rarely large. It is thus almost certain that the community will need to pursue a number of sources in a continuing manner and should update its local and Federal parliamentarians as to its progress on a regular basis.

Council data on the income generate from the Recreation reserve indicated that at present very little is being paid by very few users. The report thus recommends that a nominal pricing structure is developed and applied as soon as possible, both as a means of initiating a fundraising program and in order to engender a willingness to pay ethos in the community.

The review of management options concluded that the application of a proactive management approach will be critical to the success of the development initiative. It was recommended that a partnership or community-based manager approach should be given preference as either of these will attract the most able and motivated people. This model can work hand-in-hand with the existing King Island Youth Centre Management committee.

Next Steps The size of the Currie community and the limited financial capacity of the King Island Council mean that achieving the outcomes presented in this report will be a difficult and potentially, lengthy, task.

In order to further action on the project, a number of steps need to be taken. These are:

1. Adopt this report as the blueprint for the development of an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex in Currie

2. Establish the recommended fundraising committee to evaluate each of the funding mechanisms identified and to determine the most appropriate mix to initially pursue. Implement an initial 18 month program with specific targets. Identify and submit for all funding grants for which the project is eligible

3. Initiate further research into the capacity of the library and school facilities to be developed to meet those components of the indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex deemed to be inappropriate for provision at the Recreation Reserve

4. Initiate a new fee structure for the use of existing Recreation Reserve (and potentially, other public facilities) and negotiate with King Island Council regarding the allocation of the income earned toward the project

5. Develop an information package and message using this report and make presentations as to the desired outcomes and the processes being pursued to relevant State and Federal members of parliament. Seek access to State government budget formation processes

6. Prepare and issue an annual update “supplement” to this report which highlights continuing and new needs in the community, fundraising targets and successes and other activities regarding the project. Present or forward this to all relevant government and other agencies and to members of parliament

7. Commence design development for the Recreation Reserve redevelopment as soon as resources become available

8. Liaise with the King Island Club regarding redevelopment initiatives at that venue which can meet a number of the social/function elements identified in this study and regarding possible links with the Recreation Reserve

9. Initiate action to implement the Recreation Reserve masterplan as resources become available

10. Determine the preferred management and programming approach to be followed and prepare a draft “job description” for the position

11. Proceed to the construction and operation of the first component of an indoor multi-purpose community and recreation complex and establish a performance monitoring program and mechanisms for responding to this.

HM Leisure Planning Pty Ltd., Suters, Prior + Cheney Architects: 41Currie Multi-Purpose Community and Sporting Complex, Feasibility Study, 2008