Day One, 28 June 2021 - Smoking Ceremony, key agency session and opening community workshop Smoking Ceremony
Our four-day engagement with community and stakeholders began with a moving smoking ceremony conducted by Whadjuk Elders, Neville Collard and Herbie Bropho, both of whom are part of our Elder Reference Group. Over 40 people attended to listen to some local stories and be welcomed to the site in good spirits.
Neville spoke about the significance of this important spiritual ceremony as a means to ask the good spirits for positive energy for our endeavours and looking towards turning negatives into positives. Having previously walked the site and identifying over 160 elements in the landscape, vegetation and animals known in Aboriginal culture and knowledge, Neville observed the importance of the foreshore to people.
Smoking is representational of cleansing away bad spirits and welcoming people in good spirits. It has been used by Aboriginal people for both burials and celebrations, signifying finding a positive from a negative.
He highlighted that we are here together to look after the land, a common theme highlighted by the Aboriginal Reference Group in pre-Charrette Aboriginal engagement and aligning with the values uncovered by the Community Values Survey undertaken in March to April this year.
Key agency presentations
Following the Smoking Ceremony, we heard from 9 key agency departments highlighting the main issues and opportunities from their perspective. The presentations were structured into five sessions as follows:
Key project partners and environmental considerations
- City of Melville, project custodian Mick McCarthy
- Department of Biodiversity, Conservations and Attractions
- Department of Water and Environmental Regulation
- Water Corporation
- Environmental Sub-consultants, Syrinx and Seashore Engineering
Planning and land management
- Department of Planning, Lands, Heritage (DPLH) – Lands
- DPLH – Planning
Cultural values, heritage and history
- Aboriginal Engagement sub consultant, Karda Designs
- element – Heritage
- City of Melville, Arts and Culture department
- DPLH – Heritage
Sporting and recreation
- Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries
- City of Melville, Sport and Recreation
- Sporting and recreation sub-consultant, CCS Strategic
Access and movement
- Department of Transport
- Main Roads WA
- Access and movement sub-consultant, Porters
Presentations from each theme area highlighted the complexities of the foreshore site and the various competing priorities. Whether it be the need to add more recreational facilities and oval to meet government policies on physical activity participation; preserving more land for environmental rehabilitation and conservation; improving Aboriginal lifelong learning and connection to the site; or improving the cultural facilities and events facilitation along the site – these are only a few of the various ways in which the site is used and adored by local and regional visitors!
The information provided at the presentation was considered by the Project Team in light of what they found out during further community and stakeholder consultation.
Opening community workshop
Our eagerly anticipated first Community Workshop was attended by approximately 65 members of the community to learn about the journey of preparing the foreshore Master Plan thus far and to contribute to the evolving conversations about priorities across the site. Also in attendance were staff from the City of Melville, project consultants, Lisa O’Malley MLA and Kim Giddens MLA, Mayor George Gear as well as many of the City’s Elected Members.
A key element presented by the project team was unpacking the Shared Values and Key Themes crafted from preliminary engagement via a digital community survey and stakeholder conversations. These will help to guide the Master Plan as it progresses. These values, themes and project principles are summarised in the Project Charter of which copies were provided to attendees to take home as well as being available online on the project page.
Participants were invited to ask questions of the project team to clarify any key points about the project, including the Charrette process, the role of the City for implementation and discussions about community infrastructure provision.
Attendees were invited to participate in two activities:
1. Foreshore ideas
Each table group was asked to identify what is missing, what should be enhanced and what should be maintained along the foreshore by writing their suggestions on sticky notes under each of the three categories.
In total the group submitted over 400 suggestions which will be combined with our digital Ideas Wall to guide the next round of Charrette discussions and design activities.
2. Foreshore priorities
Attendees were each provided with five sticky dots and directed to read and consider each other’s work. Using the dots, people then identified their top priorities for the foreshore as the most important areas of focus.
The top five suggestions collected on the night revealed a group focus to enable enjoyment of the natural environment as well as addressing movement across the site. These suggestions (in no particular order) were:
- Separation of cyclists and pedestrians.
- Protection of biodiversity of the area by the canal for people to love and treasure as a hot spot for migratory birds.
- More boardwalks with better access to the water
- Adapt the international protocol for migratory birds.
- Bushland / vegetation corridor between the site and Wireless Hill.
Following the activities, a project team member explained the remaining Charrette process and the next steps following its conclusion.
Back after a month delay due to the snap lockdown imposed on the end of Day 1, we recommenced the Charrette with a bang! Day two of the Charrette saw us talking with over 28 key stakeholders across the site at four Stakeholder Sessions, based on the following themes identified in the Project Charter:
- Environment and Landscape
- Culture
- Access and Movement
- Sport and Recreation
The purpose of the Stakeholder Sessions was to identify some key issues within each theme area of the site and delve deeper into these issues by brainstorming some solutions and management options. All current findings from the whole Charrette process, including the Values Survey, Aboriginal Elder Engagement, Stakeholder Workshop and Charrette Day 1 findings were considered when discussing issues, ideas and management options to ensure we are building on the conversation.
The following are just a few examples of many of the issues raised today, organised into the four themes:
- Shade was a key environmental and landscape issue raised by all stakeholders, which they noted could be addressed through involving the community to plant more trees.
- Lack of cultural conservation (e.g. deteriorated signage) was raised as an issue and could be resolved through additional interpretive signage or training courses in cultural stewardship.
- Pedestrian and cyclist conflict is an access and movement issue which could be addressed through applying separated lanes for cyclists and pedestrians across the site and improved education about cycle safety.
- ‘Amenity hubs’ could be added to the site in 2-3 locations to create an all-access location for storage, information, toilets and other sporting and recreation-related amenities.
After receiving a wealth of information prior-to and during the Charrette so far, the Design Team put their heads together to brainstorm ideas. Their ideas formed a series of design responses to the key issues, opportunities and considerations raised to-date from community members, key stakeholders, Aboriginal Elders and key agencies.
Those diligently working on the Master Plan design during day three included:
- Andrew Howe, Principle urban designer (element)
- Bronwyn Slater, Senior Urban Designer (element)
- Mark Casserly, Principal Sport and Recreation Specialists (CCS Strategic)
- Rada Tomanovic, Environmental Scientist/Botanist (Syrinx)
- Brad Harris, Civil/Transport Engineer (Porter Consulting Engineers)
- Michael Rowlands, Landscape Architect (ASPECT Studios)
- Matt Elliot, Coastal Engineer (Seashore Engineering)
This is the team that will continue to work on refining the Master Plan following the Charette alongside the City and key agencies, using sentiment and feedback from community and stakeholder collected on day four.
Testing opportunties
By mid-afternoon the design team had drafted three ‘work-in-progress’ options for comment for stakeholders and the wider community. The team had taken into considerations all the conversations, local knowledge, site constraints, site principles and values to create three design responses to showcase opportunities for the site within different nodal areas.
Invite-only sessions for key State Agencies and Elected members were held prior to the open Design Studio session with the community session running from 6:00pm – 7:30pm. We had 27 community members come to view the plans, discuss ideas with the project team and left over 100 written comments. This feedback continued to inform the Master Plan direction presented to community on day four at the community workshop for further feedback.
Working titles and summaries for these options are as follows:
Option 1 – ‘Efficient’
This option had a clear line of sight to accommodate exsisting use and address many of the critical environmental issues on the foreshore, without looking to make large changes or additions to facilities already here.
Option 2 – ‘Balanced’
This option built on Option One by exploring, rationalising and improving amenity across the site introducing the opportunity for a café in the precinct and more detail around netball, nature plan and an interpretive centre at Troy Park.
Option 3 – ‘Aspirational’
The Aspirational option looked to introduce bolder changes by moving the sporting facilities from Troy Park to Attadale Foreshore and reclaiming Troy Park for environmental and cultural purposes.
All three options considered various ways of protecting the environment and allowing the river to ‘breathe’ while improving access to the site, separating cyclists and pedestrians and highlighting culture, stories and interpretation.
It is important to note that the next step in refining the Master Plan may use a combination of elements from one or more options and will take on further feedback from the Day 4 workshop.
The team explored balancing the competing interests of protecting environmental systems and spaces whilst also providing necessary amenity for users to enjoy and appreciate the site. A key challenge becoming more prevalent as the Master Plan progresses is finding opportunities that preserve and enhance activity spaces that are supported by contemporary amenity without compromising the fragile environment.
What is certain is that underpinning the majority of design decisions for the Master Plan is the need to care for country and protecting the environment. These consistent key themes heard from community are playing an ongoing, guiding role in the design options.
Day four marked the conclusion of the intensive Charrette process, where the Design Team took on board the feedback from the previous night’s Open Design Studio and refined the three options into a preferred direction. They worked tirelessly all day to balance competing uses and priorities for the beloved site across five sub-precincts within the whole area:
- Attadale Bushland and Reserve West
- Attadale Reserve East
- Troy Park and Point Waylen
- Alfred Cove and Atwell House
- Tompkins Park
The result was a draft design response across the site which was taken to the final community workshop to test with the community for further feedback, including an alternative option for Troy Park and Point Waylen.
The final community workshop drew 53 members of the community to the City of Melville Main Hall, to receive a presentation on the draft design response and how the design team arrived there. Following the presentation, the community were involved in a round-robin style activity which got participants to provide feedback on what they loved about the design option (and why) and what they thought could be improved. This was captured across each of the 5 sub-precincts, and a high-level overview of the key findings are shared below.
Download the preliminrary design responses
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Canopy, shade and trees – Cool environment, shelter, habitat food source
- Foreshore buffer – Benefits to fauna and wildlife habitat
- Dog agility area is smaller
- Separate areas for paths
- Boardwalk – off and out of the vegetation
What could be improved in the design response?
- Need additional trees
- Dog run/exercise area needs low fencing to protect dogs/cars/people
- Foreshore access
- Delineation between paths
- Cultural signage and significance
- Public toilets and drinking fountains
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Additional footpath along Burke Drive – Separation of cyclists from pedestrians
- Path pulled back from the river and the widening of the vegetation buffer – Visibility, bird watching and integration with nature
- Boardwalk
- Swales
- Multigenerational spaces
- Additional sports field – Tompkins Park under pressure of over-use
What could be improved in the design response?
- Night, light and noise/traffic pollution – concern around effect of lighting on residents and wildlife
- Parking loop – kiss and drop
- More clubrooms/orientation of club room
- Netball court
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.
OPTION 1
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Wide buffers and conservation areas
- Living stream
- Access, paths and roads
- Clubrooms
What could be improved in the design response?
- Inclusion of netball courts
- Sporting oval won’t cope – potentially relocate or sacrifice oval altogether
- Too many bends in pathways
OPTION 2
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Nature play
- Living stream and wetlands
- Interpretation centre and bush tucker garden
- Conservation of native vegetation
- Pedestrian and cycle paths
- Inclusive area – cultural element for kids and families/all ages
What could be improved in the design response?
- More viewing platforms
- Replace pump track with skate park or something for teenagers
- Concern about ovals
- Want fencing along the foreshore
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Boardwalk – Like the safety aspects.
- Living stream – Cultural value and area floods in heavy weather
- Nature play – Must support all ages and abilities
- Additional parking – Increased parking is good
- Lookout/viewing platform – Raised with good views of the water
- Café - Nice outlook and appropriate location
What could be improved in the design response?
- Cyclists need to be separated from pedestrians on the boardwalk. Looks like there will be blind corners and unsafe elements
- Better cultural education and safety signage
- Make space for road cyclists along Burke Drive
- Café needs to be small and have accessible toilets
- Food vans and picnic areas next to Atwell House
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.
What do you like about the design response presented?
- Good use of sporting facilities
- Nature play area
- Access to the water from the boardwalk
- Increased vegetation buffer
What could be improved in the design response?
- Pop-up café near Bowling Club
- Community garden at Atwell Precinct
- Boardwalk to separate pedestrian and cycling lanes through colour or different surfaces
- Crown land should be part of conservation estate
- Speed limits for bikes or scooters
- Utilise central road through Tompkins Park to redirect cycling onto Dunkley
Please note - these plans and presentation material were preliminary design responses to inform discussions with the project team. Community feedback will be used to progress toward the refinement stage and inform the development of the draft Master Plan.