Mt Gravatt Outlook Reserve Land Management Plan

[Oppy]

I put this on the general thread but I thought I would post it here as well.

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE:1127432491:pc=PC_2133

Provide your feedback on the Mt Gravatt Outlook Reserve Land Management Plan.

 

[udi]

Hooray, it's gonna go the same way as cootha.

 

[toodles]

Worth giving them some suggestions for bikes. It's a long shot, so long as that f*ckwit Newman is in office but what the hell.

 

[norco01]

well i told them to consider some trails, sadly don't think its going to do much..

Well with a cafe/kiosk up there, somehow i think its going to get even harder to go there..

 

[udi]

Here's what I sent. I realise my viewpoint might be a little narrow but I tried to target what needs to be targeted, and detailed the issues how I see them personally. By the way, the BS about serenity is just my lame attempt at suggesting further development of the summit is a bad thing. Because, let's face it, the only reason kids can still ride a bike up there is because the area is pretty neglected, has very few visitors, and is therefore very lightly policed. Add people and you add policing. I guess I'm pretty doubtful of there ever being a positive result for downhillers in Brisbane (not going to waste my precious years waiting), so the longer we can get away with "just riding" the better.

1.
Disagree.

2.
The idea of increasing visitors to the site isn't a bad one, however the appeal in Mt Gravatt over Mt Cootha for example, is in the lack of development and associated excess of visitors. Cootha has lost some of its serenity as a result, and it would be somewhat of a shame to see Gravatt go the same way.

3.
The mountain has constantly supported walkers with walking paths (and tourists with the outlook), however mountain bikers (particularly downhill mountain bikers, who have very different needs) are not catered for. A downhill trail network could be established that does not interfere with walking tracks, and clear signage along with properly enforced trailcare requirements would alleviate concerns about erosion and collisions with walkers.

4.
To clarify point 3., downhill mountain biking is very different to cross country mountain biking - a discipline already supported by trail networks at Gap Creek and the like. Downhill on the other hand involves gravity fueled riding and therefore requires a mountain with considerable vertical drop, and the Brisbane City Council has consistently shown a disregard to this group. Perhaps it is because the group is small in comparison to other groups (whether opposing or not), however in any case, the discrimination is unacceptable. Other councils have approved and supported the building of downhill facilities to benefit the community (for example Toowoomba, with their downhill track on Mt. Jubilee) and again, the BCC shows no such commitment.

5.
Disagree.

6.
This proposal will increase safety, but what is not considered is where the people responsible for these concerns will go. The proposal is no more than a blanket fix, essentially moving the problem elsewhere instead of addressing the reasons behind the issue.

7.
In short, give the kids something to do. Think about the reasons young people are resorting to arson, drugs, alcohol, and other similar behaviour (including violence) at the summit of Mt Gravatt. Research the things young people want to be doing and how the council can support their endeavours actively instead of attempting to "move the problem along" by merely increasing visitors to a problem district.

8.
Not a safety consideration so much, but the lack of water at the top of the summit is a problem for walkers, sightseers, and bike riders alike. There should be at least one tap installed, if not a few. Public toilets would also support an increase of visitors to the site; both water and toilets should have been implemented some time ago.

9.
No, the management of biodiversity values appears to be sufficient.

10.
No other comments.

11.
No other feedback.

13.
Yes

14.
Yes

 

[Oppy]

Draft Mt Gravatt Outlook Reserve Land Management Plan

http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASEc=PC_5063

Background
Between 27 June 2008 and 25 July 2008 the community was invited to provide feedback on the Mt Gravatt Reserve Draft Land Management Plan, for the future management of the reserve.

A total of 88 responses were received including 27 written responses and 61 online feedback submission forms. Thank you to everyone who provided their feedback, this was a really great response.

The following information provides a summary of the feedback provided. Not all respondents commented on every aspect of the draft Plan. Where this is the case, a percentage rate of those that did provide comment has been provided.

To help make sense of the feedback results, you can download the draft Plan and the original feedback form:

draft Mt Gravatt Outlook Reserve Land Management Plan (PDF - 4.19mb) * http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/lib518/mt%20gravatt%20draft%20plan.pdf

original feedback form (PDF - 935kb) http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/bccwr/lib518/mt%20gravatt%20feedback%20form.pdf

* Due to the large file size, this document may take a while to download.

You can download Acrobat Reader (version 7 or latest version) for free. http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html

What you said
Your responses covered a range of issues from recreational activities and facilities to conservation and planning.

Recreational use of Mt Gravatt

94% of all respondents provided feedback about recreation in the reserve
50% supported mountain biking, 14% opposed this activity and 36% expressed no specific opinion
18% of respondents raised the issue of equity of access to the reserve for all citizens and the right to use the reserve for a broad range of recreation including cycling, mountain biking, walking, running, nature and environmental walks, hikes and botany studies, bird watching and picnicking

Safety and security

74% of all respondents provided feedback about safety and security issues and the impact of increased visitation on the levels of safety in the reserve
Many respondents felt increased visitation alone would not increase safety and some believed this may decrease safety
The majority of suggestions focussed on physical security improvements ranging from security cameras to closing the access road at night and increasing police patrols

Facilities
39% of all respondents spoke about the need for more facilities that support recreation in the reserve
Suggestions include new and improved tracks, some track closures, clearly designating types of uses for tracks (walking, cycling, shared), more educational and directional signage, more and improved visitor facilities such as toilets, seats, bins and taps at the summit and more picnic facilities at Gertrude Petty Place, to serve local residents

Conservation

25% of all respondents provided feedback about conservation issues
Respondents provided clear statements on the need to manage all impacts on the reserve from recreation and visitation, adjoining land uses and loss of connections with external places
Respondents expressed strong views about the need to control erosion, weeds and high impact recreation along with concerns that the conservation of the site should be better managed

Volunteering

23% of respondents commented on volunteering
The majority of respondents believe that volunteering is desirable and five respondents offered their services as new volunteers to work in the reserve on trail care
A small percentage (3%) expressed the view that volunteering is an indicator that Council is not managing the reserve properly
Good support was expressed for a program that involved the community in caring for the reserve’s trails and the environment

Kiosk

21% of all respondents commented about the kiosk and opinions were mixed
While direct support for the kiosk was balanced, additional comments were received on a range of aspects such as the need to ensure the reserve was well managed, the control of litter and graffiti and the contribution the kiosk will make to better recreational use of the reserve

Traffic management

18% of all respondents provided feedback about issues of traffic management, parking and the width of Outlook Drive
Traffic management on Outlook Drive for all users was an issue as was the need to ensure parking was well organised and managed. The width of Outlook Drive was also discussed and will need to be carefully examined in light of any increase in the frequency of use

Reserve management

17% of all respondents provided feedback about management of the Reserve
Respondents called for increased funding, followed by improvements to the appearance of the reserve and better management of litter and rubbish
Other one-off comments included fencing, carrying capacity for the reserve, law enforcement, feral animals and community education

Fire management

13% of all respondents provided feedback about fire management
The majority of feedback was directed at adopting strategies to manage the threat of wildfires in the reserve such as reductions in the current frequency of prescribed burns, a shift from prescribed burning in cooler months to burning in warmer months, reductions in the current size of prescribed burning plots and the manual removal from the reserve of material that may provide the fuel for fires
The use of fire 'badword'ant barriers was also requested as was the exclusion of fire/prescribed burning from some parts of the reserve

Views

10% of respondents provided feedback about views and the management and maintenance of views
The majority of respondents supported managing the views to and from the summit by planting low growing species that would not require pruning
A small number of respondents opposed the management of views that involved pruning or removing existing trees

Other feedback

7% of all respondents commented on tourism and there was no clear message here, with the responses evenly split between supporting tourism, not supporting tourism and suggestions for consideration
15% of all respondents provided feedback about the planning scheme and the reserve’s gazetted purpose. This feedback revealed some confusion about the reserve’s gazetted purpose under the State Land Act and its City Plan Area Classification. Some comment was also made on the need for public consultation in both planning and development in the reserve
18% of all respondents provided feedback about information missing from the Plan and factual errors in the Plan. Respondents asked for the following to be included: significant wildlife and flora and ecological linkages as well as activities such as mountain bike riding Suggestions for corrections to the plan were few, with the most notable being the substitution of Mt Gravatt for Holland Park as the closest town centre

Council response

Council will use this feedback to shape the final Mt Gravatt Reserve Land Management Plan before it is presented to council’s Civic Cabinet for endorsement and then to the state government for approval in line with the provisions of the Land Act 1994. Taking account of the variety of views expressed, the final plan will represent a balance of the community’s views on the use of the reserve and the management practices that will ensure a balance is maintained and the health of the reserve is enhanced.

Some activities will not be changed as a result of this feedback alone, such as the wildfire hazard reduction program. Council has a statutory obligation under the Fire Services Act to actively address fire threats on land it manages. The current program is based on specialist scientific and technical advice provided by an independent panel on fire management. Council will submit the feedback from this consultation to the panel and implement any changes recommended by the panel.

The plan will incorporate many elements of the community’s feedback on increased recreational access to the reserve, improvements to personal safety and security, improvements to facilities and enhancements to the overall health of the reserve.

A copy of the final Plan will be forwarded to everyone who provided feedback and supplied their contact details. A copy of the plan will also be placed on the “Your Say Online” page of council’s website.

 

[toodles]

That is actually pretty damn cool.

Cheers Oppy

 

[JaRedy]

Cootha has lost some of its serenity as a result, and it would be somewhat of a shame to see Gravatt go the same way.

I dont see the harm.

If Mt Gravatt does go Legal, there wouldn't be as much stress about keeping it secret; maintaining the trails would be acceptiable' and you won't find concrete blocks in the grass, etc...

Surley having a proper network of legal trails is better than having get up there every time, to see that the kickers have been knocked down, and to be abused by annoyed walkers saying "you're being naughty".

Perhaps the area could be turned into DH mainstream area other than another Mt Cootha full of xc, if that's what you were inferring...

Lastly, it does annoy me that the only legal trails we get are not catering for the downhillers out there. Also there's no Dj's on much of the southside either, but perhaps it's up to people like me to contact land managers and organise things myself...

P.S. It would be cool having some legal trails in my backyard

 

[Viv92]

Has anyone even done anything to get legal DH trails in QLD though (other than Kram who we occasionally hear about). Maybe that's why there aren't any?

 

[darsh]

Has anyone even done anything to get legal DH trails in QLD though (other than Kram who we occasionally hear about). Maybe that's why there aren't any?

 

[toodles]

Has anyone even done anything to get legal DH trails in QLD though (other than Kram who we occasionally hear about). Maybe that's why there aren't any?

Kram is in Canada now eh.

A bunch of us were involved in a Downhill Access Group a few years ago, but Cambell Newham told us point blank that he didn't want to see downhill in Brisbane. Arguing against the well-funded (and BCC-sponsored) Bulimba Creek Catchment Group, who are very anti-mountain bike was practically futile. And seeing no-one let me undertake a series of Gestapo kidnappings and 'disappearings', we really had no chance to be heard.

In the end, there remains a diminished push for DH trails in Brisbane but nothing really organised.

 

[Air time erik]

Kram is in Canada now eh.

A bunch of us were involved in a Downhill Access Group a few years ago, but Cambell Newham told us point blank that he didn't want to see downhill in Brisbane. Arguing against the well-funded (and BCC-sponsored) Bulimba Creek Catchment Group, who are very anti-mountain bike was practically futile. And seeing no-one let me undertake a series of Gestapo kidnappings and 'disappearings', we really had no chance to be heard.

In the end, there remains a diminished push for DH trails in Brisbane but nothing really organised.

Guess who just lost my vote come election time!