The Proposal & Purpose of Engagement
In the July 2022 state election, the State Government pledged $1.5m to make improvements to the St Clair oval precinct - installation of path lighting around ovals 3 and 4 (complete), sports lighting to oval 2 (underway), and a new community facility (outstanding).
It was proposed that the community facility would be located on St Clair Oval 2 (bounded by St Clair & Brocas Avenues), next to the existing changeroom building where the cricket practice nets are currently located. Based on the existing oval use agreements, the facility would primarily support Woodville High School during weekdays and local sporting clubs at other times but would potentially be available to the wider St Clair community and visitors during or after organised sport (or when not otherwise in use). As part of the engagement process, we wanted to understand if access to the facility would be important to you so this could be considered in the decision process.
Cricket practice nets
As the location for the proposed community facility would require relocation of the cricket practice nets, we also sought your feedback on two, preferred relocation options for nets. We also noted that, if relocated, the cricket nets would likely be gated to restrict public use when it may conflict with organised sport (training and games) on oval 3 and/or 4. Because of this, we also sought feedback on what impact the relocation and potential restriction of net use during organise sporting use may have on you.
Engagement Outcomes
We engaged with the public from 10 July to 7 August 2024. You can view the engagement page and the project background and details here, as well as links to related reports and documents on this page. A high-level summary of the community engagement findings are provided below, however you can read the Community Engagement Report for more detail.
Participation
Who we heard from
Participant affiliations with groups
We also consulted with stakeholder user groups:
Community Facility
Most participants indicated that they were supportive of the proposed community facility for St Clair.
Position on the proposed facility | % |
---|---|
Very Supportive | 73% |
Supportive | 8% |
Not opposed but concerned | 5% |
Opposed | 4% |
Very opposed | 9% |
The responses specifically from participants who resided in St Clair were also considered. They revealed more mixed options, with 36% very supportive, 18% supportive, 15% concerned, 7% opposed and 21% very opposed with the remaining 3% unsure.
While these responses indicate a high degree of support for the proposal, a review of the comments and sentiment shared by participants in more detail demonstrated that, in some cases, support was centred around broader expectations regarding the facility (for example, availability for community hire and initiatives, parking and traffic improvements, a better designed, multi-use facility etc).
Those who were supportive or concerned (81%) could indicate if access to the facility was important to them. 58% said that it was. 21% each were either unsure or said access was not important. Some who said access was not important genuinely felt it didn't matter, while others said it didn't appear they would be able to, and others preferred it was not openly accessible.
Key themes in supportive sentiment:
Key themes in oppositional sentiment:
Cricket Nets Relocation
The required relocation of the cricket practice nets if the community facility is approved was a divisive issue for participants. This was due to mixed views about the location that would have the least impact on other sports and recreational users in terms of safety and access to open space and have the least impact to surrounding residents.
There were also concerns about impacts to community use of the nets with some stating that the nets should remain where they are so that community open space and/or recreational facilities in this area are not (further) restricted or reduced.
St Clair participants, specifically, expressed similar views to the overall results with 45% preferring cricket practice net relocation Option 1, 29% preferring relocation Option 2, and 26% no indicating a preference.
Stakeholders
Community Facility Positions
Four of the five users (80%) were supportive of the community facility proposal. One user was opposed.
Only four of the users provided feedback on the proposal, with all four indicating they would require/desire access to the facility at specific times. Some of these times were in conflict.
It was also obvious that the requirements of these users would leave little opportunity for broader community access to the facility for private activities or events.
The users were divided 50/50 on the preferred management model solution, with equal preference for a Head Licence model vs a Governing Body model.
Cricket Practice Nets Relocation
The users were, again, divided on the preferred relocation position for the cricket nets with two preferring Option 2, one preferring Option 1, and one indicating that neither option was suitable due to interference with sport activity and concern with nets needing to be locked during sport, preventing community access.
Challenges
The feedback demonstrated the varied and differing community and stakeholder perspectives on what the proposed facility should deliver, its availability, how it will be used, and also on the cricket practice nets relocation.
While stakeholder needs identified that the facility would be almost exclusively occupied by the Vipers Football Club and Woodville High School year-round, concerns were raised about its capacity to host other sporting users in addition to private and community activities unrelated to the sporting club. This highlighted that a genuine community outcome is not yet clear, with some feeling single user groups or sporting groups were being prioritised.
Key outcomes identified
Council Report
November 2024
A report was presented to the 25 November Council meeting to consider the outcomes of community engagement on a proposed community facility for the St Clair Precinct. This report also made recommendations to Council on how we should proceed with the proposal. Essentially, the report recommends that the project be reconsidered as part of a broader precinct plan to consider an alternative design to accommodate multiple users, parking solutions, and facility location/size to minimise impact to the cricket nets and the many users of the space.
You can view this report in the 25 November Council meeting agenda and review the Council's decisions in the minutes of the meeting via our Council Agendas & Minutes webpage on our public website.
You can view a summary of the outcomes of this report and Council's decision on how to proceed with the Proposed Community Facility for the St Clair oval precinct here.
What next?
The City of Charles Sturt will use the funds we held as our contribution to the facility construction this year to commence a St Clair sports precinct masterplan process, so we can understand and address the concerns raised in the community consultation about impacts and desires associated with the proposed new facility. We will also seek additional funds to enable the full masterplan process to be completed.
Once this process has been completed, a report will be prepared for Council to consider the outcomes of the masterplan process and works that may be required in addition to the proposed facility, and Council will determine how to proceed.
We will back in touch with everyone who participated in the consultation on the proposed community facility when this report is available (before Council considers it), so you can follow the outcomes of the masterplan process and next steps for the project.
Proposal FAQs
- Why is a community facility being proposed?
- What is Council’s financial contribution?
- Why is St Clair Oval 2 the preferred location for the facility?
- What will happen to the cricket nets?
- As a member of the public, will I still have access to the cricket nets?
- Who can use the community facility?
- Who will own and manage the facility?
- What is the layout of the community facility?
- Will the community facility provide more car parking?