Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the...

26
Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review REPORT For WELLINGTON PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST HOBART AUSTRALIA Wellington Park: Review of Management Plan and Planning Framework March 2011

Transcript of Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the...

Page 1: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

 

Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review

REPORT For

WELLINGTON PARK MANAGEMENT TRUST HOBART

AUSTRALIA

Wellington Park: Review of Management Plan and Planning Framework

March 2011

Page 2: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 2

Review date:

7 – 9 March 2011 Review team:

Piers Brissenden: Deputy Regional Conservator – Operations, Adelaide and Mt Lofty Ranges Region, Department of Environment & Natural Resources, South Australia

Neil Olsen: Parks and Recreation Advisor (Regional Parks), Auckland Council, New

Zealand Linda Greenwood: Team Leader Planning, Parks Division, Parks Victoria

Reviewed organisation:

Wellington Park Management Trust GPO Box 503 Hobart TAS 7001 Role: Management and planning authority for Wellington Park

Vision:

For Wellington Park to be a special place enjoyed by all for its prominent landscape, natural and cultural diversity, and community value

Purpose:

Per s 11(1) of the Wellington Park Act 1993:

• to provide for the management and maintenance of Wellington Park in a manner that is consistent with the purposes for which it is set aside;

• to give effect to any management plan in force for Wellington Park; • to prepare plans with a view to their submission to the Governor for approval as

management plans for Wellington Park and to keep under review the provisions of management plans;

• to ensure that any development undertaken in Wellington Park is consistent with the purposes for which it is set aside and with any management plan;

• when required to do so by the Minister, to advise on any development proposed for Wellington Park;

• to carry out, or arrange for the carrying out of, research and other activities that appear to it to be desirable in connection with the administration of this Act;

• to be the managing authority of Wellington Park; and • to perform such other functions as are imposed on it by or under this or any other Act.

Page 3: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 3

Responsibilities:

National Parks Regional Parks Local Parks Cemeteries Botanic Gardens Heritage Sites Streetscapes Civic areas Stadia Leisure Facilities X Other: State Park Other

Budget: Total budget = $250 000 (financial year) (Does not include operational or on-ground management requirements) Organisational chart:

Page 4: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

Trust Members Wellington Park Management Trust www.wellingtonpark.org.au

Office

Chairperson

Dept of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment

Glenorchy City Council

Hobart City Council

Parks and Wildlife Service

Southern Water

Tourism Tasmania

Dr Christine Mucha

Dr John Whittington

Ald Peter Ridler

Ald Peter Sexton

Ald Bill Harvey

Mr Ashley Rushton

Mr Russell Fox

Dr Claire Ellis

Manager

Cultural Heritage Coordinator

Fire Management Coordinator

Ranger

Project Planner (Wellington Park Management Plan)

Project Officer (Hobart MTB Masterplan)

Mr Michael Easton

Ms Anne McConnell

Mr Axel von Krusenstierna

Ms Lydia Marino

Ms Catherine Nicholson

Ms Clare Hester

Management Advisory Committee Community / Technical Reference Groups Broader Community SUPPORT The office and associated staff are located at the Hobart City Council with the exception of the Ranger, who is located at the Parks and Wildlife Service. The office receives administrative support from the Council and strategic and technical support from all member agencies as required.

Page 5: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

Program Chart: Wellington Park Planning Framework

Document Date Status Wellington Park Management Plan 2005

(1997) Statutory

Site Development Plans Springs Zone Site Development Plan 2002

(1998) Policy: required by Management Plan

Pinnacle Zone Site Development Plan 2001 Policy: required by Management Plan Myrtle Forest Site Development Plan 2004 Policy/Design Springs Zone Master Plan 2008 Design Recreation Strategies Walking Track Strategy 2003 Policy: required by Management Plan Bike Strategy 2005

(2000) Policy: required by Management Plan

Operational Strategies Fire Management Strategy 2006

(2000) Policy: required by Management Plan

Design and Infrastructure Manual 2006 (2003)

Guideline: required by Management Plan

Sign Manual 2002 Guidelines Drinking Water Catchment Management Strategy 2002 Policy (prepared by Hobart Water) Springs Zone Interpretation Strategy 2008 Guidelines Heritage Policies/Plans Historic Heritage Audit and Inventory 2005 Assessment & Advice Upper Merton Historic Heritage Assessment 2006 Assessment & Advice Junction Cabin Area Historic Heritage Assessment 2006 Assessment & Advice Former Exhibition Gardens Conservation Management Plan

2006 Policy

Springs Initial Conservation Policy 2007 Policy Myrtle Forest Conservation Policy 2008 Policy Pinnacle Area Heritage Assessment 2010 Assessment & Advice (draft) Mountain Water Supply Conservation management Plan

2010 Policy

Administrative Policies Commercial Visitor Service Guidelines 2007 Guidelines Vehicle Hygiene Protocol 2007 Operational Guidelines Agency Induction Kit 2007 Operational Guidelines Corporate Strategic Plan 2006 Administration Communications Plan 2006 Administration Regulations Awareness Programme: Guidelines for Field Staff

2010 Operational Guidelines

External Plans/Policies Planning Schemes(Hobart; Glenorchy; Kingborough; Huon Valley; Derwent Valley)

Statutory

Pinnacle Zone Local Area Plan (HCC) 2001 Statutory Springs Zone Local Area Plan (HCC) 2002 Statutory

Page 6: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 6

Overview:

Project Aims To conduct a Peer Review on the Wellington Park Management Trust’s planning framework.

Project scope (also refer attached summary) At 18 250 ha, Wellington Park is one of the largest reserved areas in Tasmania. Mount Wellington, the most visible feature of the Park, receives over 300 000 visitors p.a., making it the third-most visited destination in Tasmania. Approximately 50% of the visitors are local to southern Tasmania. The Park is reserved for a range of natural and cultural values, and supplies over 20% of Greater Hobart’s drinking water. The Park has great social and landscape significance, and contributes to the ‘sense of place’ of Hobart, Tasmania’s capital city. An extensive review of the Park’s values is contained on the Trust’s website: http://www.wellingtonpark.org.au/mountain/ The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park Management Plan 2005. The Peer Review provides the first step in the rewriting of the Management Plan by the Trust later in 2011. The Review will consider:

• Appropriate performance measures and indicators both for the current and future Management Plans • The ability of the Trust and member agencies to co-ordinate implementation of the planning framework • The cross-integration of various subsidiary planning strategies and management policies prepared under

the Management Plan e.g. Bike Strategy, Walking Track Strategy, site development plans, historic heritage policies etc

• Current best practices for writing management plans and consulting with the community throughout the planning process

Project Objectives

• Provide an objective review of the Trust’s management planning framework and the capacity to implement plans and strategies.

• Identify practical recommendations for writing management plans, particularly as it relates to performance measurement.

• Provide the Trust with a strategic framework based on the Seven Baldrige Categories to guide future management planning and further self review.

• Build relationships with other the Parks Forum Members. The visit will include:

• Induction and field trip (Mon am) • Formal interviews with key stakeholders, including Board members, Trust officers and key agency

representatives (Mon pm & Tues) • A two-hour workshop with stakeholder agencies on the final day to share knowledge experiences

regarding natural area planning at both the State and Municipal level. • An exit interview between the Senior Management Team and Review Team leader to ensure expectations

have been met. • Preparation of a full working draft prior to departure.

Page 7: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 7

Evaluation of the Seven Baldrige Categories: The seven categories of business excellence are evaluated at two levels. A simple ‘traffic light’ indicator is provided for the key descriptors within each Baldrige category. The Reviewer to shade the Evaluation box with the appropriate ‘traffic light’ indicator.

- -

Good, Maintain Development potential or

caution needed to sustain performance

Resolve issue/assess risk/reassess priority

Secondly an overall star rating (max five stars ) is provided for each of the seven Baldrige categories. These ratings are to provide an internal benchmark for improvement and are not comparable between agencies. A blue medal symbol ( ) denotes an area of best practice. Summary Findings: Observations and Recommendations The Review Team met with all parties identified on the interview program and conducted the interviews with all three reviewers present at each session. Observations about the effectiveness of the Wellington Park Management Trust’s planning framework and processes and implementation of the plan have been detailed in the following evaluation form but the Peer Review Team would like to highlight some key observations: Best Practice Processes and initiatives considered as Best Practice and leading examples by the review team are:

Using technical specialists in key roles within the organisation to develop and implement the Plan is effective and efficient. This includes roles such as fire management, cultural heritage and planning

Incorporating a quality assurance step in formal public consultation that uses the Tasmanian Planning Commission as an independent reviewer of plans and the planning process

Supporting volunteer engagement and management through the Hobart City Council Bushcare program run with Hobart City Council enables effective and empowered community contributions

Ongoing feedback and communication between the Trust Manager, agencies, community groups and influential community members establishes and maintains a valuable culture of goodwill

Strengths Stakeholders tended to agree that the Trust model works well for management of the Park and that the Trust has built capacity to manage the Park well. This could be attributable to the acceptance that the Trust has a fundamental role as a broker to manage relationships and to set strategic direction for the Park. It is also, in part, a reflection of a common recognition of Mount Wellington and the Park being an iconic landscape and valued recreational and tourism asset to the region. The planning framework, consisting of the Wellington Park Management Plan and subsidiary plans and strategies, provides a sound basis for an effective and cooperative management approach. In addition, there is a shared perception amongst the interviewees that the Wellington Park Management Plan has improved the Park environment and that the plan has delivered a clear benefit, both social and environmental. Based on information sighted and observations during interview, this perception is also shared by the Peer Review team. In spite of the obvious complexities of managing a park with multiple land owners, each delivery agent seems to have a willingness to work cooperatively and maintains a shared vision for the Park. It is the belief of the Peer

Page 8: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 8

Review team that the expertise and interpersonal skills of the Trust’s manager underpins the sound working relationships with the stakeholders and partner agencies. Opportunities While the planning framework appears to be sound, the Peer Review Team could see benefits in formalising some key management processes. This would enable the Trust to integrate decision making and priority setting amongst agencies and volunteer groups and to raise the level of structured reporting and performance monitoring. The majority of information gathered by the Trust in order to evaluate park management and planning effectiveness appears to be done largely informally. An annual Board report is prepared by the Trust Manager however no other structured reporting either to the Board or from delivery agents to the Trust Manager was evident. Stakeholders commended the consultative processes of the Trust but considered the implementation and delivery of projects sometimes tended to be slow. This is believed to be related to doubling up on approval processes (i.e.: council process and Trust process). Therefore, opportunities exist to improve overall coordination of approval processes and implementation and enhance the level of reporting and accountability from delivery agents to provide a better understanding of how well the Wellington Park Management Plan is being delivered. This could involve establishing formal reporting protocols against key performance measures that would be followed by each delivery agency. In addition to this, methods of gathering information about changing trends or increases in visitor use should be developed to feed into the performance monitoring program. Resource documents The Review Team have included six documents that can be used by the Trust as templates or standards for procedures or processes. A summarised list can be seen in appendix 2

Page 9: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 9

1. LEADERSHIP Strategic Direction – systems and processes by which the organisation establishes and communicates its purpose, vision and goals Organisational Culture – systems and processes which the organisation develops a culture and supports behaviours Leadership throughout the Organisation – how leadership and management is developed, how the management system supports purpose, vision and goals Environmental and Community Contribution – how the organisation contributes to the community

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

Corporate Strategic Plan Organisation chart Community engagement processes and procedures Annual Report

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern

Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Strategic Direction – systems and processes by which the organisation establishes and communicates its purpose, vision and goals Strengths

• Wellington Park Management Plan purpose and goals are clear • The Plan is supported by the Trust’s Strategic Plan and a clear hierarchy of subsidiary plans appear to be

well understood and used by Councils, particularly Hobart City Council • Existence of five year memorandums of understanding with the four agencies demonstrates cooperation

and commitment • Formal and informal relationships and cooperation with the Trust and agencies working well in planning

and implementing subsidiary plans • Trust board members are motivated and committed to delivering the Plan • The expertise and interpersonal skills of the Trust’s manager underpins the sound working relationships

with the stakeholders and partner agencies • The Councils (in particular) support the Trust in delivering the Plan • Agencies have productive working relationships with Trust staff • Agencies value the Trust management model and are committed to contributing available funds and in-

kind support Opportunities

• The unique role of the Park and difference from National Parks and Council parks could be communicated more effectively to further improve community understanding and appreciation

• A clearer more outcome focused vision in the plan for the Park could assist in coordinated implementation by agencies and performance measurement

• Consider the establishment of a Management Advisory Group to help in setting priorities. Membership could include agencies, volunteer and community representatives. A Management Coordinating Committee does currently exist, however the terms of reference for an advisory group would be broader. For example, the membership would be more representative of all stakeholders and the group could

Page 10: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 10

assist in leveraging funding from external sources by providing strong rationale for new initiatives. Having wider community representation will also allow for more transparent and balanced decision making processes

Organisational Culture – systems and processes which the organisation develops a culture and supports behaviours Strengths

• The planning framework, consisting of the Wellington Park Management Plan and subsidiary plans and strategies, provides a sound basis for an effective and cooperative management approach

• At interview the majority of agencies showed a good understanding of the Plan and there appears to be a high level of commitment, good intentions and goodwill to implement its strategies

• Strong inter-agency working relationships with a sense of joint ownership and commitment

• Good support from the Board and an understanding and appreciation of resource and funding limitations

Opportunities • The existing Management Coordinating Committee could be better structured, have greater ownership of

the plan and facilitate networking of agencies to jointly implement.

• Better articulate the unique role of the Park and difference from National Parks and Council parks to further improve community understanding and appreciation

Leadership throughout the Organisation – how leadership and management is developed, how the management system supports purpose, vision and goals Strengths

• The Trust Manager is the only full time staff member within the organisation. The current incumbent has an intimate understanding of the Plan’s purpose, vision and goals and communicates it well to other staff within the Trust, management agencies and the community

• Sponsorship of the Trust by Hobart City Council offers many complementary benefits to both organisations

Opportunities

• Systems should be developed to ensure an appropriate level of knowledge transfer can occur to a new incumbent in the role as Trust Manager should the circumstance arise

Environmental and Community Contribution – how the organisation contributes to the community Strengths

• Supportive of volunteer conservation groups engaging in activities • Empowerment of volunteer groups, such as Bushcare, through the Hobart City Council

Opportunities

• Acknowledge volunteers’ contributions; for example via the website • Consider developing community stewardship programs through the councils for recreation and other user

groups such as rock climbing (is already happening to a degree), walking and bike riding groups, and encourage active involvement in Park management programs and better direction for voluntary work

Page 11: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 11

Evaluation Strategic direction Organisational culture

Leadership throughout the organisation Environmental and community contribution Summary Findings Leadership is a strong point within the organisation and the Trust model works well with the partner agencies. The Review Team believes that the success in inter-agency cooperation is mainly due to the solid, largely informal, relationships between the parties. There is vulnerability in having only one full time staff member in the Trust Manager and it is recommended that processes and arrangements be documented and a plan for succession be considered.

Star Rating

Page 12: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 12

2. STRATEGY AND PLANNING

Understanding the Business Environment – systems and processes by which organisation develops its business strategy Development and Application of Resources – systems and processes which the organisation builds, develops and applies its resources and assets The Planning Process – systems and processes to turn strategic decisions into actionable plans

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

Wellington Park Strategic Plan 2007-2010 Wellington Park Management Plan 2005 Subsidiary Planning Strategies and Policies

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern

Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Understanding the Business Environment – systems and processes by which organisation develops its business strategy Strengths

• A review of the Trust’s strategic plan for 2011 has occurred • Clearly defined strategies are well articulated in the strategic plan • High level of commitment to undertake the five-yearly review of the Wellington Park Management

Plan and to maintain its relevance Opportunities

• Develop more rigour around governance and management reporting which will give rise to a higher level of accountability and an understanding of progress against delivery outcomes

• A Management Coordinating Committee currently meets twice a year to discuss the Fire Program and other operational matters. Consider using this or similar means as the mechanism for more structured reporting. Also refer Section 1, Leadership, Strategic Directions opportunities for comment on this committee.

• Inclusion of engagement with the Indigenous community for developing the business strategy should be a strategic component the planning (refer resource document 3 for further information)

• A clear vision statement should be developed, placed prominently in the Plan and linked to strategic outcomes and performance measures

Development and Application of Resources – systems and processes which the organisation builds, develops and applies its resources and assets Strengths

• Realising Management Plan goals is limited by resources, however achievements and progress are impressive nevertheless

• Using technical specialists in key roles within the organisation to develop and implement the Plan is effective and efficient. This includes roles such as fire management, cultural heritage and planning

Opportunities • Look at strengthening Memorandums of Understanding or similar instruments with the aim of

providing more certainty for administrative, in-kind and financial arrangements

Page 13: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 13

• Continue to maximise the benefits of in-kind contributions from agencies • Alignment of the Park and plan with broader Tourism strategies • Develop a case for an increase to the recurrent funding base to enable an increase in employment of

Trust staff. Apart from the full time manger, current staffing levels consist of five part time employees totalling 1.5 full time equivalents. The Review Team considers that this significantly limits the capacity of the Trust to fully and effectively implement and monitor the Plan

The Planning Process – systems and processes to turn strategic decisions into actionable plans Strengths

• Hobart Council incorporates Trust priorities within Council’s Strategic Priorities • High level of commitment to developing a quality draft and content of Wellington Park Management

Plan prior to formal public consultation and submission to Tasmanian Planning Commission. • Involving agencies early and collaborating effectively throughout the planning process • Incorporating a quality assurance step in formal public consultation that uses the Tasmanian

Planning Commission as an independent reviewer of plans and the planning process • Application and ongoing review and improvement to the Park’s clearly defined zones and zoning that

incorporates reasonable negotiated outcomes • Culture among agencies of using and valuing management plans and strategies

Opportunities • Review some subsidiary plans and strategies (such as the Design and Infrastructure manual) to

ensure alignment with contemporary practices and thinking and to ensure they are Park and not Hobart-centric

• Management planning has not kept pace with the increase in visitors over the past decade. Reviews of key strategies and plans should take into account this increase and changes in use (e.g. more school groups are using the Park for educational reasons)

• Review aspects of zoning (e.g. outcomes desired from zoning) and the water catchment zones now that Southern Water’s jurisdiction extends into the remote area zone

• Review prescriptions for permitted use within zones with regards to access for recreation activities versus water quality protection

• Development application processes need to be looked at (chapter 6 in the Plan) to differentiate what is day-to-day maintenance from projects and development proposals. This will help to streamline processes, remove duplication and improve alignment and ease of understanding of planning processes

Evaluation Understanding the business environment

The planning process Development and application of resources Summary Findings The principles for sound strategy and planning are well understood and clear to the Trust and some good forward thinking practices have been demonstrated. However, there are areas for improvement with regards to a more structured approach to management reporting in order to effectively understand how well delivery of the Plan is being achieved and subsequent benefits or not to the Park

Star Rating

Page 14: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 14

3. KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION

Collection & interpretation of data & information – systems and processes which determine what data is collected and how it is stored and analysed Integration & use of knowledge in decision-making – systems and process which organisation integrates knowledge to make decisions Creation & management of knowledge – systems and processes in which knowledge is consolidated and shared across the organisation

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

GIS systems and procedures Internal networking and information sharing

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern

Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Collection & interpretation of data & information – systems and processes which determine what data is collected and how it is stored and analysed Strengths

• Commitment to undertaking a level of research to fill knowledge gaps • Fire management program maintains GIS information and database relating to neighbours and weed

control • Good level of informal communication and information sharing between the Trust and agencies

Opportunities • Strengthen the current research partnership network to enable annual planning to align with

Management Plan initiatives. Partners include University of Tasmania, Tourism Tasmania, Conservation Volunteers Australia and Greening Australia

• Better develop data sharing arrangements between agencies so that more consistency in data management and access can be achieved (this is likely to require additional resourcing however)

Integration & use of knowledge in decision-making – systems and process which organisation integrates knowledge to make decisions Strengths

• The Trust Board membership facilitates access to community views and knowledge from a diverse range of relevant areas

• The Trust uses its limited funds and resources well and empowers agencies and volunteer groups to make decisions and maintain information

Opportunities • Funding for key initiatives (e.g. performance management) should be sought. This could also link

with development of a research and monitoring program (refer Collection & interpretation of data opportunities above)

• Methods should be identified to effectively gather information about changing trends or increases in visitor use in order to build response strategies

Creation & management of knowledge – systems and processes in which knowledge is consolidated and shared across the organisation

Page 15: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 15

Strengths • Regular meetings of the Management Coordinating Committee provide a formal mechanism for

sharing agency expert knowledge. • Agencies have a range of individual systems and processes that are used but were not analysed or

assessed as part of the peer review. Opportunities

• Maximise opportunities to utilise information gathered by councils (e.g. related to on-ground volunteer activities and weed control programs)

• Maximise opportunities to better understand what people want to do in the Park and expectations about how the Park should be managed

• Improve management of research permit system and build awareness of research activities • Improve partnership with research organisations and develop targeted projects to address Plan

priorities • Improved partnerships could lead to leveraged funds (e.g. ARC Linkage grants) by providing a

stronger business case for funding Evaluation Collection & interpretation of data & information

Creation & management of knowledge Integration & use of knowledge in decision-making Summary Findings There appears to be a high level of awareness amongst Trust members and agency staff regarding the importance and relevance of gathering and utilising relevant data and information. However, there are limited systems in place to capitalise on the information currently at hand available from the delivery agents and the University. It is acknowledged that in order to improve in this area, it is likely additional resources will be required. One key area to explore further is developing partnerships to maximise opportunities for leveraged funding.

Star Rating

Page 16: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 16

4. PEOPLE

Involvement and Commitment – systems and processes by which people are encouraged and enabled to contribute Effectiveness & Development – systems and processes which organisation maximizes its effectiveness through the contribution of people Health, Safety and Well-being – systems and processes providing a effective work environment that recognises the importance of wellbeing

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

Internal networking / meetings Individual performance coaching OH&S Policies (reliant on HCC and other relevant agency policies)

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern

Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Involvement and Commitment – systems and processes by which people are encouraged and enabled to contribute Strengths

• Strong interpersonal relations between the Trust Manager and partner agencies. This has led to excellent working relationships.

• Supporting volunteer engagement and management through the Hobart City Council Bushcare program run with Hobart City Council enables effective and empowered community contributions

• Community engagement processes and levels have been effective and appear to have met the needs and possibly exceeded the expectations of communities

Opportunities

• Demonstrate best practice in community engagement by documenting, reporting publicly on the plan and on continuing community engagement practices. Refer to the Public Participation Spectrum in appendix 4 of the attached resource document 2

• Improve articulation and understanding of how volunteer programs, such as Bushcare and green Corps, align with strategic goals. (Refer to Section 3: Knowledge and Information for further guidance on opportunities to assist in achieving this)

• The use of the web to engage community groups more effectively in future plan development and day-to-day issues, especially relating to recreational activities (rock climbing, walking, bike riding etc..)

• While current relationships tend to be informal and appear to be effective, they can be seen as a vulnerability. Opportunities to develop more formal processes should be considered.

• Develop more formal processes to improve transparency and accountability in decision making, and mechanisms to improve coordination of activities between agencies, volunteers and the community (links with Section 2 opportunities in Understanding the Business Environment – systems and processes by which organisation develops its business strategy)

Effectiveness & Development – systems and processes which organisation maximizes its effectiveness through the contribution of people

Page 17: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 17

Strengths • Good Trust website that provides appropriate information and an avenue for community input • Feedback from volunteer groups indicate that the Trust has good level of community engagement

opportunity for interaction • Consultative processes appear to be effective and appreciated in relation to community and

agencies’ involvement in planning Opportunities

• Improve website feedback loops to people who provide input. Current processes tend to be passive • Consider ways to provide timely communication related to where planning processes are at.

Implementation of projects can be seen as slow and the community may become frustrated at not knowing at what stage things are at

• Create a community consultative forum to enable improved opportunity for interaction with user groups (including Indigenous people and neighbours of the Park)

• Consider public reporting to the community via the website on management activities and planned activities from the biennial Management Coordinating Committee meetings

Health, Safety and Well-being – systems and processes providing a effective work environment that recognises the importance of wellbeing

• The responsibilities for providing a healthy and safe environment falls to the land management jurisdictions and were not assessed as part of this Peer Review

Evaluation Involvement and commitment

Health, safety and well-being – not assessed Effectiveness and development Summary Findings The high level of commitment from Trust employees and the goodwill of Board members are evident and provide much of the foundation for successful outcomes. The support and implementation of volunteer programs via Hobart City Council is considered a best practice highlight by the review team. Improvements around increased feedback loops and creation of a community consultative forum are areas for the Trust to consider

Star Rating

Page 18: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 18

5. CUSTOMER AND MARKET FOCUS Knowledge of customers and markets – systems and processes which ensure the organisation has an ongoing understanding of present and potential customers and markets Customer relationship management – systems and processes which the organisation manages and evaluates relationships with customers Customer perception of value– systems and processes which the organisation measures the perception customers have of the value the organisation provides

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

User-based strategies and policies Community engagement and consultation procedures and strategies Community-focus branding of agency

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern

Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Knowledge of customers and markets – systems and processes which ensure the organisation has an ongoing understanding of present and potential customers and markets (as they relate to volunteering) Strengths

• The strengths noted in section 4 People apply to this category; especially with regards to understanding volunteer engagement. In particular the volunteer management programs run within the councils appear to be of a high standard

Opportunities • Marketing of a broader range of visitor experiences to better realise the Park’s potential • Opportunity for the Trust to undertake targeted market research through telephone survey, intercept

surveys or focus groups, on particular issues e.g. recreation activities. This will however require additional resourcing or working through Tourism Tasmania or the University of Tasmania

• Opportunity for the Trust to undertake targeted market research about the Park via their website and Hobart City Council surveys

• Simplify processes for tourism tour operators to engage with the Park. Customer relationship management – systems and processes which the organisation manages and evaluates relationships with customers (as they relate to volunteering) Strengths

• The strengths noted in section 4 People apply to this category; especially with regards to understanding volunteer engagement. As in section 4 Involvement and Commitment the Review Team considers a best practice in the interactions between agencies and community

• Ongoing feedback and communication between the Trust Manager, agencies, community groups and individual community members of influence established and maintains a valuable culture of goodwill

Opportunities

• Develop a method to enable volunteer and user groups to better understand the status of annual park programs and planned initiatives. For example consider public reporting to the community via

Page 19: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 19

the website on management activities and planned activities from the biennial management Coordinating Committee meetings. This will assist in providing context and potentially allow for input and further support

• Refer also to opportunities noted in Section 3 Creation & management of knowledge – systems and processes in which knowledge is consolidated and shared across the organisation. Eg: utilise information gathered by councils

Customer perception of value– systems and processes which the organisation measures the perception customers have of the value the organisation provides (as they relate to volunteering) Strengths

• The Trust, agencies and other stakeholders appear to appreciate the role the Trust plays but would like to have a more active and ongoing interaction with the Trust.

• Relationships with councils provide value in understanding visitor and volunteer perceptions Opportunities

• Create a community consultative forum to enable improved opportunity for interaction with user groups (including neighbours of the Park)

• Develop more contemporary communication tools for community to interact with the Trust • Consider public reporting to the community via the website on management activities and planned

activities from the biennial Management Coordinating Committee meetings Evaluation Knowledge of customers and markets

Customer perception of value Customer relationship management Summary Findings This category pertains to the Customer and Market focus as it relates to volunteering. As seen in Section 4, People, there are strong relationships built up between the councils and volunteer groups and they are managed well through the commitment on both sides. The open communication between volunteers and the Trust is also evident with contact made possible through informal networks and some more formal feedback methods (submissions, web based and via the Ranger). Opportunities to improve an understanding in this area are predominately the same as identified under Section 4.

Star Rating

Page 20: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 20

6. INNOVATION, QUALITY AND IMPROVEMENT

Innovation process – systems and processes by which the organisation acquires, evaluates and implements creative ideas to improve business performance Management and Improvement of Processes – systems and processes by which the organisation manages and improves its processes to achieve operational efficiency and effectiveness Supplier and Partner Processes – systems and processes by which the organisation manages its relationships with its suppliers and partners Quality of Products and Services – systems and processes by which the organisation determines quality indicators and describe how products and services perform against standards

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

Memoranda of Understanding with key management agencies Formal and informal liaison procedures

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils, Southern Water

and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Innovation process – systems and processes by which the organisation acquires, evaluates and implements creative ideas to improve business performance Strengths

• The management model used by the Trust enables access to a variety of systems and processes within agencies to improve business performance

• The Trust Board membership facilitates access to creative ideas from a diverse range of relevant areas of expertise

• Southern Water’s view is that control and management of catchments in the Park is the best in the State. This was an observation made in the context of ease of catchment management compared to other areas in Southern Water’s area of control

Opportunities • The Trust to work with the agencies to improve coordination of activities and evaluation of management • Look at opportunities for agencies to learn from each other and feed into the Trust’s management

objectives. If further strengthened the management model has the potential to be a leading example for multi-agency cooperative management

• The Trust to work with Southern Water on development of an Environmental Management System of mutual benefit

• The Trust management model is open to management and research partnerships that could improve business performance

• Work with Southern Water and the other agencies in applying contemporary catchment management approaches.

Management and Improvement of Processes – systems and processes by which the organisation manages and improves its processes to achieve operational efficiency and effectiveness Strengths

• Communications between the Trust manager, office staff and agencies appears to provide an effective mechanism for feedback

• Communication and coordination amongst agencies for on-ground delivery appears to work well

Page 21: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 21

Opportunities • Clarify terms of reference for the Management Coordinating Committee or other operational working group

to enable more structured feedback • Formalise accountability and reporting methods between Trust and agencies to minimise risk of not

meeting expectations for operational delivery • Work with Parks and Wildlife Service and University of Tasmania to develop appropriate performance

measures and monitoring tools (links with opportunities in Section 3 in Integration & use of knowledge in decision-making)

• Links with Section 2 opportunities in Planning process: Development application processes need to be looked at (chapter 6 in the Plan) to differentiate what is day-to-day maintenance from projects and proposals for developments. Specifically alignment with agencies (councils) processes and ease of understanding of planning processes ie: remove planning loops & double ups

Supplier and Partner Processes – systems and processes by which the organisation manages its relationships with its suppliers and partners Strengths

• Wellington Park Trust Board membership: The professional diversity of members and agency representation enables effective priority setting

• Board membership and operational working groups facilitate effective resource allocation and sharing Opportunities

• Develop partnerships with delivery agencies and commercial operators with the aim of leveraging funds for management plan (and subsidiary plan) strategies

• Tighten operating procedures and apply consistent high quality standards Quality of Products and Services – systems and processes by which the organisation determines quality indicators and describe how products and services perform against standards

• The main product considered in this review would be seen as the Management Plan itself. Hence the review takes into account this category in the overall context

Evaluation Innovation process Supplier and partner processes

Management and improvement of processes Quality of products and services N/A Summary Findings The Trust management model is vulnerable to disjointed or poorly aligned management; however, due to good working relationships and take-up of the plan between the parties it avoids this pitfall. With improvement the Peer Review team considers that there is the potential for the model to be a leading example of multi-agency cooperative. The areas for improvement include integrated approaches beyond their boundaries (rather than silo) by the agencies and volunteers; evaluation and monitoring of management practices and processes and more rigour around systems to implement and provide outcomes for the Park.

Star Rating

Page 22: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 22

7. SUCCESS AND SUSTAINABILITY

Indicators of Success – systems and processes by which the organisation measures and understands its performance at the organisational level and evidence of success Indicators of Sustainability – systems and processes by which the organisation measures and understands the likelihood of its sustainability in regards to social, environmental and economic viability in the future

- Best Practice or Leading Practice Example Documentation

Corporate Strategic Plan Annual Report

Interviewers: PB, LG, NO Organisational Abbreviations:

• The Trust means the Wellington Park Management Trust • The Plan means the Wellington Park Management Plan • Agencies mean the land management agencies (ie: Hobart and Glenorchy City Councils,

Southern Water and the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service) Indicators of Success – systems and processes by which the organisation measures and understands its performance at the organisational level and evidence of success Strengths

• The planning framework, consisting of the Wellington Park Management Plan and subsidiary plans and strategies, provides a sound basis for an effective and cooperative management approach

• Shared perception amongst the interviewees that the Wellington Park Management Plan has improved the Park environment and that the plan has delivered a clear benefit both social and environmental

• Maintenance of water quality and quantity • Plan outputs are acknowledged as being relevant and of good standard amongst agencies e.g.

bike riding strategy. However success is currently limited to looking at outputs Opportunities

• Improve economic viability and move away from reliance on opportunistic funding (such as grants) by developing a three year or longer term approach for funding. Reliable funding will establish a space for forward scheduling and improved integrated implementation

• Identifying outcomes for key values and risks to those values would help in determining performance measures and success in the future and help resolve any future tensions between protection of natural values and water production

• Develop appropriate performance measures to enable qualitative assessment of achievement • Develop a program to support performance monitoring

Indicators of Sustainability – systems and processes by which the organisation measures and understands the likelihood of its sustainability in regards to social, environmental and economic viability in the future Strengths

• The strong working relations and goodwill between the agencies is a major factor in the obvious success of the planning framework and the support for the Trust management model

Opportunities • Consider partnering with Tourism Tasmania to run some surveys or at least utilise existing

statistics in order to evaluate future feasibility and viability of Plan strategies

Page 23: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 23

• As identified under the Leadership category, systems should be developed to ensure an appropriate level of knowledge transfer can occur to a new incumbent in the role as Trust Manager should the circumstance arise. This will contribute to future viability of the Trust management and planning framework

Evaluation Indicators of success Indicators of sustainability Summary Findings One of the key strengths identified by the Review Team as an indicator of success was that the planning framework, consisting of the Wellington Park Management Plan and subsidiary plans and strategies, appears to provide a sound basis for an effective and cooperative management approach. The Review Team believes that the success in inter-agency cooperation is largely due to the solid, mainly informal relationships between the Trust and agencies. However, there is a degree of risk that comes with the lack of performance measures to effectively evaluate implementation of the plan and outcomes for the Park. Hence the Review Team sees there are opportunities to improve sustainability by demonstrating success in implementing programs and Park management. A number of opportunities to develop an approach to this are identified in Section 2 Strategy and Planning and also factors relating to organisational succession planning are mentioned under Section 1: Leadership throughout the organisation

Star Rating

Page 24: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

Agency: Wellington Park Management Trust Summary Evaluation of Parks Forum Agency Peer Review

Baldrige Category Assessment Sub-Categories

1. Leadership

Strategic direction Organisational culture

Star Rating Leadership throughout the organisation Environmental and community contribution

2. Strategy and Planning Understanding the business environment

The planning process Star Rating Development and application of resources

3. Knowledge and Information Collection & interpretation of data & information

Creation & management of knowledge Star Rating Integration & use of knowledge in decision-making

4. People

Involvement and commitment Health, safety and well-being – not assessed

Star Rating Effectiveness and development

5. Customer and Market Focus Knowledge of customers and markets

Customer perception of value Star Rating Customer relationship management

6. Innovation, Quality and Improvement Innovation process Supplier and partner processes

Star Rating Management and improvement of processes Quality of products and services

7. Success and Sustainability

Star Rating Indicators of success Indicators of sustainability

Overall Rating Star Rating (Not comparable with other agencies)

Page 25: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

Appendix 1: List of Interviewees

Name Position Role Michael Easton Manager

(Wellington Park Management Trust) Strategic planning and policy; general liaison and co-ordination

Dr Christine Mucha Chairperson (Wellington Park Management Trust); CEO On-Stream

Strategic planning and policy development

Catherine Nicholson Project Planner (Wellington Park Management Trust)

Review of Management Plan and preparing new plan

Rob Mather Manager Bushland and Reserves (Hobart City Council

Land manager: strategic planning and on-ground co-ordination

James McIlhenny Senior Development Planner Land use planning Alli Coombe Natural Areas Co-ordinator (Glenorchy

City Council) Land manager: strategic planning and on-ground co-ordination

Dr Claire Ellis Board Member; Director Destination Development (Tourism Tasmania)

Strategic planning and policy development; tourism development

Grant Hall Parks and Reserves Manager (Parks and Wildlife Service)

Former land manager: extensive knowledge of development of original management Plan and establishment of Park

Russell Fox Board Member; Executive Manager Asset and Service Strategy (Southern Water)

Strategic planning and policy development; catchment management

Peter Cusick Senior Ranger (Parks and Wildlife Service)

Land manager: strategic planning and on-ground co-ordination

Andy Crawford Catchment Co-ordinator (Southern Water)

Catchment management: strategic planning and on-ground co-ordination

Wellington Park Office: • Axel von Krusenstierna • Anne McConnell • Lydia Marino

Fire Management Co-ordinator Cultural Heritage Co-ordinator Ranger

Strategic planning and policy; general co-ordination of actions

HCC Bushland Officers: • Stephen Bresnehan • Jill Hickie • Richard Greenhill

Bushland Fire Officer Bushland Planner Bushland Project Officer

Land manager: assistance in development of strategic plans; implementation of strategies and on-ground actions

Community volunteers • Judy Sprent • Bruce Champion • Peter Franklin • Tony McKenny

Bushcare and long-time advocate Bushcare and bush walker Bushcare and bush walker Rock climber

Page 26: Wellington Park Planning Framework Peer Review · The Peer Review will take a close look at the Trust’s existing management planning framework and particularly the Wellington Park

AGENCY PEER REVIEW – Wellington Park Management Trust March 2011 26

Appendix 2: List of resource material provided by the review team Resource 1: Parks Victoria planning summary This document includes references to many other examples and planning documents that Parks Victoria provides for planners to use. Specifically an example of a risk assessment for natural values incorporating Australian Standards might be useful).

Source: Parks Division, Parks Victoria Resource 2: Communication and Engagement strategy for Parks Victoria Greater Alpine

National Parks Management Plan This document includes a community engagement risk analysis table (refer appendix 2) and the International Association for Public Participation spectrum (refer appendix 4). The latter is considered a best practice approach to community engagement

Source: Parks Division, Parks Victoria Resource 3: An example of an Indigenous participation framework This document is intended as a template to guide Indigenous community engagement in planning for parks managed under the National Parks Act. It includes sections which need to be completed for each management plan and forms part of the project brief. Together with the Work Program and the Participation Strategy used to identify relevant Aboriginal groups (simplified in Victoria now by Government recognition of Registered Aboriginal Parties

Source: Parks Division, Parks Victoria Resource 4: Park Visitor Charter This has proved useful to ensure that the rangers understand what is expected of them and to ensure uniformity of performance across the parks network. This might be particularly useful where multiple agencies are delivering a similar service on a park, as is the case with Wellington Park.

Source: Auckland City Council, NZ Resource 5: Levels of Service statements This schema links the vision statement for regional parks through the desired community outcomes to the performance measures and methods in a transparent and obvious way. The improvement programme column is particularly helpful.

Source: Auckland City Council, NZ Resource 6: Customer Service Reporting Audit Process – Auckland Council This is an internal process that ensures that staff (i.e. park rangers) ensure they are meeting park visitor standards, continuously. They report on these monthly and ensure any failure is either built into their weekly work program or ensure it gets onto a future apex or programme. These are independently audited annually to ensure they are not cheating and to pick up ongoing trends and issues.

Source: Auckland City Council, NZ