PR4 PARKS AND RESERVES BARRIER FENCING

REPORT Executive Manager Works - 15 July 2002

Moved Councillor Vallelonga, seconded Councillor Copley that

RECOMMENDATION TO COMMITTEE

That the City of Stirling have a PREFERRED policy on barrier fencing type for parks and reserves within the City of Stirling be dome top bollards for reasons of lower maintenance costs and safety to the public.

REPORT PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the procedure for installation of barrier fencing around reserves and the types of barrier fencing used.

Procedure for Installing Barrier Fencing Around Reserves

The Parks and Reserves Department is responsible for the installation and on-going maintenance of barrier fencing around reserves within the City. Policy H401103 sets the procedure and selection criteria for installing barriers around reserves. In summary, barrier fencing is installed around:

· major reserves
· reticulated reserves
· reserves containing valuable structures (playgrounds, sport facilities or buildings), or
· reserves which adjoin roads.

Barrier Fencing Types

Tanolith Pine post and rail and bollard style barriers are the two types of barriers installed around reserves. The current replacement value of barriers around reserves in the City is $2.25 million.

Plate 1 shows the standard Post and Rail barrier fencing type and Plate 2 shows the standard Dome Top Bollard used around the City's Reserves (Refer Attachments).

Costs Of Barrier Fencing Types

Capital costs for both types of barrier are similar. Post and Rail barrier fencing costs $14.46 per lineal metre. Dome Top Bollard fencing costs $15.91 per lineal metre. The Operations and Maintenance Section of the Parks and Reserves Department reports that maintenance and replacement costs for post and rail barriers are significantly higher than bollards. This is due to the additional hardware (bolts) and the additional rail and the lower life span of post and rail fencing.

Cost/Benefit Analysis

The Parks and Reserves Department has undertaken a cost/benefit analysis of post and rail and bollard type fencing. Input from Design and Construction and Operations and Maintenance was received. The following points summarise the main issues on barrier fencing types:

· Capital costs for bollard and post and rail barrier fencing are similar;
· Maintenance costs for post and rail fencing are markedly higher;
· Replacement frequency for post and rail is higher (due to the interconnections of the posts and the rail); Note: If one post is damaged, the other post and rail is simultaneously damaged);
· The top rail of the post and rail fence is prone to damage and weathering and exposes the City to safety risks as posts are sometimes used as informal seating (refer Attachment 3.);
· Bollards provide less access restriction for walkers and prams;
· Bollards provide better visual access into reserves due to the absence of a horizontal rail;
· Post and rail fencing is a higher trip-risk in poor light conditions;
· Bollards provide for easier maintenance of grass.

RELEVANT DOCUMENTS

Attachment 1: Dome Top Bollard Fencing
Attachment 2: Post and Rail Fencing
Attachment 3: Damaged Post and Rail Fencing
Attachment 4: Damaged Post and Rail Fencing TS_2002_0723_AT_PR4.pdf

BACKGROUND

The issue of barrier fencing on reserves, in particular the types of barriers used, was raised by Councillor Ham at the Technical Services Committee meeting of 25 June 2002.

COMMENT

Over the past twelve months the Parks and Reserves Department has been tending toward the use of bollard type in the replacement of reserve fencing. There has been overall acceptance by the community of the bollard type and from both design and maintenance perspectives the bollard type is the preferred barrier treatment. The Parks and Reserves Department has also experienced reduced maintenance with replacement through damage, ease of mowing and edging of surrounding turf. From an operational and maintenance perspective the adoption of a single type of barrier fence will also bring savings through standardisation.

The issue of using post and rail fencing for seating has been raised and provided as a reason for continual use. Post and rail fencing is not designed for the use of seating and should not be encouraged (Refer Attachment 4). The Council is in a position to provide seating on reserves at locations requested by the public.

CALL FOR REPORTS

CLOSURE OF MEETING

The Chairman declared the meeting closed at 5.33pm.

The Chairman of the Committee to:

RECOMMEND
That the balance of the Committee Minutes be adopted.

SIGNED this day of 2002
as a true record of proceedings.

_____________________________
CHAIRMAN