NEW ALPINE PLANNING SCHEMES
John Banks and Mick SinclairFollowing the dismantling of the Alpine Resorts Commission (ARC) last year, former ARC resorts came under independent boards of management. This has led to the drafting of new planning policies at most resorts. Draft planning documents for have been publicly released for both Mount Hotham and Falls Creek.
Status Quo for XC at Mount Hotham
In October, Mount Hotham Alpine Resort released their Local Planning Policy Framework and Comprehensive Development Plan (LPPF/CDP) which, when finalised, will constitute the local Planning Policy for Mt Hotham, as part of the Alpine Resorts Planning Scheme. The Hotham document is less detailed than its counterpart for Falls Creek discussed below and builds on the earlier ARC produced Hotham 2005 - A Strategic Plan released in 1995.The planning policies set out to meet a number of objectives relating to optimal village size and layout, transport to and within the resort, ski field development, year round use and environmental concerns. The ski field precinct policy recognises Wire Plain/Whiskey Flat/Christmas Hills area as the primary focus for trail based cross-country skiing at the resort, with the inclusion of appropriate amenities and commercial facilities at Whiskey Flat. Australia Drift is earmarked as the next area for further alpine skifield development, while any future development in the Golden Point area would need further studies covering key environmental, public safety and engineering concerns.
As this document is of a rather broad nature with few specific proposals, it is difficult to either praise it or damn it. STAV will be more interested in responding to specific development proposals as they appear and attempt to ensure that the breadth of cross-country activities available within the resort is maintained or improved.
Major Changes Signalled at Falls Creek.
The recently released draft Falls Creek Resort Planning Framework maps out a long term plan for the development of the resort. This plan contains proposals that will have a substantial effect on cross country skiing arrangements at Falls Creek.
Most significant is a proposal to shift the base of operations for cross country skiing from its existing location at Windy Corner to a site just to the West of the Rocky Valley Dam wall, below the existing Panorama Poma. The proposed new base of operations would include a car park extending from the west end of the dam wall into the start of Sun Valley, day user facilities including a shelter and a toboggan run just above the car park. It would be accessed by a realigned sealed road that would pass to the east of the Nordic Bowl. The realigned road is to have two underpasses to allow the trail network to span both sides of the road. One of the underpasses would lead to a new low level access trail to the Heathy Spur area. The new car park would also act as a new day user access point to the lift system, by means of a new chairlift from the new car park to the Cloud Nine area. The accompanying map, adapted from the Planning Framework, shows the proposed layout.
There seem to be three main motivations for moving the base of operations.
- An opportunity to create another day access point for the lift system.
- An intention to use Windy Corner for overnight parking for the village. This arises partly because the planning framework also proposes to develop a new "East Falls Creek" accommodation precinct between the bottom of the Wombat's Ramble and the Halley's Comet chairlift.
- A desire to promote summer recreational activities at Rocky Valley Dam.
Since the introduction of trail fees in 1991, there has been continuing conflict over access to areas popular with touring skiers in the Alpine National Park. Touring skiers have strongly objected to paying a trail fee to use a 2km stretch of the Bogong High Plains Tourist Road to reach either Heathy Spur or the bottom of Sun Valley. Moving the base of operations to the proposed new location has the potential to bring this conflict into much sharper focus. Skiers who were annoyed about being charged trail fees for the use of a 2km section of the Bogong High Plains Road will no doubt be even more annoyed if they are expected to pay trail fees to use the 400m section of that road on the dam wall. Less experienced skiers will also be annoyed if they are obliged to take a much more difficult alternate route on the north side of the dam wall, when the trail across the dam wall offers an easy route to the gentle touring terrain of Heathy Spur.
Rumors about new lodges at Rocky Valley Dam seem to have been decisively put to rest by the Planning Framework, a fact about which most cross country skiers will no doubt be pleased. Skiers who use the trail network at Falls Creek will also be pleased that the plan explicitly recognizes the importance of preserving the areas currently used for the network from encroachment by alpine skiing. This relates particularly to the Pipeline, Aitkens and McKay Road trails. There is, however, no mention of the significance of Falls Creek as a point of access for touring skiers. STAV submitted a brief response to the Planning Framework focussing on this aspect.
As expected, the Planning Framework signals the development of lifted skiing on Mt McKay although it does not give a great deal of detail on proposals for this area. Many touring skiers currently use the section of the McKay road that descends through the timbered area on the hillside to the east of and facing Damsite Hill to access Pretty Valley and areas further west. Alpine runs serviced by a proposed new access chairlift from the western end of Sun Valley to the ridge leading to Mount McKay could impede the use of this section of the McKay Road by touring skiers.
The VNPA and others have voiced concerns about the potential environmental and visual impacts of the development of an alpine ski field in the Mt McKay area. The Planning Framework acknowledges the need for environmental impact and visual impact studies in connection with the development of new alpine skiing facilities.
STAV Submission on Touring Access at Fall's Creek.
The STAV response made only limited comment on the implications of the Planning Framework for the Nordic trail network at Falls Creek, under the assumption that concerns about the proposals from this point of view will be more fully canvassed by groups involved in competitive cross country skiing. STAV's response emphasized the significance of Fall's Creek as a point of access for touring skiers and argued that this should be explicitly recognized in the Planning Framework. It went on to recall the history of the conflict over touring access at Falls Creek since the introduction of trail fees in 1991 and drew attention to the opportunity to resolve this matter once and for all in the new Planning Framework. It was argued that the Planning Framework should include a clause guaranteeing that touring skiers will have direct access to touring areas in the Alpine National Park both to the east and west of the Falls Creek without being charged a trail fee.The response argued that touring access to Heathy Spur should be provided by simply allowing skiers to use the trail across the dam wall without paying a fee, noting that skiers exercising this option would be expected to refrain from using the set tracks. It also argued that future conflict between touring and trail based cross country skiing could be minimized by sensible design of the trail network. The suggestion here is that the design process identify designated touring access routes on ungroomed snow through trail network as a matter of planning practice.
In relation to the Mt. McKay area, the response urges that care be taken when planning new alpine facilities to preserve touring access to areas west of Falls Creek and that comprehensive visual and environmental impact studies be conducted before any such development takes place.