status with the Community 2 Do Minimum - Stage One Only - Costs less than Option 3. Does not address risks Removal of Stand 1 Pine trees around Stand 2 Pine Reduced visual impact to Trees. surrounding residents and users of the park as Does not optimise use of only removing one stand park - fails to future proof of pine trees. and ultimately will result in stage two development in the future. Possible higher operational costs for maintaining Stand 2. Additional Costs for contract tree fellers having to undertake tree removal in two separate occasions. 3 Preferred Option - Removal of Stand 1 Greater use of overall Higher initial cost and removal of most of Stand 2 Pine space within the park for Loss of opportunity to Trees, Re-alignment of Road and events and use Neighbourhood replanting and improved pedestrian community/visitors. reserves fund for another access. Reduced risks to projects. visitors/community from Results in biggest visual existing trees. change to the park which Opportunity to improve could be perceived community asset and negatively by some increase use. ratepayers, residents and visitors. Better pedestrian access within and around the park. Safer spaces within the park (including passive surveillance. Defined and more useable spaces within the park for events and would user ship/economic development and park management. Better parking management and improved safety between pedestrians and vehicles. Ability to fund significant portion through Neighbourhood Reserves. Benefits Measurement Benefit Measurement Tolerance Method Information Centre and Positive feedback from other community Improved natural surveillance visitors, park users, 30% reduction in feedback. and security police and the security concerns Community Board community Members and
status with the Community 2 Do Minimum - Stage One Only - Removal of Stand 1 Pine trees Costs less than Option 3. Reduced visual impact to surrounding residents and users of the park as only removing one stand of pine trees. Does not address risks around Stand 2 Pine Trees. Does not optimise use of park - fails to future proof and ultimately will result in stage two development in the future. Possible higher operational costs for maintaining Stand 2. Additional Costs for contract tree fellers having to undertake tree removal in two separate occasions. 3 Preferred Option - Removal of Stand 1 and removal of most of Stand 2 Pine Trees, Re-alignment of Road and replanting and improved pedestrian access. Greater use of overall space within the park for events and community/visitors. Reduced risks to visitors/community from existing trees. Opportunity to improve community asset and increase use. Better pedestrian access within and around the park. Safer spaces within the park (including passive surveillance. Defined and more useable spaces within the park for events and would user ship/economic development and park management. Better parking management and improved safety between pedestrians and vehicles. Ability to fund significant portion through Neighbourhood Reserves. Higher initial cost Loss of opportunity to use Neighbourhood reserves fund for another projects. Results in biggest visual change to the park which could be perceived negatively by some ratepayers, residents and visitors. Benefits Benefit Measurement Measurement Method Tolerance Improved natural surveillance and security Positive feedback from visitors, park users, police and the community Information Centre and other community feedback. Community Board Members and 30% reduction in security concerns
Williamson%20Park%20Business%20Case.docx