ccs strategic management...final report state sporting strategic facilities plan 2009 to 2025 march...

CCS STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

in association with

FINAL REPORT

STATE SPORTING STRATEGIC FACILITIES PLAN

2009 TO 2025

March 2009


Strategic Facilities Plan for Hockey WA of 112

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................................................... 5

REPORT 1: AUDIT AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT .......................................................... 12

1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 12

2 RELATIONSHIP MAP ................................................................................................... 12

3 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................... 19

4 COMPETITION REVIEW & VALIDITY .......................................................................... 21

5 FACILITIES AND SERVICES AUDIT AND INVENTORY .............................................. 23

6 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ......................................................................................... 56

7 IDENTIFICATION OF GAPS AND DUPLICATIONS ..................................................... 63

8 METHODOLOGY AND CONSULTATIVE PROCESS ................................................... 63

9 OVERVIEW OF THE OUTCOMES OF THE CONSULTATION PROCESS .................. 63

REPORT 2: POLICY DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 65

1 SUMMARY OF THE DIFFERING FACILITY PROVISION PHILOSOPHIES ................. 65

2 OPTIONS FOR LGAS AND HOCKEY WA FOR FACILITY PROVISION ...................... 66

3 DEFINITION OF A SUSTAINABLE CLUB ..................................................................... 72

4 IDENTIFY CSRFF PRIORITIES FOR HOCKEY PROJECTS ........................................ 75

5 POLICY FOR METROPOLITAN AND REGIONAL ZONES........................................... 77

6 POLICY FOR THE CO-LOCATION/RELOCATION OF CLUBS .................................... 77

7 COMMUNICATION OF FIXTURES AND FACILITY REQUIREMENTS TO LGAS ........ 78

8 POLICY POSITION ON CLIMATE CHANGE ................................................................ 79

9 LAND ALLOCATION FOR HOCKEY ............................................................................ 80

10 REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT MECHANISM FOR ALL POLICIES ............................... 81

ATTACHMENT 1 - MODEL FOR PROVISION OF PLAYING FIELDS FOR HOCKEY ......... 82

ATTACHMENT 2 - POPULATION PROJECTIONS IN WA TOWNS TO 2021 ..................... 83



REPORT 3: STRATEGIC PLAN ................................................................................... 87

1 ISSUES IMPACTING FACILITY DEVELOPMENT ........................................................ 87

2 CURRENT DISTRIBUTION OF FACILITIES ................................................................ 93

3 PROPOSED FACILITY DISTRIBUTION FOR THE NEXT 5 YEARS ............................ 95

4 PROPOSED FACILITY DISTRIBUTION FOR THE PERIOD 5 TO 10 YEARS ON ....... 96

5 PROPOSED FACILITY DISTRIBUTION FOR THE PERIOD 10 TO 15 YEARS ON ..... 97

6 FACILITY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS IN THE PERIOD POST 2025 .............. 98

7 ROLE OF HOCKEY WA IN FACILITY DEVELOPMENT ............................................. 101

8 ROLE OF HOCKEY AUSTRALIA IN FACILITY DEVELOPMENT ............................... 102

9 RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................... 103

List of Figures

Figure 1 - School and Club locations affiliated to Hockey WA ................................................ 7

Figure 2 – 2025 Model ......................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3 - Club and participation maps................................................................................. 13

Figure 4 - Competition Structure .......................................................................................... 21 Figure 5 – Hockey Club Membership ................................................................................... 57

Figure 6 – Median Weekly Income ....................................................................................... 58

Figure 7 – Educational spread ............................................................................................. 59 Figure 8 – Participation Rates .............................................................................................. 60

Figure 9 - Hockey locations .................................................................................................. 62

Figure 10 – Gross demand calculation ................................................................................. 82 Figure 11 - Facilities and turfs in the metropolitan area ....................................................... 93

Figure 12 - Club distribution in the metropolitan area .......................................................... 94

Figure 13 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 5 years ........................ 95

Figure 14 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 5 – 10 years ................ 96 Figure 15 - Proposed facility provision 5-10 years ................................................................ 96

Figure 16 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 10 -15 years and on .... 97

Figure 17 - Keralup location ................................................................................................. 98 Figure 18 - Original site master plan for the Fiegerts Road site ............................................ 99

Figure 19 – Concept Plan for Brookdale Regional Open Space ......................................... 100

Figure 20 - Alkimos Eglinton structure plan ........................................................................ 101

Figure 21 - Fourth grass field at Morris Buzacott Reserve.................................................. 104 Figure 22 - Synthetic turf at Guildford Grammar ................................................................. 104

Figure 23 - Synthetic turf at Yokine Reserve ...................................................................... 105

Figure 24 - Synthetic turf at MacDonald Park ..................................................................... 105 Figure 25 - Synthetic turf in Cockburn ................................................................................ 106

Figure 26 - Synthetic turf at Sutherlands Park .................................................................... 106

Figure 27 - Synthetic turf at Mazenod College ................................................................... 107 Figure 28 - Synthetic turf at St Brigids ................................................................................ 107

Figure 29 - Hockey turf potential location to service Ellenbrook ......................................... 108

Figure 30 - Hockey Turf potential locations in the Midland / Guildford area ........................ 109

Figure 31 - Synthetic turf in Orelia ...................................................................................... 110 Figure 32 - Hockey facilities in Mandurah .......................................................................... 110

Figure 33 - Hockey facilities in Armadale ........................................................................... 111

Figure 34 - Hockey facilities in Hocking.............................................................................. 112



List of Tables

Table 1- Club home ground details ...................................................................................... 18

Table 2 - Variables that might affect provision...................................................................... 19 Table 3 - Level specified provision ....................................................................................... 20

Table 4 – Competition Structure by level .............................................................................. 22

Table 5 - Clubs that responded to the survey ....................................................................... 24 Table 6 – Individual club requests ........................................................................................ 28

Table 7 – Sports sharing with hockey................................................................................... 28

Table 8– Securing access to synthetic turf and facilities ...................................................... 29

Table 9 - Securing access to grass playing fields and facilities ............................................ 30 Table 10 – Threats to remaining at current location ............................................................. 32

Table 11 – Amenity provision of clubs .................................................................................. 35

Table 12 – Clubs with all amenities ...................................................................................... 36 Table 13 – Clubs with few of the amenities .......................................................................... 36

Table 14 – Current synthetic turf usage ............................................................................... 40

Table 15 – Desired synthetic time if unlimited ...................................................................... 43

Table 16 – Respondent LGAs with synthetic turf .................................................................. 44 Table 17 – Date of installation and resurfacing of turfs ......................................................... 45

Table 18 – Turf management and tenure ............................................................................. 47

Table 19 – LGAs with grass fields and amenities for hockey ................................................ 47 Table 20 – Grass hockey provision ...................................................................................... 48

Table 21 - Other grass hockey provision .............................................................................. 49

Table 22 – Grass and reticulation ........................................................................................ 51 Table 23 – Amenities provision at reserves .......................................................................... 52

Table 24 – Other amenities .................................................................................................. 53

Table 25 - Maintenance Budget for 2007-2008 .................................................................... 54

Table 26 – Potential new hockey allocation ......................................................................... 55 Table 27 – School summary ................................................................................................ 55

Table 28 – Barriers to sharing .............................................................................................. 56

Table 29 - Specifications for quality surface ......................................................................... 67 Table 30 - Lighting criteria for outdoor hockey ..................................................................... 68

Table 31 - Lighting levels ..................................................................................................... 69

Table 32 - Turf developments .............................................................................................. 72 Table 33 – Projected populations centres over 25,000 by 2021 ........................................... 76

Table 34 - Population projections ......................................................................................... 86

Table 35 - Turf utilisation (hrs) ............................................................................................. 89

Table 36 - fields per club ...................................................................................................... 90 Table 37 - Revenue generation Part A ................................................................................. 91

Table 38 - Revenue generation Part B ................................................................................. 91

Table 39 - revenue generation Part C .................................................................................. 92

List of Charts

Chart 1 - Clubs in metro Perth .......................................................................................................... 14 Chart 2 - Metro team numbers.......................................................................................................... 15 Chart 3 - How may natural grass playing fields at your home ground? .............................................. 25 Chart 4 – How many grass fields do you mark and use on a regular basis? ...................................... 26 Chart 5 – Do you mark fields of less than regulation size? ................................................................ 27 Chart 6 – Are your natural grass playing fields enough for your club’s requirements? ....................... 27 Chart 7 – Changeroom facilities ....................................................................................................... 32 Chart 8 – Public Amenities ............................................................................................................... 33 Chart 9 – Who maintains the facilities ............................................................................................... 37 Chart 10 – Rating of facilities ............................................................................................................ 38 Chart 11 – Access to synthetic turf for training, all clubs ................................................................... 39 Chart 12 – Access to synthetic turf for training, country and metro .................................................... 39 Chart 13 – Cost share for construction ............................................................................................. 46 Chart 14 – Cost share for maintenance ............................................................................................ 46 Chart 15 – Reserves with lighting ..................................................................................................... 50 Chart 16 – Share of responsibilities .................................................................................................. 54



Executive Summary This Hockey facilities strategic plan has been prepared by CCS Strategic Management for Hockey WA on behalf of the Department of Sport and Recreation. The plan comprises 3 discrete reports.

� The first provides an audit report on hockey in Western Australia at present addressing the number of teams and clubs, their facilities and the competition structure they play under.

� The second report addresses facility provision standards and requirements and is structured as a series of policies outlining roles and responsibilities for provision.

� The third report is the facilities plan which identifies where and when facilities should be provided based on 5 year intervals from 2008.

Hockey is played extensively throughout the state of Western Australia and boasts not only high adult participation rates against the national average but also a strong schools program. The number of teams registered with Hockey WA has grown steadily over the past 4 years and record high levels have been achieved in the past two years. Hockey is quite prolific throughout the south west of the state but does not extend beyond the Gascoyne region with Geraldton being the most northerly major hockey location. In the metropolitan area there is a concentration of participation, club locations and facilities in the western suburbs. Grass field hockey is typically played on local government provided reserves with a tendency for the playing field to be shared in the summer season primarily with cricket and sometimes with athletics or diamond sports. Normally the council will provide and maintain the grass surface with the club marking the lines and providing the goals and other specialist equipment. Arrangements for field lighting vary significantly, with electricity consumption and some responsibility for lamp replacement usually resting with the club. Whilst hockey has traditionally been regarded as a grassed field winter game there is a strong and accelerating demand for access to synthetic turf facilities for both training and competition. At present only 44% of clubs have access to a turf. Where they do exist there is a move to two seasons of competition, making hockey a year round sport. All of the major regional population centres in WA (those of more than 25,000 people) already have a synthetic turf installation, with Bunbury and Geraldton having 2 turfs each, albeit a mixture of sand and wet surfaces. Collectively in WA there are 8 turf installations in the regions and 8 in metropolitan Perth. There are two additional turfs scheduled for installation in Perth in the near future, both of them in private boy’s schools. This will see only 2 of the 10 metropolitan turfs located on council reserves, whilst all of the country turfs are on council reserves. Generally, the 77 clubs who reported under the survey and audit process are satisfied with the number of grass fields available, although quality of surface ranked poorly (rating only second lowest to provision for spectators). Goals and line marking, typically the responsibility of the clubs, scored the highest satisfaction levels. In the metro area the number of grass fields used by the larger clubs is 2 to 3 whilst in the country the median number of grass fields marked and used is 1. Almost all clubs who have some access to turf are seeking access to additional turf time. Regardless of the surface being played on, it is the quality of the surface that ranks highest in the priority list of facilities. Good quality turf or well mown uniform grassed surfaces rate as the most important element in a club’s facility requirements. This is followed by field lighting and then by clubroom and changeroom amenities.



Many of the clubs surveyed and audited do not have the desired level of toilet, shower and changeroom provision on grass field reserves and few have separate facilities for first aid and umpires. This does not seem critical to the clubs, particularly those in the country and at lower levels. Any push for off field amenities would seem to place social clubrooms high on the list as soon as basic toilet and changeroom facilities are achieved. The priorities for clubs would appear to be playing surface quality first and then social amenities immediately following. Section 3 of Report 1 provides a schedule of desirable facility and amenity standards across a range of competition levels. It is the level of competition that independently dictates the requirement for varying facility standards. In the metropolitan area, most of the synthetic turf facilities are located on school and university land. This contrasts with country installations which are all located on local government land. The installation of turfs in country areas has been driven by the clubs and associations with support from local councils. This is also the case for the Melville turf, whilst development the Rockingham turf was driven primarily by the council. All other metropolitan turfs have been established by clubs with support from their associated education institutions. The reality is that turf development to date has been largely in the absence of a guiding facility development strategy. It is noted that Hockey WA has a policy for financial support for synthetic turf development, however, this does not specify geographical parameters. Generally the club has contributed a minimum of one third of the capital cost in line with Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) guidelines. From a maintenance and operational perspective, in all instances it is the club to which the responsibility falls. This includes repair and replacement of not only the turf surface but also its sub-base, lighting, watering system and associated installations. These responsibilities are in line with the fact that the clubs are usually exclusive lessees or licensees of the facility in question. In terms of current hockey distribution in the metro area the map on the following page shows all club and participating school locations. The map shows that there is a relatively even spread of schools around clubs and only a few holes that suggest under-servicing. It is noted that:

� Kwinana club has no school programs operating in its immediate area to support it.

� The northern spread beyond Wanneroo to Butler and Jindalee is attracting school participation and a club to service these schools will need to be identified or established.

� There are schools in the Ellenbrook region that are participating in hockey but no local club to service them

� Cockburn has a strong school program and no local club to service it

� In the longer term (post 2020) growth in the Alkimos Eglinton region will require new facilities and the development of clubs to service that region

� Similarly, the future development of Keralup, east of Rockingham, will require new facilities and the development of clubs to service that region

� The hills area stretching from Mundaring to Kalamunda has a series of schools involved in hockey and a club with good facilities to service these schools will need to be identified or established

� Serpentine Jarrahdale is set for strong population growth over the next 20 years and new facilities and clubs will need to be established in this region.



Figure 1 - School and Club locations affiliated to Hockey WA



In terms of understanding existing provision and planning for new facilities the following observations have been drawn: � Education institutions (both private schools and universities) are currently the principal

location of turf facilities for Hockey WA conducted competitions in the metropolitan area.

� Local government is the principal provider of grassed playing fields for Hockey WA conducted competitions in the metropolitan area and for association and club conducted competitions in regional areas.

� Future development of hockey facilities in WA will require both synthetic turf and natural grass fields to be available with a growing demand for and reliance upon synthetic turf venues.

� Wherever possible synthetic turf venues should be developed adjacent to existing natural grass facilities. They should not be developed in isolation.

� The number of synthetic turf installations should be expanded to accommodate and encourage growth in underserviced areas and at the same time remain limited (at least by way of Hockey WA support) to ensure oversupply does not occur leaving turf facilities underutilised and therefore unviable.

� Synthetic turf development on local government reserves will fall largely to the hockey clubs to initiate. The CSRFF cost share model of one third from the state government, one third from the local authority, and one third from the club is a desirable outcome under current installation guidelines. Clubs should look to meet this challenge in any turf development program and the challenge of the ongoing maintenance of the facilities. Clubs should note that the level of support from Local Governments may differ due to established policies.

� Synthetic turf development on school or university land will largely fall to the school or university to initiate and fund. There may be some government assistance available for school and university facility developments.

� There is limited precedent for local government to contribute to school or university facilities, however, there are examples of joint provision and open access arrangements for community clubs and this should be more fully explored.

� Hockey WA should continue to manage and control the Perth Hockey Stadium as the sport’s flagship venue and ensure that it is always the best presented, most current and technically equipped venue in the state.

� Hockey WA should work with the Department for Planning and Infrastructure (DPI), DSR and the appropriately targeted LGAs to ensure adequate land allocation is provided for future hockey facilities.

� Nearly all clubs are adequately catered for in terms of the number of grass fields at present but surface quality is a concern.

� Local government should be encouraged to improve playing surface maintenance standards in line with the specification in Section 2.2 of Report 2.

� Local government should be encouraged to provide for the basic suite of facilities as per the specification in Section 3.1 of Report 2

� Most clubs are seeking access to additional turf time.

� Playing surface quality, regardless of whether it is grass or synthetic turf, is the first priority in terms of facility standards. Ancillary amenities are all secondary to the playing surface.

� Clubroom facilities attached to the turf are considered critical to long term viability and success of the resident clubs.

� Hockey WA notes that Local Government Authority philosophies differ, however, across the board, there is an established practice and preference to encourage provision of shared or joint use community facilities.

� Hockey WA notes that both Local Government Authorities and individual clubs need to consider the environmental issues associated with any request for additional grassed playing surfaces/pitches.



Hockey, like all outdoor sports, is subject to environmental conditions and with that the effects of climate change. Hockey WA is aware of and intends to address a range of climate change impacts through its strategic planning process including responses to:

� Water shortages – promoting water-wise efficiency throughout the state

� Temperature increases – implementing strategies to accommodate higher temperature

� More extreme events – contingency planning for events and activities

� Sea level rise – developing policies for adaptation

� Reducing carbon footprint – adopting procedures across all functions to reduce consumption and waste

Other than efforts to reduce overall consumption in day to day hockey operations through recycling, introducing energy efficiencies and reducing waste, the availability and cost of water is considered to be the biggest single issue for Hockey WA to address. Water recycling on wet turf installations and other water reduction strategies are likely to become a necessity and mechanisms that assist all turf owners in installing a suitable system should be led by Hockey WA with the PHS installations. There is, however, an imperative to move away from wet turf surfaces and to encourage in the first instance greater use of hybrid surfaces with a view to the ultimate replacement of all wet surfaces with totally dry surfaces. This will require considerable research and commitment from both the hockey fraternity and the turf manufacturers. The availability of a turf that eliminates field watering, accommodates intensive use and replaces grass playing fields is seen as a means of ensuring hockey facilities can continue to be developed in the face of diminishing water supplies. Whilst water availability will be a major challenge for the future of hockey in WA, another will be securing sufficient land for playing field development. Public open space provision for active sport is consistently under threat from developers offering inadequate and inappropriate land parcels, the requirements of the Bush Forever and conservation lobby to prevent clearing and development of bushland areas, and the use of Public Open Space (POS) for drainage and stormwater management. Hockey WA must take an active a role, in conjunction with the Department of Sport and Recreation and the WA Sports Federation, to inform and influence the land allocation process for active sport. This will require submission and representation to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, the various local government authorities and ultimately to the developers themselves. In general terms Hockey WA should be lobbying and informing the land allocation decision makers of the need for one hockey field per 12,500 persons, generally allocated in banks of 2 fields and provision for a synthetic turf which will require exclusive land allocation for every 75,000 persons. In summary the key issues affecting facility development are seen to be:

� Population

� Participation rate

� Water availability

� Sustainability

The analysis contained in Report 3 indicates that for metropolitan Perth between 17 and 20 turfs will be required to sustain the sport by 2025, potentially including one in Mundaring. Beyond that period, further installations will be required in the urban growth areas of Brookdale, Alkimos Eglinton, Keralup and Serpentine Jarrahdale.



Analysis within the report shows that a population of around 112,000 people in the catchment is likely to be sufficient to ensure financial viability of a club with a synthetic turf. This will allow adequate ongoing operation and maintenance funds, and sufficient reserves for surface replacement as required. This figure is perceived to be very conservative acknowledging that country towns are achieving sustainable outcomes with around 25,000 in the catchment. Nonetheless, the larger figure will provide a good degree of long term financial comfort. There is no recommendation in the report for future turf development in regional areas. These are, however, likely to occur as clubs, associations and country towns believe it is necessary to install a turf and will, against any assessment of sustainability, do so. In all probability, they, like Albany, Busselton, Kalgoorlie-Boulder and others, will be successful. In the metropolitan area there is a need for a more detailed and controlled approach to ensure that Hockey WA contributes its resources and support to developing those facilities that will help grow hockey the most. Report 3 shows a staged implementation strategy in 5 year increments to a fully developed model to 2025 which ultimately delivers as many as 19 turfs across the metro area. This is shown in the Figure 2 on the following page. In addition to the observations and recommendations drawn in this executive summary for action by Hockey WA, there is a specific set of recommendations at the end of Report 3.

CCS Strategic Management would like to acknowledge the support and assistance of the Project Reference Group comprising:

• Department of Sport and Recreation Samuel Peace and Rob Thompson

• WALGA Recreation and Leisure Technical Reference Group Mick Doyle

• Hockey WA Barb Jenkins, Damien Todorovic and Linda Hamersley

We also acknowledge the input and guidance from the Hockey WA Board.



Figure 2 – 2025 Model

* Small blue circles indicate existing turfs, small green circles indicate imminent turfs; large dotted circles indicate a 5km radius from facility (black indicates existing or imminent). Facilities designated in red are proposed for the next 5 years, facilities designated in orange are proposed for 5-10 years, and facilities designated in yellow are proposed for 10-15 years.

ECU Joondalup Lakers Joondalup Arena (Whitford and Harlequins)

Whitford Wanneroo and Districts

North Coast Raiders

Newman Knights Modernians

Vic Park Panthers

Willetton

UWA

Riverside Lions Westside Wolves

Westside Wolves

John XXIII Subs

YMCC

Hale

Harlequin Wanneroo

Stirling City Rangers

Blades

Curtin Trinity Pirates (PHS) Kalamunda

Southern River

Melville

Willetton

Old Aquinians

South Perth Wasps

Dale

Curtin Trinity

Fremantle

Wolves, Subs, YMCC

Kwinana

Canning

Old Guildfordians

Nanovich Park

Rockingham 12km

MacDonald Park

Ellenbrook DOS

Yokine Reserve Guildford Grammar or North Swan Park

Hartfield Park

Sutherland Park

Prinsep Road POS

Orelia Oval



Report 1: Audit and Needs Assessment

1 Introduction

At the time the report was commissioned, it was midsummer and hockey was not being played. Attempts to capture data regarding hockey facilities would have been stymied by clubs being in recess and grounds being unmarked and used by other codes. Further, Hockey WA already maintains a reasonably comprehensive and accurate grounds audit database with input from clubs on their own grounds, clubs on other club grounds and by Hockey WA personnel themselves. It was agreed that the formal site by site audit and inspection program initially contemplated would be compromised and was dispensed with. This existing grounds inventory and audit information held by Hockey WA has been used throughout the study. To assist in future data capture and analysis an on-line audit and assessment tool has been developed and made available to Hockey WA. Given the off-season timing of the study an alternative approach has been taken. Survey forms were circulated to all clubs, LGAs and schools. The returns are detailed further in this report. The focus of the study is the metropolitan area and the great southern, however, some additional regional areas have been considered. 2 Relationship map

2.1 Relationship map of Hockey in WA Clubs by membership, venues and competition levels

Current participation in hockey can be seen in the maps on the following page. Clubs are identified by the red dots and membership strength is shown by blue colour graduation, the darker the colour graduation, the higher the participation rate per head of population. Items of note in the maps below are the concentration of membership around clubs and the concentration of clubs in the metropolitan western suburbs. The charts on the next page show the number of metropolitan teams registered with Hockey WA in metropolitan Perth.



-

Figure 3 - Club and participation maps



Chart 1 - Clubs in metro Perth

For 2008 there were 415 Men’s teams and 266 Women’s teams registered.

1

1

1

2

2

2

3

3.5

4

5

6

8.5

9

9

10

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

15

15

15

17

17

18

18

19

20

25

27

28

29

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

SW STRIKERS

SHENTON

KWINANA

UNI ASSOCIATES

PEEL

EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY

CANNING

RANGERS

JOHN XXIII

MAZENOD

DALE

HARLEQUINS

SOUTHERN RIVER

KALAMUNDA

SUBURBAN

ROCKINGHAM

BLADES

MODERNIANS

JOONDALUP

OLD AQUINIANS

NEWMAN

YMCC

WILLETTON

FREMANTLE

CT PIRATES

RIVERSIDE LIONS

NC RAIDERS

OLD GUILDFORD MUNDARING

HALE

WHITFORD

VICTORIA PARK

UNIVERSITY OF WA

MELVILLE

WESLEY SOUTH PERTH

WESTSIDE WOLVES

ALL CLUBS - MALE TEAM NUMBERS 2008

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

3

3

3

4

4

4

4

5

5

5

5

5

5

6

6

7

9

10

10

11

12

12

12

12

12

18

17

20

23

0 5 10 15 20 25

SW STRIKERS

SOUTHERN RIVER

SERVIO

PEEL

KWINANA

DELLAS

DALE

BAYUNION

PENRHOS

JOHN XXIII

ST BRIGIDS

OLD AQUINIANS

EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY

SUBURBAN

RANGERS

CANNING

BLADES

UNI ASSOCIATES

ROCKINGHAM

OLD GUILDFORD MUNDARING

NEWMAN

MERCEDES

HARLEQUINS

PERTH COLLEGE

JOONDALUP

MODERNIANS

YMCC

VICTORIA PARK

RIVERSIDE LIONS

CT PIRATES

WILLETTON

WHITFORD

SOUTH PERTH

NC RAIDERS

FREMANTLE

MELVILLE

HALE

WESTSIDE WOLVES

UNIVERSITY OF WA

ALL CLUBS - FEMALE TEAM NUMBERS 2008



Chart 2 - Metro team numbers

Collectively the number of Hockey teams registered has been rising steadily since 2004. 2.2 Clubs by home ground and synthetic turf access

Most clubs have an identified home ground which is predominately based on grassed fields. These are detailed below:

Club Name Reserve

No.

Grass

Fields

Access to Synthetic

Turf?

Country Clubs

Amaroo Men’s Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds 2 Collie Turf

Badgingarra Hockey Club Badgingarra 2

Borden Ladies Hockey Club Borden Pavilion 1

Bunbury & Districts Hockey

Stadium Bunbury 11-15 Bunbury

Burracoppin Hockey Club Merredin Rec Centre 2

Busselton Hockey Stadium

Inc Bovell Park 6-10 Busselton

Calingiri Hockey Club Calingiri 1

Carnamah Women’s Hockey

Club Carnamah 1

Centaurs Men’s Hockey Club

Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds 2 Collie Turf

Co-op Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds 2 Collie Turf

Coorow Hockey Club Coorow 1

Corrigin Hockey Club Inc. Corrigin Sports Pavilion 1



Club Name Reserve

No.

Grass

Fields

Access to Synthetic

Turf?

Dumbleyung Hockey Club Dumbleyung Stubbs Park 1

Eastern Goldfields Hockey

Association EGHA Eastern Goldfields

Esperance Hockey Club Greater Sports Ground 4

Geraldton Hockey

Association [Inc.] Mitchell & Brown Stadium 2 Geraldton

Gingin Hockey Club Gingin Recreation Centre 1

Gnowangerup Ladies Hockey

Club

Gnowangerup Sporting

Complex 2

Jerramungup Hockey Club Jerramungup Town Oval 3

Kellerberrin Hockey Club Kellerberrin 3

Kondinin Women’s Hockey

Club Kondinin 3

Kulin Hockey Club Freebairn Rec Centre 4

Lake Grace Hockey Club

Lake Grace sporting and

Recreation Ground 1

Lower Great Southern Ass. Albany 1 LGSHA Albany

Merredin Women’s Hockey

Club Merredin Recreation Ground 3

Miling Hockey Club Miling 3

Mingenew Hockey Club Mingenew 1

Mukinbudin Hockey Club Mukinbudin

Mustangs Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds 2 Collie Turf

Newdegate Hockey Club Newdegate Sports Pavilion 3

Nyabing Women’s Nyabing (Shire of Kent) 1

Peel Hockey Association Mandurah Hockey Stadium 4

Robins Hockey Club Moora Rec Oval 2

SW Strikers Hockey Club

(combined team) Busselton Stadium / Bunbury

Tammin Hockey Club Tammin 1

Three Springs Hockey Club Three Springs 1

Wagin Hockey Club Matera Oval Wagin 2 Narrogin Turf

Waratahs Hockey Club Moora Hockey Ground 2

Warren Women’s Hockey

Assoc COLLIER STREET COMPLEX 4

Warriors Women’s Hockey

Club Narrogin Leisure Centre Turf 4 Narrogin Turf

Wongan Ballidu Hockey Club Wongan Hills 2

Metropolitan Clubs

Bay Union Hockey Club Yokine 1 Nil

Canning Districts Hockey

Club Inc Ferndale Reserve 4 Melville Turf

Curtin Trinity Pirates Hockey

Club Trinity Playing Fields 3 Perth Stadium

Dale Hockey Club Bob Blackburn Reserve Nil



Club Name Reserve

No.

Grass

Fields

Access to Synthetic

Turf?

Dellas Hockey Club n/a Nil

Eastern Blades Hockey Club Altone Park 3 Perth Stadium

Edith Cowan University

Hockey Club Charles Veryard Oval 4 Hale Aquaturf

Fremantle Hockey Club Stevens Reserve 4

Perth Stadium

Melville Turf

Hale Hockey Club Hale Aquaturf Hale Aquaturf

Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey

Club Inc Breckler Park 5

Perth Stadium

UWA Turf

Joondalup Arena

John XX111 Hockey Club John XX111 College 2 Hale Aquaturf

Joondalup Lakers Hockey

Club Joondalup Arena 2 Joondalup Arena

Kalamunda Districts Hockey

Club Hartfield Park 2 Melville Turf

Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club Orelia Sporting Pavilion 2 Nil

Mazenod Hockey Club Hartfield Park 3 Nil

Melville City Hockey Club Inc Morris Buzacott Reserve 3 Melville Turf

Mercedes Hockey Club n/a

Modernians Hockey Club Charles Veryard Reserve 4

UWA Turf

Melville Turf

Mundaring Women’s Hockey

Club Inc. Parkerville Oval 2 Nil

Newman Knights Hockey

Club Newman College 4 UWA Turf

North Coast RaidersHockey

Club

Charles Riley Reserve North

Beach 3

Perth Stadium

Hale Aquaturf

Melville Turf

Old Aquinians Hockey Club Kennedy Oval Aquinas College 2 Nil

Old Guildfordians Mundaring

Hockey Club Lilac Hill Park 2 Perth Hockey Stadium

Penrhos College Hockey Club School Oval

Perth College Hockey Club Yokine Reserve 16+

Riverside Lions Hockey Club Melvista Oval

Rockingham District Inc

Hockey Club Lark Hill Sportsplex 4

Lark Hill Sportsplex Turf

Mandurah Turf

Servio Ladies (Vets Team)

Hockey Club n/a

Shenton Hockey Club Shenton Shenton Turf

South Perth Hockey Club Richardson Park West Perth Hockey Stadium

Southern River Hockey Club Sutherland Park 5 Melville Turf

St Brigids College Hockey

Club n/a

Stirling City Rangers Hockey

Club Yokine East 16+



Club Name Reserve

No.

Grass

Fields

Access to Synthetic

Turf?

Suburban Hockey Club

Hockey Club Tregonning Field

UWA Associates Women’s

Hockey Club University Turf UWA Turf

UWA Associates Men’s

Hockey Club McGillivray UWA Turf

University of Western

Australia Hockey Club Inc. McGillivray Sports Park 5

UWA Turf

Perth Stadium

Victoria Park Xavier Inc Fletcher Park 3 Perth Hockey Stadium

Wanneroo Districts Hockey

Club Inc. Kingsway Sporting Complex 6-10

Wesley South Perth Hockey

Club Richardson Park 6-10 Perth Stadium

Westside Wolves Hockey

Club Cresswell Park 2

Shenton Turf

UWA Turf

Whitford Hockey Club MacDonald reserve 3 Joondalup Arena

Willetton Hockey Club Trevor Gribble Reserve 3

Melville Turf

Perth Stadium

YMCC Hockey Club Perry Lakes/Alderbury Reserve 6-10 Shenton Turf

Table 1- Club home ground details

2.3 Synthetic Turf facilities in WA

Only 8 turfs exist in metro Perth, 2 of which are based at the Perth Hockey Stadium in Bentley and operated by Hockey WA. Clubs with dedicated synthetic turf venues are:

� Hale at Hale School � University at McGillivray � Melville at Morris Buzacott � Joondalup at the Arena � Rockingham at Lark Hill � The combination of Wolves, YMCC, Riverside Lions and Subs at Shenton College

In the country and regional areas the majority of clubs operate from one venue. There are now 10 regional turfs in 8 locations as follows:

� Mandurah � Bunbury 1 � Bunbury 2 � Busselton � Albany � Collie � Narrogin � Geraldton 1 � Geraldton 2 � Kalgoorlie-Boulder

Additional turfs are currently planned for Scotch and Aquinas Colleges in Perth and potentially at Bruce Rock.



The chart below shows the location of the existing hockey locations in metropolitan Perth 3 Definitions

The project brief calls for the determination of definitions for the various levels of participation in hockey and to determine Hockey WA’s ideal facility requirements or specification for each level. We have considered a raft of variables that may influence how the hockey community engages with the sport and following that, whether there should be differing facility provision requirements for those variables. Each of the elements is shown in the table below.

Gender Male Female

Age U13 Primary

School U17 High

School Under 21

Youth Open Veteran

Comp level Junior Metro Promotional Premier Representative

Aspiration Social only Personal

Improvement On field success

Advancement in competition

Representative

Involvement Sporadic games or social only

Games and or social only

Frequent playing and training and

or social

Regular games training

and social

Most days most activities

(Totally committed)

Role Player Coach Official Administrator Supporter

Table 2 - Variables that might affect provision

A detailed investigation of the effect that each of these elements would have on facility needs revealed that facility requirements were specifically, if not solely, related to the level of competition contemplated. The various competition levels as they relate to facility needs were then considered and the following definitions were determined: Level A Representative level hockey at the highest level including international and

national competitions, likely to have large spectator numbers and potential for television (totally turf based)

Level B Premier and aspirational league competitions that accommodate the best the

local competition has to offer. Attracts moderate to large spectator numbers but does not attract television coverage (totally turf based)

Level C Sub premier level competitions that accommodate a variety of competition

standards both competitive and social (turf and or grass field based) Level D Junior or non-standard competitions where field size and amenity provision are

not critical (grass field based) Level E School based hockey programs and competitions where participation is the key

and lack of facilities may hinder but not prevent (grass field based)



The following matrix table indicates the desirable requirements for each level

Level A Level B Level C Level D Level E

Field dimensions

91.44m x 55 m max

91.44m x 55 m max

91.44m x 55 m max

91m X 50 m approximately

50 m x 25m or larger

Buffer zone 3m side

4.5m end 3m side

4.5m end 3m side

4.5m end 2m side 3 m end

2m side 3 m end

Surface type

Turf Turf Turf or Grass Grass Any firm surface

Goals Standard Standard Standard Standard Any marker

4m apart

Field lighting

750 lux 500 lux 300 lux N/A N/A

Scoreboard Electronic Electronic Manual N/A N/A

Public address

Yes Yes N/A N/A N/A

Spectator seating

Yes min 1500

Yes min 250

Yes min100

N/A N/A

Spectator shade shelter

Yes min 250

N/A N/A N/A N/A

Change Rooms

2 per field 2 per location 2 per location N/A N/A

Players Showers

4 in each changeroom



Available on-site

N/A

Players toilets




Available on-site

N/A

Public toilets

Yes separate from players



Yes Yes

Clubrooms 350m2 200m

2 150m

2 N/A N/A

Umpires Room

15m2 15m

2 15m

2 N/A N/A

First Aid room

15m2 15m

2 15m

2 N/A N/A

Kiosk Canteen

30m2 15m

2 15m

2 N/A N/A

Car parking 500 bays 100 bays 100 bays 20 bays 20 bays

Storage 25m2 15m

2 15m

2 25m

2 N/A

Table 3 - Level specified provision

Note that these requirements are offered as ideal outcomes for hockey facility development. All such developments will be required to comply with the relevant planning codes, the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standards.



4 Competition Review & Validity

Hockey WA controls all metropolitan fixtures for hockey played under its auspices. Country associations take responsibility for their own competitions as does the non-aligned Wanneroo Districts Association Inc. The chart below was produced by Hockey WA for its competition structure for 2008. It indicates the level of competition and how each fixture group feeds into a promotion and relegation hierarchy. The main characteristics of this structure is that it accommodates both large and small clubs, including single team clubs and allows for clubs to have numerous teams within one level or grade of competition but not within the same fixture series. The competition design therefore does not limit progression of smaller clubs that might otherwise be blocked by larger clubs with more teams. The structure reflects both the current demand for hockey in the metropolitan area and the availability of synthetic turf venues, noting that by choice or necessity, or perhaps a blend of both, that the structure 3 metropolitan competition is played solely on grass.

Figure 4 - Competition Structure

The table below shows the same structure reflecting the number of grades in each category of competition. The colour system is consistent with the levels developed in the Hockey WA competition structure document above.



Level Competition Men’s Women’s

1

Elite Turf

Premier 1 (Wizard Cup) Premier 1(Wizard League)

2 Premier 2 Premier 2

2 Promotion 1 (Willow Bridge Cup) Promotion 1 (Willow Bridge League)

3 Promotion 2 Promotion 2

3 Premier Alliance Premier Alliance

3

Provisional League

Provisional 1 Provisional 1

4 Provisional 2 Black Provisional 2 Black

4 Provisional 2 Gold Provisional 2 Gold

5 Provisional 3 Provisional 3 Black

5 Provisional 3 Gold

3

Metro

1 1

4 2 Black 2 Black

4 2 Gold 2 Gold

5 3 Black

5 3 Gold

5 3 White

6 4

1

Veterans

Over 40 1 Division 1

2 Over 40 2 Division 2

3 Over 40 3 Division 3

4 Over 40 4

1 Over 40 midweek

1 Over 50 1

2 Over 50 2

3 Over 50 3

1 Over 55

2 Over 55

1

U/17

A Girls U17A 08

1 A Reserve Girls U17A Reserve 08

2 B Black Girls U17B 08

2 B Gold

1

U/15

A A

1 A Reserve

2 B Black B Black

2 B Gold B Gold

3 C Black C Black

3 C Gold C Gold

1

U/13

A A

1 A Reserve

2 B Black B Black

2 B Gold B Gold

3 C Black C

3 C Gold

1

U/11

A A

2 B Black B Black

2 B Gold B Gold

3 C Black

3 C Gold

3 C White

Table 4 – Competition Structure by level



4.1 Validity of current competition structure for future hockey facility development

The current competition structure appears to reflect the number of teams and the availability of venues and therefore reflects an economic and demand driven design. A significant increase or decrease in team numbers would necessitate a change to the competition structure based on availability of venues. Similarly a change in the number of turf venues is likely to alter the structure of the competition. A proliferation of turf venues without a commensurate increase in team numbers could well lead to the demise (or at least the diminution) of the metropolitan grass only competition. The economic imperative of running the available turfs as a hockey factory will naturally see turf play and training scheduled rather than natural grass use. The turfs need to be in constant use and therefore generating constant revenues to meet operating costs, paying off establishment debts and building replacement reserves. Note that replacement reserves for the synthetic turf surface and sub-base are not the only maintenance, refurbishment and replacement costs the clubs need to consider. In many instances the hockey clubs will also be required to meet the cost of refurbishment and renewal of clubroom and changeroom facilities, particularly when the club has exclusive use or a lease over these facilities. Scheduling at PHS reflects this economically driven model where competition is allocated as a priority and training is only available on two nights per week. Training bookings deliver a hire fee for the facility but competition bookings return both a turf hire fee and a participant gate fee making it more attractive financially. From a wear and tear perspective, competition is more desirable than training, assuming training is more demanding on the turf surface than competition fixtures. Aside from an economic or demand driven argument which would suggest keeping the number of teams and turfs commensurate with demand, the validity of the current competition structure is difficult to assess. It is assumed, however, that the tag line of Hockey WA (we want hockey Everywhere) reflects a desire to have hockey players and facilities well distributed and dispersed across the metropolitan catchment area. This means supporting and assisting the development of new clubs or the relocation of existing clubs into target areas. If a target area requires the establishment and growth of a new club, the development process will be slow. Conversely, if an already established club is relocated (ideally from an otherwise congested area) to a new growth area with new facilities, this will provide instant activity. It is understood that a separate study into the competition structure for Hockey WA has been commissioned. The availability of facilities is likely to influence the even geographic distribution of clubs, assuming that turf facilities are preferred. The resultant competition structure must consider its effect on the economic viability of turf facilities. 5 Facilities and Services Audit and Inventory

5.1 Club Surveys

A survey was sent to all clubs and associations in the metro and larger country centres. There were 77 completed surveys returned from the following clubs: Country Clubs Metropolitan Clubs

Amaroo Men’s Hockey Club Canning Districts Hockey Club Inc.

Badgingarra Hockey Club Curtin Trinity Pirates

Borden Ladies Hockey Club Eastern Blades Hockey Club

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium Edith Cowan University Hockey Club



Burracoppin Hockey Club Fremantle Hockey Club

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey Club Inc

Calingiri Hockey Club John XX111 Association Hockey Club

Carnamah Women’s Hockey Club Kalamunda Districts Hockey Club

Centaurs Men’s Hockey Club Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club

Co-op Hockey Club Mazenod Hockey Club

Coorow Hockey Club Melville City Hockey Club Inc

Corrigin Hockey Club Inc. Mercedes College Hockey Club

Dumbleyung Hockey Club Modernians Hockey Club

Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association Mundaring Women’s Hockey Club Inc.

Esperance Hockey Newman Knights Hockey Club

Geraldton Hockey Association North Coast Raiders Hockey Club Inc.

Gingin Hockey Club Old Aquinians Hockey Club

Gnowangerup Ladies Hockey Club Old Guildfordians Mundaring Hockey Club

Jerramungup Ladies Hockey Club Perth College Hockey Club

Kellerberrin Hockey Club Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc,

Kondinin Women’s Hockey Club Servio Ladies Hockey Team (Vets Team only)

Kulin Hockey Club Southern River Hockey Club

Lake Grace Hockey Club St Brigids College Hockey Club

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass. Stirling City Rangers Hockey Club

Merredin Women’s Hockey Club University Associates Women’s Hockey Club

Miling Hockey Club University of Western Australia Hockey Club

Mingenew Hockey Club UWA Associates (Men’s) Hockey Club

Mukinbudin Hockey Club Victoria Park Xavier Hockey Club Inc

Mustangs Hockey Club Wanneroo Districts Hockey Association Inc.

Newdegate Hockey Club Wesley South Perth Hockey Club

Nyabing Women’s Hockey Club Westside Wolves Hockey Club

Peel Hockey Association Whitford Hockey Club

Robins Hockey Club Willetton Hockey Club

Tammin Hockey Club YMCC Hockey Club

Tammin Women's Hockey Club

Three Springs Hockey Club

Wagin Hockey Club

Waratahs Hockey Club

Warren Women’s Hockey Assoc

Warriors Women’s Hockey Club

Wongan Ballidu Hockey Club

Table 5 - Clubs that responded to the survey

Clubs were asked how many full sized natural grass playing fields they have at their home ground (including appropriate run off to sides and back).



0 5 10 15 20

0

1

2

3

4

5

6-10

11-15

16+

Number of Natural Grass Fields - Country Clubs

Chart 3 - How may natural grass playing fields at your home ground?

The majority of country clubs have only 1 or 2 fields at their disposal, whilst more metropolitan clubs have access to 2 or more fields. The 5 clubs with no fields tend to be single teams (e.g. Servio) who make use of other club’s facilities.



Chart 4 – How many grass fields do you mark and use on a regular basis?

Most country clubs mark only 1 field, whereas the majority of metro clubs mark and use between 2-4 fields. There are a number of clubs that do not mark and make use of all of the fields available to them. Clubs were asked if they marked fields less than regulation size. Almost 80% of all clubs said they do not. When country and metro clubs are assessed separately, the indications are that only 10% of country clubs mark fields less than regulation size, while 35% of metro clubs do the same. Generally, of those clubs that do, it is generally for juniors, or the fields are marked the same length but marginally narrower than regulation.



10%

90%

Country Clubs

Yes

No

Chart 5 – Do you mark fields of less than regulation size?

Clubs were asked if their natural grass playing field provision was sufficient for their requirements. 88% of clubs indicated they were satisfied with their provision. However, from the charts below it is clear that a higher percentage of country clubs are satisfied than their metro counterparts.

5%

95%

Country Clubs

No

Yes

Chart 6 – Are your natural grass playing fields enough for your club’s requirements?

Of those clubs who felt they needed more provision, these are the comments / requests provided:

Club Name If no, please tell us how many more fields you need and your preferred location

Corrigin Hockey Club Inc.

because we mark one full size one on the football ground as well

Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association

We have 1 synthetic field and need 1 more

Edith Cowan University Hockey Club

Please note that we only use the one grass field of the 4 marked. We share facilities with Modernians Hockey Club who use the others.


Technically at present no, as the new grass has only been recently laid. The one marked oval is not enough as another association uses our facilities and when we clash 7 games of hockey are played on that one day. The other association will not change their playing time so all hell breaks loose as we fit around them and ask our travelling opposition side to play at different times. This is why we have extended our current oval.

35%

65%

Metro Clubs

Yes

No

21%

79%

Metro Clubs

No

Yes



Club Name If no, please tell us how many more fields you need and your preferred location

Melville City Hockey Club Inc

4 fields

Mundaring Women’s Hockey Club Inc.

At present our association uses three fields, as our competition commences games at noon on Sundays and we have 14 teams in the competition. Unfortunately our hockey club has been trying for many years to get a decent home ground in the Shire of Mundaring. We have been playing at Chidlow and Parkerville, sharing with football, which is definitely not compatible. At our home games, we commence games at 10:30.

Old Guildfordians Mundaring Hockey Club

Ground space is available however 2 of the 3 ‘ovals’ are water logged in winter which requires all 3 fields being marked on one oval, one of which has to be smaller than regulation. If additional fields could be marked and lighting for training was available the usage of the area would be significantly enhanced

Stirling City Rangers Hockey Club

We are marking more fields than we need for our club as Hockey WA uses the ground as a central venue and the schools also use the grounds.

Victoria Park Xavier Hockey Club Inc

Four full size fields would be sufficient

Wesley South Perth Hockey Club

4 grounds are for WASPs, 4 is enough, 2 grounds are for South Perth Women’s Hockey Club

Westside Wolves Hockey Club

We have access to Mt Claremont Oval and Scotch college which we use another 1 to 2 fields. This is ample.

Table 6 – Individual club requests

When asked if they share their playing surface with other sports or events, 27% of clubs have exclusive use of their fields. Of those that have to share, the breakdown is as follows:

Summer

Cricket 42

Diamond Sports 8

Athletics 6

Autumn

Volunteer Fire Brigade 1

Winter

AFL Football 13

Soccer 13

Rugby 23

Netball 1

Year Around

Festivals 1

Ad hoc sports 1

Table 7 – Sports sharing with hockey

It is noted that hockey played on grassed surfaces is almost exclusively a winter sport and therefore it is appropriate for the ground to be used in the summer by another sport. The summer sports mentioned in Table 7 generally present no problems for hockey.

When hockey is required to share a playing field in the winter season access and compatibility issues arise. Acknowledging that local authorities and other ground providers seek to maximise use of facilities, there are times when the wear patterns of other sports compromise the quality of the playing surface. Rugby and soccer are played on similar sized fields and wear patterns tend to coincide with high activity areas on the hockey field and therefore are considered least compatible. Ground damage from rugby is most problematic.

Football ovals are considerably larger and high wear areas tend to be outside of the hockey playing field even when two fields are marked per oval.



Clubs were asked how they secure access to their synthetic turf and associated facilities. Overall, access to synthetic turf is only applicable to 31 of the respondent clubs (40%).

Amaroo Mens Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Borden Ladies Hockey Club N/A 3 3 3 3 5

Borden Ladies Hockey Club N/A 3 3 3 3 5

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium 1 1 1 1 1 5

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club (Inc) 5 5 1 1 N/A 5

Calingiri Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Centaurs Mens Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Co-op Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association 3 3 3 3 3 3

Esperance Hockey N/A 5 5 2 5

Geraldton Hockey Association [Inc.] 1 5 N/A N/A 1 5

Gingin Hockey Club 3 3

Kondinin Womens Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Kulin Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass. 3 3 1 1 N/A 5

Merredin Women’s Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Mukinbudin Hockey Club N/A 5 5

Mustangs Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Peel Hockey Association 3 3 2 2 N/A 5

Tammin Hockey Club N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Tammin Women's Hockey Club 3 3

Warriors Womens Hockey Club 4 4 4 4 4 4

Wongan Ballidu Hockey Club 3 3

Country

Synthetic

Turf

Training

lights

Club

room

Change

rooms Parking Goals

Table 8– Securing access to synthetic turf and facilities

Of those country clubs who responded positively to this question (some country clubs did not respond to this question), most own their own Goals, most hire their turf and lights on an annual basis, most do not specify arrangements regarding club room, changerooms or parking. Of those metro clubs who responded, a larger proportion of clubs have access arrangements (and some own) their clubrooms and changerooms, and a higher proportion access the turf and lights by casual hire arrangements.

Exclusive Lease 1

Non Exclusive Licence 2

Annual Seasonal Hire 3

Casual Hire 4

Owned by Club 5

Curtin Trinity Pirates 4 4

Eastern Blades Hockey Club 3 3 4 4 N/A 5

Edith Cowan University Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A 3

Fremantle Hockey Club 3 3 N/A 4 4 4

Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey Club Inc 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Kalamunda Districts Hockey Club 4 4 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Mazenod Hockey Club 3 3 5 5 5 5

Melville City Hockey Club Inc 5 5 2 2 2 5

Modernians Hockey Club 4 5 1 1 1 5

Newman Knights Hockey Club 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

North Coast Raiders Hockey Club Inc. 4 4 N/A 4 N/A 4

Old Aquinians Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 3

Perth College 3 3 4 4 4 4

Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc, 1 1 2 2 N/A 1

Southern River Hockey Club 3 3 5 5 5 5

University of Western Australia Hockey Club Inc. 3 5 5 5 5 5

Victoria Park Xavier Hockey Club Inc 4 4 4 4 4 4

Wanneroo Districts Hockey Association Inc. N/A 4 1 1 1 5

Wesley South Perth Hockey Club 3 3

Whitfords Hockey Club 4 4 N/A N/A N/A 4

Willetton Hockey Club 3 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A

YMCC Hockey Club 4 4 4 4 N/A 4

Metro

Synthetic

Turf

Training

lights

Club

room

Change

rooms Parking Goals



They were also asked how they secured access to their grass playing fields and associated facilities. 57 of the clubs indicated how they secure access to their fields, 11 of the clubs have indicated that grass playing fields are not applicable to them.

Country

Natural

grass

playing

fields

Training

lights

Club

room

Change

rooms Parking Goals

Badgingarra Hockey Club N/A 3 3 3 N/A 5

Borden Ladies Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Borden Ladies Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium 3 5

Burracoppin Hockey Club 3 3 N/A 3 N/A N/A

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club (Inc) 3 N/A 1 1 N/A 5

Calingiri Hockey Club 5 5 5 5 5 5

Carnamah Womens Hockey Club 3 3 N/A 3 N/A 5

Coorow Hockey Club 3 5 3 3 N/A 5

Corrigin Hockey Club Inc. 4 4 4 4 N/A 5

Dumbleyung 3 3 3 3 3 5

Esperance Hockey 3 5 5 5 2 5

Geraldton Hockey Association [Inc.] 1 N/A N/A N/A 1 5

Gingin Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Gnowangerup Ladies Hockey Club N/A 5 N/A N/A N/A 5

Jerramungup Ladies Hockey Club 2 5 2 2 2 5

Kellerberrin N/A 4 N/A N/A N/A 5

Kondinin Womens Hockey Club N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5

Kulin Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass. 2 2 1 1 N/A 5

Merredin Women’s Hockey Club 2 2 2 2 2 2

Miling Hockey Club 3 N/A 3 N/A 3 5

Mingenew Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

Newdegate Hockey Club 5 N/A 5 5 5 5

Peel Hockey Association 3 N/A N/A 3 N/A 5

Robins Hockey Club Moora 3 5 5

Tammin Women's Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 N/A 5

Three Springs Hockey Club 3 5 5 5 5 5

Wagin Hockey Club 3 4 N/A N/A N/A 3

Waratahs Hockey Club 3 3 5 5 N/A 5

Warren Womens Hockey Assoc 3 5 3 3 N/A 5

Wongan Ballidu Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5 Table 9 - Securing access to grass playing fields and facilities

Both country and metro clubs show a propensity to own their goals, a much higher percentage of metro clubs have exclusive lease or non exclusive license to their premises, and a higher ownership of training lights.

Exclusive Lease 1

Non Exclusive Licence 2

Annual Seasonal Hire 3

Casual Hire 4

Owned by Club 5

Metro

Natural

grass

playing

fields

Training

lights

Club

room

Change

rooms Parking Goals

Canning Districts Hockey Club Inc. 3 3 3 3 3 N/A

Curtin Trinity Pirates 2 N/A 2 2 2 2

Eastern Blades Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 N/A 5

Edith Cowan University Hockey Club 2 5 2 2 2 5

Fremantle Hockey Club 1 5 1 1 2 5

Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey Club Inc 3 3 3 3 3 5

Kalamunda Districts Hockey Club 3 2 1 N/A 2 5

Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club 3 5 3 3 3 5

Mazenod Hockey Club 3 5 5 5 5 5

Melville City Hockey Club Inc 1 5 2 2 2 5

Modernians Hockey Club 1 5 1 1 1 5

Mundaring Women’s Hockey Club Inc. 3 3 3 3 3 5

Newman Knights Hockey Club 2 5 2 2 2 5

North Coast Raiders Hockey Club Inc. 1 1 2 2 N/A 5

Old Aquinians Hockey Club N/A N/A 1 1 N/A 1

Old Guildfordians Mundaring Hockey Club 2 2 2 2 N/A

Perth College 4 4 4 4 4 4

Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc, 3 3 2 2 N/A 3

Southern River Hockey Club 1 1 1 1 1 4

St Brigids College Hockey Club 5 N/A N/A N/A 5 5

Stirling City Rangers Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 3 5

University of Western Australia Hockey Club Inc.5 5 5 5 5 5

Victoria Park Xavier Hockey Club Inc 1 5 1 1 1 5

Wanneroo Districts Hockey Association Inc. 3 3 1 1 1 5

Wesley South Perth Hockey Club 3 5 1 1 2 5

Whitfords Hockey Club 3 3 3 3 N/A 5

Willetton Hockey Club 3 2 1 2 N/A 5

YMCC Hockey Club 3 5 1 3 N/A 5



In both the country and the metropolitan area, most clubs own their goals, some own their lights, few own their clubrooms and changerooms and a very few own grass or synthetic playing surfaces. Ownership in this sense acknowledges that the club either paid for or otherwise secured rights to the asset and will be permitted to use, control and perhaps even relocate the asset. It is noted, however, that infrastructure developed on any land becomes the property of the land owner regardless of who paid for the infrastructure. In terms of sporting facilities, clubs who pay for infrastructure usually do so, on the basis that they will be responsible for the provision, operation and maintenance of the asset. If anything was to alter the club’s right to quiet enjoyment of that asset by the land owner (most often a local council) then the council will usually make reparations to the club to relocate or replace the asset. This was the case recently with Rockingham. The term ‘own’ in this discussion is used rather loosely and indicates an exclusive right to access or control rather than a legal ownership with right to sell or dispose. Clubs were asked whether there were any threats to them being able to remain at their home ground for the foreseeable future. 16% of them felt their tenure was threatened. Of those that felt threatened, their comments are listed in the following table: Country Clubs

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium

Soccer is continuing to increase in the area. This is contributed to by Council not maintaining the surfacing wear and tear in the soccer areas.


There are plans within the shire to upgrade the recreation precinct but there will be consultation together with all sports and the Corrigin Shire.

Esperance Hockey Growth of local soccer needing more ground and cutting down hockey useable space

Kellerberrin Possible Shire Planning – wanting to move the hockey field to the Football Field. We are trying to keep the current venue

Wagin Hockey Club Grounds get badly damaged during our Woolorama festival in March and then with winter rains make our grounds unplayable at times. We then have to re-schedule games to be held in Narrogin

Metropolitan Clubs

Fremantle Hockey Club

The Fremantle Hockey Club mainly utilises turf facilities at the Perth Hockey Stadium for training through allocations prepared by Hockey WA each year. Games at synthetic turfs are fixtured by Hockey WA. Our grounds and clubrooms are leased to the clubs through the City of Fremantle and we are currently trying to renegotiate a long term lease with the City, in association with the Fremantle Districts Cricket Club. Training lights were purchased and erected by Fremantle Hockey Club alone. Our previous 10 year lease has expired and we are currently on a rolling lease with the City of Fremantle. Both hockey and cricket are keen to discuss new long term options but the City of Fremantle is currently considering its preferred model for ground use by sporting clubs within the City. We are actively working with the council to secure our facility.

Kalamunda Districts Hockey Club

Kalamunda Shire’s long-term Reserve Usage plan has recommended relocating the hockey club, although the Shire has since considered that the recommended location (Pioneer Park) can never be got to a suitable standard for hockey (barely suitable now for diamond sports). They would like to free up our fields for usage by soccer and rugby. As yet, no suitable alternative site has been identified, and we’ve made it clear we will not contribute to building facilities that would only bring us up to what we have now, and will not move to an inferior facility. In the interim, it is highly unlikely the Shire will spend money on or give support to improvements to our existing clubrooms.



There has been some talk of a synthetic surface at Forrestfield High School (now a sports specialist school), but I’ve been unable to get a response from the teacher who leads this push. Obviously we would be keen to be involved, although we do need to maintain three fields to support our existing teams, whatever happens.

Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club

Changes with the new Gilmore College - we have to move

Mazenod Hockey Club Dependent upon agreement with Kalamunda Hockey Club and Kalamunda shire


We actually do not wish to remain at Parkerville Oval, with the playing fields being absolutely terrible. We have an increased amount of injuries at our home games, compared to the games at the other two venues. This year we have had a break through with the Shire of Mundaring, as we have been allowed to use Harry Riseborough Oval in Mundaring for our home games (sharing with soccer), still training at Parkerville Oval. They have three fields, but one is unavailable this year due to maintenance. Fingers crossed we will be allowed to continue playing there.

Stirling City Rangers Hockey Club

The cost of marking fields for the use of others means that most of our money raised is used on line marking and not on goal maintenance. Our goals are becoming unserviceable and the cost of replacing them, or the wire on them, is going to be in excess of our means. Soccer is also trying to gain access to the grounds.

UWA Hockey Club Inc. Expanded usage required by Soccer with the amalgamation of Uni Soccer club with Nedlands City junior soccer club

Willetton Hockey Club City council sports rationalisation plan. Condition of grass playing surface. Shifting surface, uneven ground and soft underfoot. Leads to dangerous situations.

Table 10 – Threats to remaining at current location

Clubs were asked about their changeroom facilities.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Do you have

separate

changeroom

facilities for two

teams including

at least 2

showers each

with hot and

cold water

Do you have

separate

changeroom

facilities for

officials

including at

least 1 shower

with hot and

cold water

Does each

changeroom

have at least 1

toilet

Country Clubs

No

Yes

Chart 7 – Changeroom facilities

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Do you have

separate

changeroom

facilities for two

teams including

at least 2

showers each

with hot and

cold water

Do you have

separate

changeroom

facilities for

officials

including at

least 1 shower

with hot and

cold water

Does each

changeroom

have at least 1

toilet

Metro Clubs

No

Yes



A lower proportion of country clubs have full changeroom facilities than metro clubs, however, for the officials and toilets per changeroom, both country and metro clubs have similar percentages with and without. They were also asked to describe their public amenities.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

There is at least

1 male and 1

female public

toilet for

spectators

There is at least

1 disabled toilet

Public toilets are

clean and

hygienic

Country Clubs

No

Yes Chart 8 – Public Amenities

There is little difference between country and metro provision for public amenities. The care and hygiene of public amenities is perceived to be higher in country areas. Half of the clubs have 2 team changerooms with 2 showers in each. Only 18% have facilities for officials, most have public toilets that are clean and hygienic and approximately 60% have facilities for disabled access. Clubs were asked to describe what they had: Club Name

Please describe what you do have: Country Clubs

Amaroo Men’s Hockey Club

There are male toilet/shower facilities and female toilet/shower facilities. There are at least 2 showers per male and female facility. Access to the showers is through the toilet area. There are no separate change rooms. There is one toilet/shower area for males and one toilet/shower area for females. There is a separate disabled toilet facility.

Borden Ladies Hockey Club

We have Home and Visitors change rooms shared with other sports for both Male and Female. The toilets and showers are shared.

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club (Inc)

No specific changerooms for officials, although could be arranged as we have 3 changerooms

Carnamah Women’s Hockey Club

We don’t have change rooms at the hockey field, they are shared with the football netball & hockey club and owned by the shire and located at the football field

Centaurs Men’s Hockey Club


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

There is at least

1 male and 1

female public

toilet for

spectators

There is at least

1 disabled toilet

Public toilets

are clean and

hygienic

Metro Clubs

no

yes



Club Name Please describe what you do have:

Co-op Hockey Club


Coorow Hockey Club

One set of changerooms for all the ladies sporting teams to use. New changerooms are currently being built. They will have 6 showers and 4 toilets plus a large changing area


We have two sets of change rooms for the Corrigin Football Club, the Hockey Club (home & visitors) utilize the football visitors change rooms.


Toilets and showers are separate from the changeroom but in the same facility

Esperance Hockey Only have one male and one female toilet/changeroom/shower (2 of each) in clubrooms

Geraldton Hockey Association [Inc.]

Geraldton-Greenough City Council toilet block. Separate male & female toilets + 1 separate toilet for disabled.

Gingin Hockey Club 1 female changeroom, officials do not have a designated changeroom.

Jerramungup Ladies Hockey Club

As we only have 1 game each home game and our changerooms are owned by the Shire of Jerramungup who do not maintain the facilities, we now only have one set of changeroom with 3 showers in it as the others are out of action and possibly be going to be renovated to include a disabled toilet

Kellerberrin We do not have any toilets/showers at our home ground.


We have sorting pavilion that is multipurpose. It has female toilets with 2 showers and a change area that both teams have access too.

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass.

Ladies and Men’s changerooms at the Albany Leisure and Aquatic Centre

Miling Hockey Club We have one area for women that has 2 showers and 2 toilets but we do not have separate change room facilities for two teams.

Mukinbudin Hockey Club

We have shared changerooms/public toilets that are within a football/netball/Shire owned complex

Mustangs Hockey Club


Newdegate Hockey Club

We have 2 change rooms that have 4 showers and 4 toilets. Our umpires are locals so they share facilities with players.

Nyabing Women’s Hockey Club

3 showers, 1 toilet, 1 DA toilet 500m from field at main sport pavilion

Spectators use same toilets as us

Change rooms very run down, but always clean

Peel Hockey Association

When teams play on grass fields, they have access to the synthetic turf facilities, change rooms on grass grounds are only used by the Assoc. 1 day for junior carnival

Tammin Hockey Club

1 changeroom with 1 toilet

Three Springs Hockey Club

We have a shed as a club room with no showers. Showers are over at the footy pavilion

Wagin Hockey Club Public toilets are available to players and spectators only, no showers, and not always clean.

Waratahs Hockey Club

We have a building with a kitchen, store room, common use room, male and female toilets and one shower.

Warren Women’s Hockey Assoc

Same toilets and changerooms are used by all



Club Name Please describe what you do have:

Metropolitan Clubs

Eastern Blades Hockey Club

The change rooms are shared with the Football Club, so we are often left with only one changeroom to be shared by men and women and visiting teams


One set of showers only with 3 shower cubicles and several toilets.

One main change room and a couple of other smaller rooms which could be used if needed


We do not have a specific disabled toilet; we do have ramp access; however a wheelchair bound person would not be able to use the toilets at our club without assistance.

No specific separate change room facilities for female officials. Separate change room facilities exist for male officials but the showers are common with male players. Separate change room and shower facilities exist for male and female players.

John XX111 Association Hockey Club

We utilize the school change rooms – 1 male and 1 female with toilets and showers


We have male and female changeroom/showers, which can realistically only deal with 3 people each at a time. Generally not an issue for most grass hockey fixtures (few clubs we go to that have better facilities actually have them open on a weekend). No changeroom for officials, but again, that is not an issue for grass hockey fixtures.

Kwinana Tigers Hockey Club

with the new designing of the club rooms we will have 5 officials rooms

Modernians Hockey Club

Several changing rooms with communal male and female toilets/showers


There are only two change rooms, but we do not have any officials. Our umpires are our players. Last season we had leaking toilets. The Shire put it down to an overuse, due to football being at the grounds in the morning. The sewerage system cannot cope with the users.

North Coast Raiders Hockey Club Inc.

Separate change rooms for both genders but common showers and toilets for each team. No separate facilities for officials

Old Aquinians Hockey Club

2 change rooms, only one has toilets


Restricted access for disabled at either of the changerooms or public toilet

Southern River Hockey Club

We have an umpire’s room with no hot/cold shower facilities


Clubrooms and changerooms are being upgraded this year by Town of Vic Park to meet clubs requirements including disability access, facilities, etc


2 changerooms with showers

1 set of toilets in clubhouse

1 set of public toilets separate to clubhouse

Westside Wolves Hockey Club

Have 2 changerooms and 6 showers in total. Where toilet access is disabled access is available but restricted. Toilets are cleaned regularly but wouldn’t consider them that hygienic as whole area needs an upgrade.

Whitford Hockey Club

We have one unisex facility shared with the football umpires with three showers and three toilets, with separate changing areas for men and women

Willetton Hockey Club

Officials are voluntary and don't require separate changerooms. We have 1 women’s and 1 men’s change room. We have so far not had to accommodate a wheel chaired or incapacitated spectator. That day will come.

Table 11 – Amenity provision of clubs



The following clubs indicated that they have all of the amenities listed in charts above: Country Clubs

Burracoppin Hockey Club

Dumbleyung

Kondinin Women’s Hockey Club

Kulin Hockey Club

Merredin Women’s Hockey Club

Wongan Ballidu Hockey Club

Metropolitan Clubs


Newman Knights Hockey Club


Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc,

Wanneroo Districts Hockey Association Inc.

Table 12 – Clubs with all amenities

By contrast, the following clubs have few of the amenities listed; Kellerberrin has none. Country Clubs

Carnamah Women’s Hockey Club


Kellerberrin Hockey Club

Robins Hockey Club

Wagin Hockey Club

Metropolitan Clubs


Mazenod Hockey Club

Table 13 – Clubs with few of the amenities



Clubs were asked to list who is responsible for maintaining their facilities.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Change

rooms and

toilets

Playing

fields - grass

mowing

Playing

fields -

ground

marking

Goals Training

Lights

Club rooms

Country Clubs

Club Volunteers

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Change

rooms and

toilets

Playing

fields - grass

mowing

Playing

fields -

ground

marking

Goals Training

Lights

Club rooms

Metro Clubs

Club Volunteers

Contract Cleaner / Contractor

Local Council

Chart 9 – Who maintains the facilities

In most cases local councils maintain the playing surface, while clubs handle the ground marking and goals maintenance. Maintenance of the lights, changerooms and club rooms is generally shared by council and clubs although there are examples of sole responsibility at either end of the spectrum, and a bit more contracting going on in the metro area. It is apparent overall that the clubs are dependent on local council support for their ongoing operations and viability. Clubs were then asked to rate the various aspects of their home grounds, and the chart on the next page illustrates that for the most part, with the exception of spectator seating provision, clubs are fairly satisfied with the standard of their facilities.



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Country Clubs

N/A

Poor

Good

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Metro Clubs

N/A

Poor

Good

Chart 10 – Rating of facilities

The biggest problem areas are spectator seating provision (as previously mentioned), quality of the playing surface, lack of (or poor) training lights, and less than adequate changeroom facilities. Overall, clubs seems satisfied with the above variables, however, metro clubs seem a little less satisfied with the quality of provision than country clubs. Clubs were asked if they trained at other venues aside from their home ground. 6 responded in the affirmative and 5 listed their alternative venues. Co-op Hockey Club Collie Senior High School Oval

Curtin Trinity Pirates Hockey Club Barblett Oval Curtin Uni

Mazenod Hockey Club Mazenod College

Mercedes College Hockey Club Yokine Reserve

St Brigids College Hockey Club St Brigids College



Clubs were asked if they trained at synthetic turf. Just under half (44%) of the clubs have access to synthetic turf for their training. Chart 11 – Access to synthetic turf for training, all clubs

However, when assessed separately, it is apparent that less than a third of country clubs have access to synthetic turf, whereas the exact opposite is the case for metro clubs.

30%

70%

Country Clubs

Yes

No

Chart 12 – Access to synthetic turf for training, country and metro

Clubs were asked to list the synthetic turfs at which they trained and the off-season and on-season hours per week they use the venues.

Club Name Synthetic Turf Off On

Country Clubs Per

week

Per

week

Amaroo Men’s Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds 1

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium Wet 2 8 12

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club (Inc) Busselton Hockey Stadium 2 11

Centaurs Men’s Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds. On - 2 2

Co-op Hockey Club Collie Hockey Grounds, On - 1 1

Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association 20

Geraldton Hockey Association [Inc.] Std 1 (sand)

Std 2 (wet)

1.5

11.5

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass. LGSHA – Albany 2 12

Peel Hockey Association Mandurah Hockey Stadium 5

Wagin Hockey Club Narrogin 0 0.5

Warriors Women’s Hockey Club Narrogin Leisure Centre 0 1

44%

49%Yes

No

71%

29%

Metro Clubs

Yes

No



Club Name Synthetic Turf Off On

Metropolitan Clubs Hrs per

week

Hrs per

week

Canning Districts Hockey Club Inc. Melville Turf

Curtin Trinity Pirates Perth Hockey Stadium varies 3

Eastern Blades Hockey Club PHS No 1 and 2 2

Edith Cowan University Hockey Club Hale Aquaturf 1

Fremantle Hockey Club Perth Hockey Stadium

Melville Turf

1

1

2

1

Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey Club Inc

Perth Hockey Stadium

UWA Turf

Shenton Park

Joondalup Turf

0.5

2

1

2

1

John XX111 Association Hockey Club Hale Turf 3

Kalamunda Districts Hockey Club Melville Turf 1

Melville City Hockey Club Inc Duracraft Stadium (Melville) 7.5

Modernians Hockey Club UWA Superturf

Melville Turf

1 1

1



Hale Hockey Turf

Melville Hockey Turf

2

3

2

Old Aquinians Hockey Club Perth Hockey Stadium

Shenton

1

1

1



Shenton Turf

2

2

5

1

Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc, Last season Mandurah, this Lark Hill

Sportsplex Turf

4 12

Southern River Hockey Club Duracraft Stadium, On - 1

University of Western Australia Hockey Club Inc.

UWA Superturf

PHS Turf # 1

8

24

8



Melville

UWA Astroturf

2

2

8

1

1

Wesley South Perth Hockey Club Perth Hockey Stadium 0 6

Westside Wolves Hockey Club Shenton Turf – Lemnos

UWA Superturf

0 8

2.5

Whitford Hockey Club Arena Joondalup 3 6

Willetton Hockey Club Melville


0

0

3

2

YMCC Hockey Club Shenton Turf 0 5-6

Table 14 – Current synthetic turf usage

Clubs were asked how much synthetic turf time they would use (on-season and off-season) for training if access were unlimited. Of those 42 clubs that currently do NOT train on synthetic turf, three indicated they would like some synthetic turf time (Esperance, Kellerberrin and Merredin Women’s Hockey Clubs). The following table details these responses (hours per week):



Country Clubs Teams

On

Hrs per

week

Off

Hrs per

week

Increase over

current usage

Amaroo Men’s Hockey Club Amaroo Men’s 1 0

Bunbury & Districts Hockey Stadium

Off - 8, On – 24 8 24 +10

Busselton Hockey Stadium Club (Inc)

SWL

AW2

U16

U13

U11

U8

5

5

2

1

1

0.5

+1.5

Centaurs Men’s Hockey Club Centaurs Combined, Off - 2, On - 4 2 4 +4

Co-op Hockey Club

Co-op Men’s (all grades)

A Men’s, On - 1

B Men’s, On - 1

Intermediate Boys, On – 1

1 1

1

1

1

+3


Across 5 clubs 30 +10

Esperance Hockey Association

Juniors (7 teams)

Under 17s (7 teams)

Ladies (8 teams)

Men (7 teams)

10

10

12

10

+42


All teams (inc. A grade) 30 +17

Kellerberrin Hockey Club

Men’s

Women’s

Juniors

1

1

4

4

2

+12

Lower Great Southern Hockey Ass.

LGSHA – Albany 2 27 +15

Merredin Women’s Hockey Club

Merredin Women’s Hockey Team

Merredin Junior Hockey

Merredin Minkey Hockey

2

1

1

4

2

1

+11

Mustangs Hockey Club

A Men’s

B Men’s

A Women’s

B Women’s

Intermediates Boys/Girls

1

1

1

1

1

+3

Peel Hockey Association

Willow Bridge cup

U17A Boys

U17A Girls

Access is not a major factor, cost

of using the turf is a major

consideration

3

1

1

0

Wagin Hockey Club Men’s and Ladies A & B Grade 1 +0.5

Warriors Women’s Hockey Club Warriors Women’s A and B grade 1.5 +0.5



Metropolitan Clubs Teams

On

Hrs per

week

Off

Hrs per

week

Increase over

current usage

Canning Districts Hockey Club Inc.

All teams 2-3 0

Curtin Trinity Pirates

Premier Men and Women (4

teams)

State League turf based teams (5

teams)

Junior A grade (4 teams)

Varies 8

5

4

+14

Eastern Blades Hockey Club

Willow Bridge, Prom 2 and Prov 3

(Men)

Willow Bridge + Women’s Prov 2

Black

Juniors

6

4

8

+16


Men’s Promotion 2

Women's Promotion 2 /

Provisional 3

3

3

+5


Wizard Cup (Division 1 Men)

Willow Bridge (Promotion 1

Women)

Other Men Turf teams (x 4)

Other Women Turf teams (x 5)

Juniors

1

1

1

1

1

3

3

4

4

4

+18

Harlequin Wanneroo Hockey Club Inc

Men’s 1 and 2

Women 1 and 2

Junior boys

2

2

2

2

1

+1.5


Men’s Promo 2

Women’s Promo 2

4

4

+5


Willow Bridge Cup

Provisional 1

Under 17s / 15s

2

2

1

+4


Juniors 13A,15 A,17A boys and

girls

Senior Men

Senior Women

2.5

2.5

2.5

-0.5

Modernians Hockey Club

Willow Bridge Cup

Men’s Provisional 1

Men’s Provisional 3

Women’s Promotion 2

Women’s Provisional 1

1

1

1

1

1

4

4

2

2

2

+16

Newman Knights Hockey Club

Senior Men

Senior Women

Juniors Under 17

Juniors Under 15

Juniors Under 13

Juniors Under 11

1

1

1

1

3

3

3

3

1.5

1.5

+16



Metropolitan Clubs Teams

On

Hrs per

week

Off

Hrs per

week

Increase over

current usage


Wizard Cup

Wizard League

Premier 2 - Men and Women

Premier Alliance – Men and

Women

Provisional Two

Under 17 – Girls and Boys

2

2

4

4

2

3

3

6

6

3

4

+32

Old Aquinians Hockey Club

WC

2A

3A

4

4

2

4

4

2

+17


Premier 2

Willow Bridge Cup

Provisional 1 - Men’s

Provisional 2/3 Women

Juniors

2

2

1

1

3

3

1

1

+7

Rockingham District Hockey Club Inc

8 18 +10

Southern River Hockey Club Men’s Provisional 2 2 +1

UWA Hockey Club Inc. Juniors 40 +2


Wizard Cup (Men

Men’s 2 & 3’s

Willow Bridge League (Ladies)

Other Ladies teams

Juniors

Vets

3

3

3

2

4

2

+3


Wizard Cup

State 2A

State 3A

Provisional 3

Junior 17s

Junior 15s

Junior 13s

1

1

2

2

2

1

1

1

1

+6

Willetton Hockey Club

Wizard Cup Women & Prem 2

women

Willow Bridge Men & 2s men

Provisional 4 & 5 women

Provisional 3 Men

0 6 +1

YMCC Hockey Club

Top Men / Women

Middle grades

Juniors

6

1-2hrs ea

1-2hrs ea

+5-10

Table 15 – Desired synthetic time if unlimited

Note that the last column on the right is the difference between the total off season and on season hours currently used, and the total of the desired off and on season hours.



In some cases the club already has as much time as it would like (i.e. Peel Hockey), in other cases they would like a lot more time (i.e. Rockingham, Willetton). Overall it is evident that clubs would like more access to synthetic turf. Attached, find the updated contact details for each of the respondent clubs: Final Club Survey Results Analysis 04.08.08.xlsx. 5.2 LGA Surveys

A survey was sent to all LGAs in the metro and larger country centres regarding their provision of playing facilities for hockey. 31 LGAs responded. They were asked whether or not there was a synthetic turf in their area. 19% said Yes. Country

Bruce Rock No

Busselton Yes

Capel No

Collie Yes

Dardanup No

Denmark No

Donnybrook No

Gingin No

Harvey No

Kalgoorlie-Boulder Yes

Katanning No

Plantagenet No

Serpentine Jarrahdale No

Metro

Bayswater No

Belmont No

Cockburn No

Cottesloe No

East Fremantle No

Gosnells No

Kalamunda No

Kwinana No

Mandurah Yes

Melville Yes

Peppermint Grove No

Rockingham Yes

Stirling No

Subiaco No

Swan No

Swan No

Victoria Park No

Vincent No

Wanneroo No Table 16 – Respondent LGAs with synthetic turf

Synthetic turf facilities have been installed in Western Australia since 1984 and there have now been numerous surface replacements and upgrades. The earliest turfs to be installed were sand filled, notably at PHS and UWA. Since then, the move has been to wet turfs with some focus now on hybrid facilities. It is noted that PHS turf 2 is a nylon surface. The table on the following page indicates construction and resurfacing schedules:



Country 19

79

19

80

19

81

19

82

19

83

19

84

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

20

11

20

12

20

13

20

14

20

15

20

16

20

17

20

18

20

19

20

20

Albany E 12 years R1 10 years? R2

Bunbury1 E (sand) R1 (wet) 10 years R2Bunbury2 E R1 (wet) 10 years R2Busselton E 12 years R1 10 years? R2?Collie E 11years R1 10 years?

Geraldton1 E (sand) 20 years R1 10 years?

Geraldton2 E (wet) 10 years R1 10 years?

Kalgoorlie E (sand) 13 years R1 (wet) 10 years?

Mandurah E (wet) 8 years R1 (wet) 9 years? R2?

Narrogin E (wet) 11 years R1

Metropolitan

Hale E (sand) 10 years R1 (Wet) 8 years R2 (Wet) 5 years R3?Joondalup E (hybrid) 13 years R1

Melville E 10 years?

PHS 1 E (nylon) 10 years R1 (wet) 7 years R2 (wet) 4 yrs R3 (wet) 6 years R4 5 years R5PHS 2 E (sand) 12 years R1 (wet) 9 years R2 56 years R3 7 years?

Rockingham E 10 years?

Shenton E 8 years? R1 10 years?

UWA E (sand) 10 years R1 (wet) 7 years R2 (wet)

legend E R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 5th surface rep

R2?R2?R2?

R2?

4th surface replacementYear of establishment 1st surface replacement 2nd surface replacement 3rd surface replacement

R1?

R1?

R2?

Table 17 – Date of installation and resurfacing of turfs

The turf’s construction costs are outlined on the next page (note that we only have Kalgoorlie Boulder’s resurfacing cost, original construction will most likely be much higher) and that we are not able to determine the extent of the cost of clubrooms, car parking and other amenities included in the quoted costs

The cost share arrangements for the construction of turf facilities on local government land is shown below. There is no particular pattern in these arrangements other than that clubs are generally making a significant contribution to the capital cost (with the exception of Rockingham).



.

Cost Share for Capital Works

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Busse

lton

Turf

Collie T

urf

Kalgo

orlie

Boulder

Tur

f

Man

durah

Tur

f

Melvil

le T

urf

Rockingh

am T

urf

Other

State

Club

Council

Chart 13 – Cost share for construction

Chart 14 – Cost share for maintenance

Collie is the only Council that assists with the ongoing annual maintenance costs of its turf. Further to ongoing maintenance it should be noted that the cost of surface replacement has been met 100% by the clubs.

Cost Share for Maintenance

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Bus

selto

n Tu

rf

Collie

Tur

f

Kalgo

orlie

Bou

lder T

urf

Man

durah

Turf

Melville

Turf

Roc

king

ham T

urf

State

Club

Council



Tenure arrangements and turf managers are outlined below.

LGA Turf Manager

Busselton Turf Busselton Hockey Stadium Committee

Collie Turf Coalfields Hockey Council Inc.

Kalgoorlie Boulder Turf Eastern Goldfields Hockey Assoc.

Mandurah Turf MHS Peel Hockey

Melville Turf Melville City Hockey Club

Rockingham Turf City of Rockingham & Rockingham District Hockey Club

LGA

Tenure

Lease License Seasonal hire Casual hire

Busselton Turf X

Collie Turf X

Kalgoorlie Boulder Turf X

Mandurah Turf X

Melville Turf X

Rockingham Turf X

Table 18 – Turf management and tenure

LGAs were asked if they had grass playing fields and amenities allocated for hockey in their municipality. 32% said No.

Table 19 – LGAs with grass fields and amenities for hockey

Metro

Bayswater No

Belmont No

Cockburn Yes

Cottesloe No

East Fremantle No

Gosnells Yes

Kalamunda Yes

Kwinana Yes

Mandurah Yes

Melville Yes

Peppermint Grove No

Rockingham Yes

Stirling Yes

Subiaco No

Swan Yes

Victoria Park Yes

Vincent Yes

Wanneroo Yes

Country

Bruce Rock Yes

Busselton Yes

Capel Yes

Collie Yes

Dardanup No

Denmark No

Donnybrook Yes

Gingin Yes

Harvey Yes

Kalgoorlie-Boulder No

Katanning Yes

Plantagenet Yes

Serpentine Jarrahdale No

Of those that said No, only Kalgoorlie-Boulder has alternative provision (synthetic turf), although it is understood that the association is currently establishing a grassed field. The following table shows details of the grass playing field provision as provided by the survey returns.

LGA Reserve Name

Area

Allocated

to Hockey

(ha)

No.

Grass

Playing

fields

Country locations

Bruce Rock Bruce Rock Recreation Centre 4.2 2

Busselton Sir Stewart Bovell Park 7 9

Capel Boyanup Recreation Ground 0.5 1

Collie Collie Hockey Stadium

Donnybrook Egan Park 2.52 1

Gingin Gingin Recreation Centre 1

Harvey Harvey Rec Ground - Ivan Manning Hockey Ground 1.5 1

Katanning Katanning Leisure Centre 2

Plantagenet Sounness Park 0.5 1

Metropolitan locations

Gosnells Harmony Oval 1 1

Gosnells Sutherland Park Reserve D 4.05 2

Kalamunda Hartfield Hockey 2.5 3

Kwinana Orelia Oval 2

Mandurah Peelwood Reserve 2-5

Melville Morris Buzacott Reserve 1.74 3

Rockingham Lark Hill Sportsplex 3 4

Stirling Yokine Reserve 20

Swan Lilac Hill Central 3

Altone Park 3

Victoria Park Fletcher Park 1.5 4

Vincent Charles Veryard Reserve 3 4

Wanneroo Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex 5.5 6

Table 20 – Grass hockey provision



In addition to the survey returns other information gathered in the course of the study shows the following grass field allocations:

Metropolitan locations

Armadale Bob Blackburn Reserve 2

Cambridge Alderbury Reserve 6

Canning Burrendah Reserve 3

Ferndale Oval 5

Claremont

Creswell Park 2

John XX111 College Fields 2

Mt Claremont Oval 2

Fremantle Stevens Reserve 4

Joondalup Iluka Reserve 4

McDonald Reserve 3

Melville Trevor Gribble Reserve 2

Nedlands McGillivray Sports Grounds 5

Melvista Oval 2

Tregonning Field 2

Rockingham Stan Twight Reserve (these fields will be lost when

Lark Hill Sportsplex is commissioned)

4

South Perth

Aquinas Playing Fields 2

Richardson Park 4

Trinity Manning Playing Fields 3

Stirling

Breckler Park 5

Charles Riley Reserve 3

Hale Playing Fields 3

Newman College 3

Victoria Park Curtin Uni Barblett Oval 6

Country locations

Bunbury 4

Table 21 - Other grass hockey provision

From the information we have received, we know that 15 of the reserves have at least 1 training field lit for night practice, but only 4 have a competition field lit for night games. One third of reserves do not have any lighting at all.



0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Bruce Rock Recreation Centre

Sir Stewart Bovell Park

Boyanup Recreation Ground

Collie Hockey Stadium

Egan Park

Gingin Recreation Centre

Harvey Rec Ground - Ivan Manning Hockey Ground

Katanning Leisure Centre

Sounness Park

Lark Hill Sportsplex

Harmony Oval

Sutherland Park Reserve D

Hartfield Hockey

Orelia Oval

Peelwood Reserve

Morris Buzzacott Reserve

Yokine Reserve

Lilac Hill Central

Altone Park

Fletcher Park

Charles Veryard Reserve

Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex Number

competition fields with lighting

Number training fields with lighting

Chart 15 – Reserves with lighting



Approximately 77% of reserves have Kikuyu grass covering (18% have Couch) and 82% have in-ground reticulation (14% have above-ground).

LGA Grass Species Reticulation type

Country Locations

Boyanup Recreation Ground Kikuyu In-ground

Bruce Rock Recreation Centre Kikuyu In-ground

Collie Hockey Stadium Couch Above ground

Egan Park Kikuyu In-ground

Gingin Recreation Centre Kikuyu In-ground

Harvey Rec Ground - Ivan Manning Hockey Ground Kikuyu Above ground

Katanning Leisure Centre Kikuyu In-ground

Peelwood Reserve In-ground

Sir Stewart Bovell Park Kikuyu In-ground

Sounness Park Kikuyu Above ground

Metropolitan Locations

Altone Park Kikuyu In-ground

Charles Veryard Reserve Kikuyu In-ground

Fletcher Park Couch In-ground

Harmony Oval Couch In-ground

Hartfield Hockey Kikuyu

Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex Kikuyu In-ground

Lark Hill Sportsplex Couch In-ground

Lilac Hill Central Kikuyu In-ground

Morris Buzacott Reserve Kikuyu In-ground

Orelia Oval Kikuyu In-ground

Peelwood Reserve In-ground

Sutherland Park Reserve D Kikuyu In-ground

Yokine Reserve Kikuyu In-ground

Table 22 – Grass and reticulation

The amenities provision at those reserves is shown in table 23. A ‘traffic light’ style colour code is used to highlight poor (deep orange) to good (green) provision for easy identification:

Reserve Name

No.

Male

Change

rooms

No.

Toilets

in

Male

Change

rooms

No.

Showers

in Male

Change

rooms

No.

Public

Male

Toilets

No.

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Toilets in

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Showers

in

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Female

Public

Toilets

Country Locations

Boyanup Recreation Ground 1 1

Bruce Rock Recreation Centre 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+ 4+

Collie Hockey Stadium 1 2 4+ 2 1 2 4+ 3

Egan Park 1 2 3 1 1 2 4+ 2

Gingin Recreation Centre 2 2 4+ 2 1 3 2 3

Harvey Rec Ground - Ivan

Manning Hockey Ground

Katanning Leisure Centre 1 3 2 1 3 2

Sounness Park 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2

Peelwood Reserve 2 2 4+ 1 2 2 4+ 1

Sir Stewart Bovell Park 2 2 4+ 1 1 2 4+ 1



Reserve Name

No.

Male

Change

rooms

No.

Toilets

in

Male

Change

rooms

No.

Showers

in Male

Change

rooms

No.

Public

Male

Toilets

No.

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Toilets in

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Showers

in

Female

Change

rooms

No.

Female

Public

Toilets


Altone Park 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3

Charles Veryard Reserve 3 2 4+ 2 3 2 2 2

Fletcher Park 2 4+ 4+ 2 2 4+ 4+ 2

Harmony Oval 1 2 2 1 2 2

Hartfield Hockey 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 2

Kingsway Regional Sporting

Complex 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2

Lark Hill Sportsplex 2 2 4+ 1 2 3 4+ 4+

Lilac Hill Central 4+ 2 2 3 All amenities are unisex

Morris Buzacott Reserve 1 3 4+ 1 1 3 4+ 1

Orelia Oval 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2

Sutherland Park Reserve D 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 2

Yokine Reserve 2 2 3 3 2 2 3 3

Table 23 – Amenities provision at reserves

Lilac Hill seems to have no female amenities; Boyanup has only public toilets and no change facilities. Most reserves have both male and female changerooms, most have 2 or more toilets and 2 or more showers in each changeroom. We asked LGAs to provide measurements of other facilities as listed below:

Reserve Name

Um

pir

es

Ro

om

Fir

st A

id R

oo

m

Kio

sk /

Ca

nte

en

Clu

b r

oo

m

Sto

re r

oo

ms

(co

mb

ine

d a

rea

)

Co

ve

red

Sp

ect

ato

r A

rea

If y

ou

ha

ve

sp

ect

ato

r

sea

tin

g,

ho

w m

an

y

sea

ts a

re t

he

re?

Area in m2

Country Locations

Boyanup Recreation Ground 8

Bruce Rock Recreation Centre 12.4 12.4 88.3 381 235.5 750

Collie Hockey Stadium 17.34 17.34 20.14 147 147 140 80

Egan Park 150 40 10

Gingin Recreation Centre yes yes yes Yes

Sir Stewart Bovell Park 20 10 20 360 20 65 50

Sounness Park 60 40



Reserve Name

Um

pir

es

Ro

om

Fir

st A

id R

oo

m

Kio

sk /

Ca

nte

en

Clu

b r

oo

m

Sto

re r

oo

ms

(co

mb

ine

d a

rea

)

Co

ve

red

Sp

ect

ato

r A

rea

If y

ou

ha

ve

sp

ect

ato

r

sea

tin

g,

ho

w m

an

y

sea

ts a

re t

he

re?

Area in m2


Altone Park 18 149

Charles Veryard Reserve 12 24 70 12 50

Fletcher Park 10 10.5 36 136 55

Harmony Oval 10 50 150 25

Hartfield Hockey 20

Kingsway Sporting Complex 10 56.5 24

Lark Hill Sportsplex 24 45 98 340 245 180 110

Lilac Hill Central 30 240 125 62.5

Morris Buzacott Reserve 12 14 103 27 250

Orelia Oval 16.5 60 22 45 48

Peelwood Reserve 10 20 10

Sutherland Park Reserve D meeting

room

meeting

room 32 237 20 155

Yokine Reserve yes yes yes, 3x

Table 24 – Other amenities

65% of reserves have facilities provided. Of these, Boyanup and Hartfield have almost nothing, however, most have kiosk/canteen, clubroom and some storage facility. 32% of reserves have a designated umpire’s room, of those the average size is approximately 13m2. 19% have a first aid room, average size approximately 15m2. 55% of reserves have Kiosk / Canteen (ave 30m2), Clubroom (ave 155m2) and Storage Space (ave 63m2); 39% have a Covered Spectator Area (ave 145m2) and 16% provide some spectator seating.



Chart 16 – Share of responsibilities

Councils mainly take care of watering, mowing and top dressing of playing surfaces; clubs mainly take care of line marking, and goals maintenance / storage. Lighting provision and maintenance is shared between clubs and councils, with councils taking on the larger share.

Reserve Name What is Council's budget for maintaining this

reserve in 2007-2008?

Country Facilities

Boyanup Recreation Ground $7,000.00

Bruce Rock Recreation Centre $43,000

Egan Park $50,000 (multi use - cricket, netball, hockey, store)

Katanning Leisure Centre $40,000 (2/3 of reserve, includes cricket)

Sir Stewart Bovell Park $45,000

Sounness Park $22,715

Metropolitan Facilities

Charles Veryard Reserve $73,000

Fletcher Park $22,995.00

Harmony Oval $32,000

Hartfield Hockey $26,400

Lark Hill Sportsplex 100,000

Lilac Hill Central $180,000

Morris Buzacott Reserve $40,020

Orelia Oval $40,000

Table 25 - Maintenance Budget for 2007-2008

The following LGAs have additional area that they could potentially allocate to hockey if there was demand:

LGA

Are you able

to allocate

additional

areas for

hockey?

Area

available

for

hockey

(Ha)

No.

grass

fields

Suitable for

synthetic

turf

installation?

(Yes/No)

Are there

change room

and public

toilet

facilities?

(Yes/No)

Is there a

club house

that hockey

could use?

(Yes/No)

Country LGAs

Bruce Rock Yes 4.2 2 Yes Yes Yes

Capel Yes 1 2 Yes

Collie Yes 2 Yes Yes Yes

Donnybrook Yes 1 Yes Yes Yes

Kalgoorlie-Boulder Yes 3 No Yes Yes

Katanning Yes

Plantagenet Yes 0.5 1 No Yes Yes

Metropolitan LGAs

Bayswater Yes 2 Yes Yes Yes

Belmont Yes 2-3 Yes Yes Yes

Cockburn Yes 2 2 Yes No No

Kwinana Yes 1.3 2 No Yes Not yet

Mandurah Yes 1 1 Yes Yes Yes

Melville Yes 0.68 3 Yes Yes

Rockingham Potentially 4-8 2-4 yes Yes Yes

Stirling Yes 6 No Yes Yes

Table 26 – Potential new hockey allocation

5.3 School Surveys

Responses regarding facilities within the school system, both public and private were supplied by DSR via another Consulting firm conducting a similar review. The following data has been supplied from a study conducted some 18 months previous. It should be noted that there is likely to have been some minor variation in the actual facilities on ground since the data was collected, however this does not materially affect the assessment.

School Principal's Summary

Prim

ary

S

chools

Hig

h

Schools

Cath

olic

S

chools

Indepen-

dent

Schools

Total %

Number of schools that responded 54 18 13 12 97 100%

Number who currently share ovals with community clubs

12 6 2 0 20 21%

Number who would consider sharing 28 11 4 2 45 46%

Number of schools with no ovals 10 3 4 7 24 25%

Number of schools with junior ovals 28 13 4 4 49 51%

Number of schools with senior ovals 14 1 4 0 19 20%

Number of schools with senior & junior ovals 2 1 1 1 5 5%

Number of schools with changeroom facilities near oval

5 10 3 4 22 23%

Number of schools who would consider community club access to changerooms

18 12 3 1 34 35%

Table 27 – School summary

Barriers to Sharing Responses %

No Perceived Barriers 20 20.6%

Lack of Facilities 34 35.1%

Vandalism/Security issues 17 17.5%

Public Liability 3 3.1%

Other 11 11.3%

No response 12 12.4%

97 100.0%

Table 28 – Barriers to sharing

It would appear the school grounds (excluding Hale Aquaturf and grassed fields and Aquinas College fields) are not used for any Hockey WA competition fixtures. They are used only for the schools’ developmental programs and some school based club training and interschool matches. Even interschool matches tend to be scheduled at the nearest synthetic turf venue thereby diminishing the function of the school grassed playing field as anything more than a teaching and developmental facility. No specific recommendations are made in this report regarding the provision of grassed playing fields for hockey in schools other than to encourage the Department of Education and Training to develop and maintain the school playing fields in a condition suitable for the teaching of hockey and the conduct of recruitment programs such as Hook in2 Hockey. 6 Demographic Analysis

The following maps provide a summary of demographic data for hockey players in Western Australia. This first pair of maps shows areas of concentration of hockey players. In the south west you can see clear concentrations around Albany, Busselton, Bunbury and Narrogin, importantly where synthetic turf facilities exist. In the metro area the concentrations appear to be less facility specific with high concentrations most evident around Gosnells/Southern River, the Victoria Park/Bentley area, the western suburbs and a line running from Mt Lawley through Stirling and up toward Joondalup. The next highest concentrations appear in Midland and the hills area, Joondalup itself, Melville and Fremantle and then southward to Rockingham and Mandurah. These maps show a high correlation between club location and membership numbers. This is particularly evident in the great southern with reasonable connection in the metro area.



Figure 5 – Hockey Club Membership



This pair of maps was prepared to attempt to demonstrate a positive correlation between higher income and higher hockey participation. The evidence does not support this theory with lower income nodes around high participation nodes in Mandurah, Rockingham, Albany and Narrogin. The very high concentration of clubs in the western suburbs responds reasonably well to the higher income levels on the coastal strip, however, this is not in itself conclusive.

Figure 6 – Median Weekly Income



Similarly a relationship between hockey playing and higher levels of education was explored. Whilst the country areas in the great southern offer no perceptible correlation, the metro area suggests a reasonably strong link between areas of high tertiary qualifications in the population and high hockey participation. This may suggest that concentrating hockey facilities in areas of high educational qualifications may assist in capturing high membership levels. Additionally there also appears to be a strong positive correlation between good quality facilities (mainly synthetic turf installations) and higher hockey membership and participation levels.

Figure 7 – Educational spread



These maps look at participation rates as a percentage of population. The highest percentage occurs in the western suburbs and generally across the inner suburban areas. When viewed against the location of clubs there is a strong connection between club locations and high participation rates. Clubs lying in outer metro and country areas may need to be supported more by the provision of good quality facilities to lift participation rates.

Figure 8 – Participation Rates



A range of other indicators (e.g. Australian born vs migrant) were also investigated but like the theory between income and participation rates proved inconclusive as a predictor of hockey involvement. The map on the next page shows the spread of metropolitan clubs and the schools involved in hockey programs. There is a relatively even spread of schools around clubs and only a few holes that suggest under-servicing:

� Kwinana club has no school programs operating in its immediate area to support it.

� The northern spread beyond Wanneroo to Butler and Jindalee is attracting school participation and a club to service these schools will need to be identified or established, or alternatively embrace the existing unaffiliated Wanneroo and Districts Hockey Association.

� In the longer term (post 2020) growth in the Alkimos Eglinton region will require new facilities and the development of clubs to service that region

� There are schools in the Ellenbrook region that are participating in hockey but no club to service them. Both Old Guildfordians and Eastern Blades could take on a developmental role and establish a presence in this area

� Cockburn has a strong school program and no club to service it. Fremantle and Kwinana are target clubs for this area.

� The hills area stretching from Mundaring to Kalamunda has a series of schools involved in hockey and a club to service these schools will need to be identified or established. The Hills Districts Association could establish a permanent presence and embrace the private schools in the hills as well as teams in senior competition.

� Serpentine Jarrahdale is set for strong population growth over the next 20 years and new facilities and clubs will need to be established in this region.



Figure 9 - Hockey locations



7 Identification of Gaps and Duplications

One could take the attitude that there is no duplication of hockey facilities on the basis of “the more hockey the better” and that all of the turf facilities are currently used to close to capacity with excess demand unable to be accommodated. That view aside it is clear that there is a comparative abundance or concentration of hockey facilities in the western suburbs, both in terms of grassed fields and synthetic turfs. Of the 29 Local Government Authorities in the metropolitan area, 10 do not offer any hockey accommodations at all. These include 9 relatively small councils such a Mosman Park, Peppermint Grove, Cottesloe and Subiaco in the well serviced western suburbs as well as East Fremantle and Perth. The remaining larger council areas of Belmont, Bassendean, Bayswater and Cockburn do not support hockey at present. Key amongst this list is Cockburn. A key role for Hockey WA is to liaise with LGAs to ensure that hockey facilities are recognised in the LGAs’ facility planning strategies. See also the hockey locations maps in Report 3.

8 Methodology and Consultative Process

Consultation involved the following approaches:

� Written survey to member clubs and associations

� Written survey to local government authorities

� Written survey to schools in the metropolitan area

� Workshop with metropolitan competition clubs

� Workshop with premier league clubs

� Workshop presentation with Hockey WA board

� Regular project reference group meetings

� One on one interviews with selected stakeholders The results of the survey returns were then considered against other base information supplied by Hockey WA, from the demographic and mapping assessment and from workshop and interview results. This assessment facilitated and informed the preparation of policy statements in Report 2 and the development of a facilities strategic plan in Report 3.

9 Overview of the outcomes of the Consultation process

The following characteristics and philosophies have emerged regarding hockey facility development:

� Education institutions (both private schools and universities) are currently the principal location of turf facilities for Hockey WA conducted competitions in the metropolitan area.

� Local government is the principal provider of grassed playing fields for Hockey WA

conducted competitions in the metropolitan area, and for association and club conducted competitions in regional areas.

� Future development of hockey facilities in WA will require both synthetic turf and natural

grass fields to be available with a growing demand for and reliance upon synthetic turf venues.

� Wherever possible synthetic turf venues should be developed adjacent to existing

natural grass facilities. They should not be developed in isolation.



� The number of synthetic turf installations should be expanded to accommodate and encourage growth in underserviced areas and at the same time remain limited (at least by way of Hockey WA support) to ensure oversupply does not occur leaving turf facilities underutilized and therefore unviable.

� Synthetic turf development on local government reserves will fall largely to the hockey

clubs to initiate. The CSRFF cost share model of one third from the state government, one third from the local authority, and one third from the club (noting self supporting loan support may be available from Hockey WA) is a desirable outcome under current installation guidelines. Clubs should look to meet this challenge in any turf development program and the challenge of the ongoing maintenance of the facilities. Clubs should note that the level of support from Local Governments may differ due to established policies.

� Synthetic turf development on school or university land will largely fall to the school or

university to initiate and fund. There may be some state government assistance available for school and university facility developments.

� There is limited precedence for local government to contribute to school or university

facilities, however, there are examples of joint provision and open access arrangements for community clubs and this should be more fully explored.

� Hockey WA should continue to manage and control the Perth Hockey Stadium as the

sport’s flagship venue and ensure that it is always the best presented, most current and technically equipped venue in the state.

� Hockey WA should work with Department of Planning and Infrastructure, Department of

Sport and Recreation and the appropriately targeted LGAs to ensure adequate land allocation is provided for future hockey facilities.

� Nearly all clubs are adequately catered for in terms of the number of grass fields at

present but surface quality is a concern with greatest difficulties experienced when hockey is required to share a winter allocation, particularly with rugby.

� Local government should be encouraged to improve playing surface maintenance

standards in line with the specification in Section 2.2 of Report 2.

� Local government should be encouraged to provide for the basic suite of facilities as per the specification in section 3.1 of report 2.

� Most clubs are seeking access to additional turf time.

� Playing surface quality, regardless of whether it is grass or synthetic turf, is the first

priority in terms of facilities. Ancillary amenities are all secondary to the playing surface.

� Clubroom facilities attached to the turf are considered critical to long term viability and success of the resident clubs.



Report 2: Policy Development 1 Summary of the differing facility provision philosophies

The philosophy followed by local government in terms of sport and recreation facilities can be summarised as follows: As a commitment to community wellbeing and also the aesthetic appeal of an area, an LGA will allocate, develop and maintain areas of public open space including a number of playing fields or grassed areas prepared to allow for active sport and passive recreation. The provision of active sport playing fields generally allows for a variety of uses on a reserve area, traditionally broken into a summer and winter season allocation. LGAs usually also take responsibility for provision of basic community amenities such as parking, public toilets, changerooms (including showers and toilets), some storage and frequently provision of kiosk/canteen facilities, a first aid room and on occasions an umpire’s room. Dependent upon the size and location of the reserve playground equipment, barbecues and drinking fountains may also be provided. Specialist sporting equipment is regularly left to the sporting club to provide. This includes goals, wickets, nets, scoreboards, coaches/team shelters, safety fences, synthetic playing surfaces and line marking. Social facilities such as clubrooms (including kitchen and bar) sports field lighting for training and competition and spectator facilities such as viewing areas, seating and grandstands also provided by or at least initiated by actions of the sporting groups. In most instances the club will identify a need for lighting, a clubroom or spectator facilities at their home ground and seek support from the local government and the state government. The Community Sporting and Recreation Facilities Fund (CSRFF) model has become the standard for this type of provision. The size, shape and orientation of the reserve, together with community demand will normally dictate the sports or activities allocated to the reserve. Allocations generally take into consideration not only competition but also training schedules with a reasonable expectation that most teams will train twice per week and play once. Training is generally mid week and competition has traditionally been held on the weekend. Training and ground allocations have tended to be carefully monitored to ensure grassed playing areas are not overused, particularly for winter sport allocations. Conversely synthetic playing surfaces tend to be scheduled as often and for as long as possible to ensure high user revenues to meet maintenance and replacement costs. High quality sports field lighting (sufficient for competition) together with changing work patterns and community expectations is leading to more competitions being scheduled on week nights. Additionally some sports are attempting to blur the winter - summer seasonal allocations with pre-season training and off-season competitions (and associated trainings), pushing the boundaries of the two season approach. These guidelines are reasonably representative of the philosophy most LGAs bring to sporting facility provision, but there are many variations from this approach. For example the Eastern Goldfields Hockey Association has developed its facilities without LGA funding for both its synthetic pitch and for a grassed playing field currently under construction (note the LGA has provided the land and there has been some state and federal funding to both facilities). At the other end of the spectrum the City of Rockingham has met 85% of the cost of provision of a new synthetic turf together with changeroom and clubroom facilities. This arrangement is borne largely out of the city’s desire to relocate sports (including hockey) from various areas within the city to a regional complex at Lark Hill. Facility provision has also occurred within tertiary institutions (Curtin and UWA) and private schools (Hale and soon to be Aquinas and Scotch Colleges). These decisions appear to have been taken independently by the institutions for the needs of their students and funded from sources outside of the CSRFF program or exclusively by them.



2 Options for LGAs and Hockey WA for facility provision

The recommended approach is not dissimilar to that described above. It is described below in dot point form and is intended as a guideline for clubs and LGAs. 2.1 Basic Facility Provision � LGAs provide and maintain adequate grassed sporting space for field hockey (more about

surface quality below) on which the resident club or association places goals, flags and other specific equipment and marks lines. Adequacy of provision is frequently argued and made significantly more complex when synthetic playing surfaces are provided. The carrying capacity of grass versus synthetics and the approach to scheduling the various surfaces is almost directly opposite. For grassed fields a ratio of one dedicated hockey field per 12,500 people is recommended. The justification for this figure is shown in Attachment 1 on page 82.

� The playing surface is allocated on a seasonal basis and the LGA charges a fee for use. LGA fee schedules vary from charges per player to charges per team to charges per fixture. On average senior fees range from $25.00 - $35.00 per player per season whilst for juniors many LGAs offer free access or a fee in the vicinity of $5.00 - 8.00 per player per season.

� The LGA provides non-exclusive access to changeroom, toilet and (hot) shower facilities in the ratio of 2 changerooms per playing field. Generally one set of 2 changerooms is required to service 2 hockey pitches, however, the preferred level of provision is 2 changerooms per pitch, particularly where the competition has a strong senior focus.

� Changerooms need not be male/female designated but should have as a minimum 2 toilets, 2 hand basins and 3 showers per unit plus 10 lineal metres of bench seating with clothes hanging hooks above the benches.

� Where it is likely that a club will be permanently accommodated at a ground it is desirable for one team changeroom (the home team changeroom) to be slightly larger than the other(s).

� In addition to team change facilities provision should also be made for public toilets (1 urinal, 1 WC, 1 hand basin for males, and 2 WCs, 1 hand basin for females). These facilities are to be separate from the toilet facilities within the changerooms. Both male and female facilities should offer universal access or alternatively a separate disabled toilet facility should be provided.

� As part of the amenities block, allowance should be made for the following minimum areas � Lockable secure storage 10 m2 � Umpires room with toilet and shower 9 m2 � First aid room with hot water and basin 9 m2 � Kiosk/canteen with kitchen and servery 15 m2

� A protected verandah area with viewing over the playing field, ideally in front of the kiosk area and with direct access to the changerooms.

� Secure lit parking areas to cater for a minimum of 20 vehicles per hockey field.

� Note that clubhouses/social rooms are often not included as part of the basic amenities block provision. It is recommended that a basic module of approximately 120m2 is developed as part of the generic model. If it is the case then the clubhouse should be serviced by the kitchen /kiosk area with access to toilets for members from inside the clubhouse. These amenities would ideally be provided within the clubhouse in addition to those recommended as part of the basic changeroom and public toilet provision. Note that local government strongly promotes joint provision and shared use of facilities and this should be considered in any new off field development.



2.2 Playing Surface Quality With regard to standard of play, player and spectator enjoyment and most importantly player safety, playing surface quality is the number one concern of all hockey players, coaches and administrators. Inconsistency or lack of uniformity across the playing surface is the greatest problem. On grassed fields these problems manifest as: � Undulations across the field (i.e. poor natural ground level) � Bare patches where grass has died or been worn out through overuse � Divots and other holes created through play or other incidental activities � Intrusion of weed and tufted grasses that cause high spots in the playing surface � Grass leaf length being let grow too high (long) � Wet and dry patches within the playing area caused by inconsistent or non-uniform watering

patterns and poor drainage Accordingly, a strategy to address these concerns is for clubs and associations to work with LGAs to achieve the best possible playing surface in accordance with the following specification:

Item Specification

Grass type Couch as a preference or well maintained close cut Kikuyu

Reticulation In ground with flush fitting tops, preferably located completely outside the playing area and otherwise no sprinkler heads in the goal circles

Coefficient of uniformity Minimum of 75% preferably 85%

Grade/level of field Ideally a crowned field design to assist drainage with not more than a 2% variation from end to end or side to side

Top dressing/verti-mowing Top dressed and leveled every 3 years as a minimum after vertimowing

Repair to holes/divots On an ongoing basis by the club, holes to be filled with clean sand after each fixture

Weed/foreign grass intrusion Annual spraying

Mowing frequency At least fortnightly in winter months (hockey season) preferably just prior to home fixture play

Blade length 25mm maximum set height on a roller mower

Line marking Water soluble white acrylic paint only to be used for line marking

Sub surface drainage Sufficient drainage so that the ground absorbs rainfall uniformly, does not accommodate pooling or puddling of water and generally absorbs all rainfall within 30 minutes of the rain stopping

Table 29 - Specifications for quality surface

2.3 Sports Field Lighting

The installation of lighting for training purposes is becoming a standard requirement for all senior clubs to ensure adequate time and access to playing fields. As a guide, competition standard lighting is to be restricted to synthetic surfaces. Grass surface areas are to be lit where required for training purposes. All new lighting installations are to be in accordance with: � AS 2560 Part 2.7 for outdoor hockey; and � FIH Guide to the Artificial Lighting of Synthetic Hockey Pitches.



The following table is taken from AS 2560.

Recommended Lighting Criteria for Outdoor Hockey

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Level of Play (Note 1)

Type of lighting system (Figures 2 & 3)

Maintenance illuminance (Notes 1,2 and 3)

Minimum uniformity ratio (Notes 1 & 2)

Minimum CIE Lamp colour rendering group (Note 4)

Recommended types of floodlights (Note 5)

Type Beam Classification

Major grade club, national and international competition

Side 4+4 poles

500 0.7 2

B or C H5-6 V2-4

Corner (4+4 poles)

A or C 2-4 (A), H5-6 V4-5

Ball training junior and minor grade competition

Side 4+4 poles

250 0.6 2

B or C H5-6 V4-5

Corner (4+4 poles)

A or C 2-4 (A), H5-6 V2-4

Physical training only

side 30 0.25 2 B or C H6-7 V4-5

Table 30 - Lighting criteria for outdoor hockey

Notes: 1. See clause 12 for advice on switching and upgrading of the lighting system to provide for differing

levels of play. 2. The values of maintenance illuminance and minimum uniformity ratio are based on a horizontal plane

at the surface of the playing field, and apply over the whole e field (see Clauses 6 and 7, and Figure 1). Uniformity ratio is the ratio of the maximum illuminance to the average illuminance for the grid of points in Figure 1. (see also Appendix C of AS 2560.1).

3. Values of illuminance measured at the time of commissioning an installation should be higher that the recommended maintenance values (see Clause 6.2).

4. See Section 3 of AS 2560.1 for information on the colour rendering properties of various lamp types. 5. See Appendix A of AS 2560.1 for the significance of the floodlight classifications.

The illumination levels nominated by FIH are listed in the table on the next page. The complete reference is available via the following link. http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=t&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBF_enAU280AU281&q=guide+to+the+artificial+lighting+of+hockey+pitches

Note that the FIH guide recommends lighting level measurements to be taken on a 5 or 10 mm square grid using a light meter complying to National Standard e.g. AS 1580.602.2. The table on the next page describes:

� Non-competitive events including physical education: Class III � Ball training as well as junior and low grade club competition: Class II � High Grade national club and international competition: Class I � Televised events divided into two maximum camera distances:

>75m and >150m and HDTV



UI = Minimum/Maximum illuminance U2 = Minimum/Average illuminance * The same colour temperature lamps should be used for a venue ** Recommended colour rendering for televised events

Table 31 - Lighting levels

There is a discrepancy between the illumination levels nominated for competition matches:

Standard Ball training and

junior competition Major grades club, national

and international competition AS2560 for grass and synthetic 250 lux 500 lux FIH guidelines for synthetic 500 lux 750 lux

A number of the existing turfs have been established with lighting to AS2560 (250 lux) or a previously publicized Hockey WA guideline of 300 lux and therefore do not achieve the illumination level listed in the FIH guide, or more importantly the guide for major grade club competition for AS2560. It is noted that the Australian Standard is a recognised standard whilst the FIH illumination levels are part of a guide and not necessarily an enforceable standard other than for FIH sanctioned international competitions.

Accordingly, it is proposed that Hockey WA recommends that all new turfs be lit to AS2560 (500 lux) to be eligible for Hockey WA competition games. Similarly, existing turfs should be encouraged to upgrade the illumination level to AS2560 (500 lux) to maintain eligibility for Hockey WA competitions.

LGAs generally do not provide sports field lighting as part of the basic amenities on a reserve. In most instances lighting installation is occasioned by a request and financial contribution by the resident clubs on a reserve, usually in accordance with the CSRFF guidelines which require the resident club to find one third of the funds. This approach is generally well received by LGAs who offer financial support and a strong recommendation to the state government for funding applications of this nature.

For training lights on grassed playing fields the CSRFF guidelines of one third club / one third LGA / one third DSR approach is tried and tested and is recommended for continuation. Once installed, responsibility for the operating and maintenance costs of the lights must also be considered. The cost of operating the lights is almost universally paid for by the clubs using the lights, either by way of coin, token or credit card payments on a pay as you go basis, on an up-front agreed fee-for-use basis or on payment following a subsequent meter reading. Accordingly, all clubs should look to meet the cost of lighting use (electricity charges).

There is considerable variation in who is responsible for lighting maintenance including replacement of blown or failed lamps, re-lamping after the illumination level falls below standard and the routine measurement of illumination levels.



Where lights are used exclusively by one club then it is likely that the maintenance costs will be borne exclusively by that club. Where lights are used by more than one club then maintenance costs are usually borne by the LGA, however, the usage charges are frequently loaded with a levy for replacement of blown and inefficient lamps. Either way the user clubs will need to allow for some lighting maintenance and lamp replacement costs. The major difficulty in leaving maintenance to a party other than the user is in effecting a timely response. The cost of cherry pickers and a suitable labour resource to replace lamps is significant. If the LGA is the party required to respond in cases of lamp replacement there needs to be a strong positive working relation between the club and the LGA to ensure a timely response.

For synthetic turf developments, full competition standard lighting (not television standard lighting) is considered as an integral part of the facility design and is included as part of the capital cost equation for the installation.

It is recommended that television standard lighting be reserved for the Perth Hockey Stadium as the sole venue for televised matches in WA. Maintenance and lamp replacement costs are the responsibility of the clubs who lease and operate the turf. 2.4 Clubhouse and Spectator Accommodation Development

Once clubs are established and reasonably well accommodated in terms of being able to play the game of hockey, there is a strong push to develop facilities that strengthen and stabilise the club as an off-field entity. The target is for a clubhouse in which social functions can be held, where club memorabilia can be proudly displayed and where the off-field business of the club (administration and fundraising can be undertaken). Additionally, clubs that have a strong family focus and broad team base seek to establish spectator facilities in terms of covered (sheltered) viewing areas combining a degree of tiering and fixed seating.

This clubhouse facility is often constructed as part of the amenities building on the reserve with the spectator viewing area positioned as an extension of the building on the edge of the playing area. As a policy initiative described in Section 2.1 it is anticipated that LGAs will provide a club house of around 120m2 as part of the basic provision of amenities on a sporting reserve. The basic provision is intended to be generic in nature and available to all users of the reserve, and also available to non-sporting hirers for a variety of other purposes (as a community facility or meeting place).

There are many instances, however, when the facilities are sought to be made more specific to the needs of the principal users and are often established either:

� for sole and exclusive use by one club under lease from the LGA; or

� on a shared seasonal use arrangement with two or more clubs making use of the facility either as parties to a sporting association which holds the facility under lease; or

� on a non-exclusive license basis for the duration of the sporting season.

Whilst it is hoped that LGAs will take on a generic provision role for clubrooms on reserves, development costs and financial contributions to facilities of this nature vary dramatically. There is considerable precedent and good practice established by the state government’s CSRFF program to require a contribution by the club(s) toward the capital cost of construction, and in this case for any development over and above the basic and generic model of 120m2. Given the nature and cost of clubroom facilities it is not unusual for the LGA to provide more than one third of the cost, however, these are usually cooperatively negotiated outcomes rather than the result of any obligation on the part of the LGA.



Summary

This series of policy statements places the onus to provide playing fields and basic amenities on reserves squarely at the feet of LGAs. Improvements and specific hockey requirements including goals, lighting, player, coach and spectator amenities all carry a requirement for contributions by the club. The more specific the item to hockey and the more restricted the use of such a facility is to other users, the greater the expectation that the club should meet the cost (e.g. hockey goals should be exclusively used for hockey [and not poached for soccer] and therefore should be considered a club cost).

Lighting to a reserve could be a shared cost (in accordance with CSRFF guidelines) if other users are able to make use of the lights at other times. Note that requirements for different lighting levels for different sports may warrant the negotiation of a weighted contribution between the clubs involved.

Clubhouse facilities are recommended as a standard provision by the LGA when an amenities block is developed on a reserve. Access to the basic clubhouse should be on a venue hire basis if used intermittently or on a joint use negotiated cost share basis for shared facilities. A license fee or lease rental is more appropriate for permanent or exclusive use of the facility. It should be noted that LGAs are unlikely to assist in funding an exclusive use facility.

Costs for enhancements to the basic clubhouse, either by construction of a larger space or provision of a higher standard of amenities should be funded by the club or clubs involved.

This approach invokes what might be best termed the “exclusivity rule” – if you want it exclusively – you pay for it exclusively. Further if you want something over and above basic provision - you pay for it or at least you pay for the variation to cost above standard provision. 2.5 Synthetic Turf Development

Notably six of the eight metropolitan turfs have been developed without a strong local government involvement. This may in itself signal a strategy for future facility development perhaps focusing on developing and strengthening relationships with private school and tertiary education institutions.

In the metropolitan area only Melville and Rockingham Councils have turfs developed on their land, noting also that they are the two most recently constructed facilities. In non-metropolitan areas, however, there is a total local government involvement with all 10 country turfs being located on reserve land vested in the local council. With respect to future or proposed turfs that have been identified, the most immediate are proposed for private schools in the metro area with a possibility for Bruce Rock in the country.

Land owner Existing Facility Proposed Facility

Metropolitan Facilities Note: All metropolitan turfs are wet turfs.

Curtin University Perth Hockey Stadium 1

Curtin University Perth Hockey Stadium 2

University of Western Australia UWA 1

Private School Hale School

Aquinas College

Scotch College

State Government Shenton

Arena Joondalup (hybrid)

Local Government Melville

Rockingham



Non-Metropolitan Facilities Existing Facility Proposed Facility

Local Government (wet turfs) Narrogin

Albany

Busselton

Mandurah

Bunbury 1

Bunbury 2

Kalgoorlie (hybrid)

Local Government (sand based turfs) Geraldton (wet)

Geraldton (sand)

Collie

Bruce Rock

Table 32 - Turf developments

In line with the exclusivity rule mentioned above, hockey turfs have until recently been funded largely by the club with some contribution from local and state governments. The Lark Hill turf has been funded primarily by the City of Rockingham stemming from the City’s desire to develop a regional sporting complex and rationalize land currently occupied by sporting facilities. It is most likely that future turf development will be driven strongly by the capacity of a club to fund the development. Local government is unlikely to respond to sport specific facility development without strong demand demonstrated by the community. Contributions from local government will need to be negotiated on a case by case basis although the CSRFF model of one third contribution should be pursued in all instances. For non-metropolitan installations, opportunities for regional development and other federal programs must be considered a priority. It is noted that the Department of Sport and Recreation is developing a case for special funding for regional scale facilities (metro and non-metro) separate to the traditional CSRFF program. Should this program be successfully funded then a facility development strategy that identifies a hierarchy of synthetic turfs for competition, training, and eventually the development of regional or geographical divisions throughout metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas, may be able to be implemented more quickly. 3 Definition of a sustainable club

Based on workshop results, survey returns and discussions with a variety of stakeholders, and keeping in mind an ‘ideal hockey club’ structure the following characteristics have been identified as contributing to club sustainability. The Steps described below are somewhat of a sustainable club checklist. � Leadership and Governance

No club is likely to be successful or sustainable without strong leadership both on and off the field. In fact long term sustainability is perhaps more closely embedded in strong off field leadership as players come and go. Strong visionary leadership must be supported by an effective succession planning program for office bearers within the club. Rotating presidents on a fixed term cycle without losing their expertise is a key to long term stability. Clubs must be continually thinking about ‘who next’ and ‘who else’ to carry the load of running the club off the field, even when they have a full complement of office bearers. Step 1: Elect a strong visionary leader to the role of president. Step 2 Invoke a succession planning program that keeps people rotating through office

bearer positions. Allow for a half or one third spill every election period of say 2 years to maintain a degree of continuity and organisational memory.



At a governance or management level, in the less visible more mundane roles where the actual work is done there must be sufficient helpers to do the grunt work. It is essential to recruit people to specific positions with specific task for specified periods. The development of position descriptions and operating manuals complete with task descriptions will help ensure continuity of tasks and personnel. The nature of volunteerism in Australia has changed over the years. Fewer (much fewer) people are prepared to dedicate body and soul to the management of a sporting club for an indefinite period People are, however, keen to contribute and if their contribution can be clearly defined, discrete or finite in its nature, people are more prepared to contribute. They can get a job done and then go and do something else feeling good about their contribution rather than their involvement being an unending drain of time and energy. Step 3: Recruit people to specific positions with specific task for specified periods as

opposed to endless committee membership. Step 4: Formally constitute and incorporate the club and establish procedures and

protocols for adequate and appropriate documentation of the club’s plans, decisions, actions and finances.

From a governance perspective it is critical that clubs are legally established and properly constituted and incorporated, and keep adequate and appropriate records of decisions made, funds received and expensed and membership, competition and social activities. The Department of Sport and Recreation offers extensive guidance for Clubs including the smart clubs program which offers guidance, checklists and recommended actions and strategies.

DSR also offers a variety of other useful publications for clubs including:

� Draft constitutions and procedures to incorporation

� Roles and responsibilities of office bearers

� Conduct of meetings and an AGM

� Fundraising, sponsorship and marketing ideas

� Strategic and business planning

� Policy outlines for member and club behaviour Many reference documents can be found at the following link: http://www.dsr.wa.gov.au/scripts/nc.dll?DSR.65682:STANDARD::pc=PC_162

� Number of Club teams – Age and Gender mix

The most successful and sustainable clubs appear to be those with both males and females involved on and off the field, with more teams in more grades and offering a strong family and social focus. From an age mix perspective there is significant merit in having players involved at all levels, especially at either end of the spectrum to include participation in Hook in2 Hockey programs and veterans. The value is that the club effectively breeds its own future players, it provides a strong family network that tends to keep parents involved both on and off the field and it allows for a club culture to develop (culturally and emotionally) tying players and administrators to a club. This notion is equally applicable to clubs with elite/high performance or social/good times aspirations. Further, this fully integrated vertical age strata should accommodate both male and female players and teams. Participation and player retention wanes during the teenage years as youngsters seek independence and the company of the other sex. If a strong club structure can provide at least one of these attractions then there is an increased likelihood of player retention. This also holds true for parents of teenagers who are more likely to remain active in the club if the children remain active in the club.



Step 5: Develop a club structure that allows for male and female teams. Step 6: Develop a club structure that allows for participation at all age levels and

competition standards ensuring that juniors and veterans are well nurtured. � Development pathways

The mechanism for effective development pathways for hockey players is largely dependent upon the competition structure in place. Hockey WA has recently commissioned a review of its competition structure and this will in turn inform the most appropriate development pathway model for clubs.

Step 7: Integrate development pathways with the Hockey WA player development model and talent identification processes.

� Venue owner relationship

The larger more sustainable clubs are frequently characterised by access to better quality playing and social facilities. Based on feedback about priorities for facility provision, the quality of the playing surface is ranked number one priority regardless of whether it is grass or synthetic turf. In all instances to date a synthetic turf playing surface is supported by a number of grassed playing fields nearby and the quality of the grassed surface is a similar priority issue. Given the general preference for synthetic turf and with all elite level competition now being played on turf, the argument flows that the larger, stronger, more sustainable clubs will have either developed their own or have relatively unfettered access to a turf. In all instances to date the club has responsibility for the care, control and management (including maintenance and replacement planning) for their synthetic turf, noting the exception of PHS where responsibility rests with Hockey WA. Step 8: Develop or secure unfettered access to a synthetic turf playing and training venue. Step 9: Develop a strong working relationship with the local government authority that will

be responsible for providing and maintaining the grassed playing surfaces, ideally in accordance with the natural grass specification included in Section 2.2 of Report 2.

Step 10: Work with the Local Government Authority to carry out routine and ongoing

ground leveling and repair works and ensure seasonal ground use applications are submitted on time and the appropriate fees are paid in full by the due date.

For those clubs who have established a turf, (and operate it under lease) the need for it to be used all year round to generate income has caused a push for full year access to social clubrooms and changerooms facilities, rather than shared seasonal access as was once the dominant approach for grass based clubs. This is appropriate when the facilities are physically located and preferentially aligned to the turf, however, where the amenities have previously serviced summer and winter grassed field users, a shared arrangement with the summer user may need to prevail. Most LGAs and the DSR promote multiple use/multiple user facilities. Exclusive use of facilities will normally only apply where they have been developed as part of the turf and funded largely by the actions of the club. Step 11: Where possible seek to secure permanent leased clubroom and changeroom

facilities adjacent to the home turf.

� Minimum club size, number of teams, juniors seniors and veterans Acknowledging the approach to a sustainable club described in all points above it is implicit that the ideal is for a club to field teams in all grades and levels of competition.



This is not to say that smaller clubs should not develop and participate, rather that they will generally be playing in lower grades with limited or no access to premier competition levels.

One mechanism to address club size, acknowledging the existence of single team clubs and clubs with limited team numbers at present, is that they may choose to maintain their identity but affiliate or associate with a larger eligible club and take that larger club’s place in the premier level of competition. The challenge for both the eligible club and its affiliate is that the larger club may eventually develop its own team to fill that eligible spot and the affiliate will either have to fully integrate, play in a different grade or disband. There is no necessity at this stage to demand a minimum club size, rather to provide an acknowledged competition structure that permits only clubs that offer suitable facilities, depth of team and gender balance to field teams in the premier competitions. Step 12: Allow single team, single gender and smaller clubs to participate in all Hockey WA

competitions during the transition period and where space is available. Step 13: Allow the larger eligible clubs with premier competition access rights to enter

affiliate or associate teams on their behalf when they are unable or unwilling to field a team.

Step 14: Recognise that some teams will remain small independent units that do not wish to

participate in premier and elite level competitions.

4 Identify CSRFF priorities for hockey projects

Hockey WA support for CSRFF applications should be structured as follows: Priority 1 Perth Hockey Stadium

This venue must at all times be presented and maintained as the premier venue for hockey in WA. It should be the only venue for televised and international matches (unless overflow capacity is required) and it should host as much of the national and special event tournament play as possible. Premier level competition and opportunities for all age groups to play at PHS should be encouraged wherever possible whilst recognising that higher grade matches should take precedence. It is also acknowledged that the PHS must run both turf 1 and turf 2 as close to continuous factory lines to generate revenue for ongoing maintenance and regular replacement. For these reasons and coupled with the fact that Perth is the home of Hockey Australia’s High Performance Program, the PHS must be presented and maintained as a first class venue and the best facility on offer in WA at all times.

Priority 2 Synthetic turf development for eligible clubs In line with the steps outlined for the development of a sustainable club, every encouragement and support should be given to the development of synthetic turf facilities for the suite of clubs eligible for premier level competition. Hockey WA should advise clubs that they support clubs to have competition standard lighting installed at new turfs (but not television standard lighting) as identified in Section 2.3 of Report 2.



Priority 3 Synthetic turf development for country and regional associations Regardless of their eligibility for participation in a premier level competition, support should then be offered to regional and country associations for the development of a turf. The progressive development of a turf in all regional population centres over 25,000 residents should be a priority. Attachment 2 to Report 2 on page 83 shows projected population centres over 25,000 by 2021. These are summarised on the next page. Those with an asterisk indicate where a turf currently exists:

Metropolitan Country

Armadale 78,500 Albany* 36,800

Bayswater 62,100 Bunbury** 34,000

Belmont 37,200 Busselton* 36,500

Canning 86,100 Kalgoorlie-Boulder* 33,900

Fremantle 28,400 Mandurah* 100,000

Gosnells 99,700 Mundaring 40,600

Joondalup* 157,400 Serpentine-Jarrahdale 25,500

Kalamunda 59,400

Kwinana 39,900

Melville* 102,000

Rockingham* 130,100

South Perth** 42,000

Stirling 201,300

Swan 145,100

Victoria Park 34,200

Vincent 29,000

Wanneroo 201,200

Table 33 – Projected populations centres over 25,000 by 2021

From a country perspective only Mundaring and Serpentine-Jarrahdale are without turfs. It could be argued that these communities are fringe metro and therefore carry lesser priority. It should also be noted that Geraldton already has a two turf facilities in a population of around 20,000 and that its population is not expected to reach 25,000 by 2021 Some areas within the metro area that vastly exceed the threshold level will not necessarily warrant a synthetic turf on the basis that they can be serviced by adjoining areas. It is more likely that selected geographical areas and areas currently under-serviced by existing facilities would take priority. For example, there is no turf in the City of Swan at present. The geographical spread of Swan would warrant new facilities in Ellenbrook and in Guildford (noting that Old Guildfordians already exist).

Priority 4 Social facility, clubroom, storage and spectator facilities Working on the basis that quality playing surfaces are the highest priority for hockey development in the long term, support for social and clubroom development will rank behind playing accommodation.



Policies detailed in Sections 2.1 and 2.4 indicate that clubs may be required to contribute to clubhouse development and certainly to extensions, special needs or special finishes over and above the basic LGA generic provision. Covered spectator viewing and storage facilities (internal and externally for goals) should also be considered as part of this category. Note that large scale spectator grandstands that could attract events otherwise destined for PHS should not be supported.

5 Policy for metropolitan and regional zones

In the metropolitan area the first priority for development of turfs should be for established clubs in areas currently not serviced by a turf. North of the river this effectively means all areas away from the coastal strip, moving eastward and picking up Rangers, Modernians, Harlequins, Blades and Old Guildfordians. South of the river the priority is the Fremantle club and from a geographic location the Cockburn area. Subsequent south of the river developments would need to pick up Southern River, Dale and Kwinana. In an easterly direction and heading through to the hills accommodation for Kalamunda and Mundaring is needed and in the longer term Ellenbrook and Wanneroo. In the country areas it is important to note that all of the regional centres with a population of more than 25,000 already have a turf. The sustainability analysis in report 3 indicates a population of 112,000 is warranted to provide a solid sense of long term viability. Country communities have, however, regularly displayed a capacity for higher levels of sporting activity support both on and off the field and a subsequent financial willingness and capacity beyond that of the metro area. 6 Policy for the co-location/relocation of clubs

Hockey clubs appear to have developed spontaneously throughout the metropolitan area since hockey first established itself as an organised sport in WA. This relatively ad hoc approach has emerged in the absence of a formal structured development plan and generally in response to a variety of triggers or opportunities such as:

� Strong leadership or vision from an individual or group of individuals already from an existing club, who see a need for the development of hockey in a growth area and seek to establish a new (satellite) club in that area. The parent club supports the new club until it stands on its own.

� A strong leader relocating to an area where there is either little or no hockey being played and acting to establish a club.

� Personality differences, usually between two strong leaders within an existing club with one choosing to move elsewhere and establish another club.

� Clubs growing too large to be accommodated at one venue and another nearby venue is available, the club splits and two separate clubs emerge.

� The amalgamation of two or more small clubs or single teams to form a more sustainable club structure.

Note that there is a need for strong leadership to establish a club. Accordingly, an attempt to impose co-location or relocation of clubs without the prerequisite leadership to take charge and drive the change is folly. What is recommended is the definition of a desired future state for the metropolitan competition structure that is widely advertised and understood with clubs being able to move towards that structure voluntarily and over time.



Hockey WA will have a capacity to influence and encourage movement to the new structure by setting guidelines, policy or rules related to eligibility for entry to competitions. Where clubs choose to move to fit the defined competition structure, co-location, relocation and amalgamation of clubs will occur naturally. Where clubs resist a move to rationalise according to the policy, then one approach may simply be to tolerate non-compliance for a nominated transition period, after which entry to competition will need to be in accordance with the eligibility rules. In effect, there is no requirement for a co-location, relocation policy, rather there needs to be a clearly defined competition structure into which clubs will progressively align. Hockey WA can assist the transition to the future desired state by only offering funding and other support for facility and club development in line with the strategic plan. The movement of an existing club or the establishment of a new club in a new area will require close liaison between the intended club and the LGA or other land owner where the club seeks to establish. Additionally, the establishment of a turf for a new or existing club will require support and approval from the LGA or landowner. Hockey WA should offer administrative and financial support (self supporting loan) where possible for new club and facility developments in line with the strategic plan. Most importantly Hockey WA should support funding applications and assist with land owner liaison/negotiation for strategically located developments. 7 Communication of fixtures and facility requirements to LGAs

LGAs operate such a variety of seasonal ground allocation policies that it would be difficult for Hockey to dictate a one size fits all approach. It is incumbent upon each club to establish a positive working relationship with its facility provider and conform to the specific LGA policy for that municipality. Clubs can however, provide the facility requirements policy, detailed in Section 2 above, to their LGA, and seek the support of Hockey WA in negotiating facility provision to these standards. Hockey WA should also undertake an independent and direct communication with WALGA and individual LGAs as appropriate with respect to their facility provision policies. Grass based clubs must recognise that LGAs will seek to maintain the traditional summer / winter seasonal allocation approach for grassed fields. Clubs wishing to extend their season beyond the end of September or start ground use earlier than 1 April will be required to negotiate access with the LGA and be mindful that summer season users will take priority in the allocation. In this instance it is recommended that the hockey club seek to establish direct liaison with the summer ground user to negotiate an acceptable access pattern prior to making application to the LGA.



8 Policy position on climate change

Hockey WA recognises the need for a comprehensive Climate Change Strategy and through its strategic planning process is working toward addressing the following issues: Water Shortages – promoting water-wise efficiency across all states through:

• Non water based surfaces • Increased UV resistance • Grass versus synthetic versus hybrid • Regional, drought • Metropolitan • Alternative water sources • Reuse of surface supplied water • Use of Curtin University/Technology Park grey water (system is called ECOMAX) • Create a water/conservation usage plan for PHS facilities including amenities, gardens,

offices • Proactive approach to communicate and educate the community that Hockey WA is

taking water conservation seriously (ie signage) Temperature Increases – implementing strategies to accommodate these by:

• Understanding climate cycles and scheduling major events appropriately • Winter season is less affected • Summer season currently is played late afternoon and evening • Indoor competition played weekend days • Protected environment will need to be provided for spectators • Ascertain the cost of roofing for both turfs at PHS • Replacement of artificial surfaces more frequently

More extreme events – contingency planning, such as:

• Risk management component for every event included in event planning. • Policies currently reflect extreme weather conditions including re-fixturing of games • Insuring the cost of event cancellation • Budget implications • Health implications – heat stroke, etc. • Strategies for venue recovery

Sea level rise – developing policies for adaptation, like:

• Indirectly related through affiliated associations i.e. Peel, Busselton, Albany, Esperance, etc.

• Facility location planning • Beach hockey

Reducing carbon footprint – adopting procedures across all functions, by:

• When refurbishing the stadium building, pitches and other venues, move to compliance with relevant building codes. Include power saving devices, solar power, solar hot water heating, rainwater storage tanks, water saving shower heads, lighting timers, etc.

• Aim for carbon neutrality as a sport Other than efforts to reduce overall consumption in day to day hockey operations through recycling, introducing energy efficiencies and reducing waste, the availability and cost of water is considered to be the biggest single issue for Hockey WA to address. Water recycling on wet turf installations may become a necessity and mechanisms that assist all turf owners in installing a suitable system should be led by Hockey WA. There is, however, an imperative to move away from wet turf surfaces and to encourage in the first instance greater use of hybrid surfaces with a view to the ultimate replacement of all wet surfaces with totally dry surfaces.



This will require considerable research and commitment from both the hockey fraternity and the turf manufacturers. The availability of a turf that eliminates field watering, accommodates intensive use and replaces grass playing fields is seen as a means of ensuring hockey facilities can continue to be developed in the face of diminishing water supplies. 9 Land allocation for Hockey

It is unlikely that Hockey WA, as a sporting organisation in isolation, will be able to influence the subdivision and land allocation process in WA. The needs of hockey and all other sport and recreational pursuits are best represented in the planning process through the development of appropriate land provision standards and driven by the Department of Sport and Recreation. Additionally support can be garnered through the Western Australian Sports Federation to lobby and inform the state and local government planning process. Section 2.1 above identifies a requirement for one grass hockey field per 12,500 people, noting that a field should be provided within all communities, regardless of size. A ratio for development of synthetic turf facilities also needs to be considered as well as whether these facilities are to be provided within the public open space or private schools domain. Given the significant number of synthetic turfs established or planned on private school land there is also an opportunity for Hockey WA to inform and influence the planning processes of private schools for their facility development. The 7 strong PSAWA comprising Aquinas College, Christ Church, Guildford Grammar, Hale School, Scotch College, Trinity College and Wesley College will have within 2 years established 3 synthetic turf installations and there is a strong likelihood that more will follow. Elite girls schools such as MLC, PLC, Penrhos, Mercedes, Perth College, St Hildas and St Brigids have not progressed to hockey turf installation and discussion with this group may be warranted. Further, there are a number of new private colleges in the outer suburban areas that may also need to be considered as potential turf providers including Swanleigh or Ellenbrook Christian College in Ellenbrook and Lumen Christi College in Martin (Gosnells). Similarly, tertiary institutions could be targeted for further turf development and steps could be made to inform and influence their planning processes. Curtin hosts the PHS and UWA offers a turf at McGillivray but there is no corresponding facility for ECU at Mt Lawley, Churchlands, Claremont or Joondalup, Notre Dame in Fremantle, or Murdoch Uni in Melville. At this stage there is no planning imperative for Hockey WA to encourage turf development at any of these locations, however, opportunities for additional facilities without expense or involvement to Hockey WA should not be overlooked. Note that there will be a requirement for the provision of additional land for the development of synthetic turf facilities given that in many instances hockey pitches sit either side of cricket pitches, 2 per cricket oval. It is not feasible to build a turf on one hockey pitch as it would cut out the cricket oval. Accordingly, additional land area nearby to existing hockey pitches is required to be identified. Note that a synthetic surface can accommodate a significantly increased level of activity, often by as much as 2.5 times over a grassed surface. It is also important to acknowledge that any land dedicated to a turf is removed from the available public open space register for seasonal allocation, i.e. there will be no alternative summer season user, hockey will control (but not necessarily exclusively use) the facility 100% of the time. Alternative uses of the hockey surface in summer could include lacrosse, netball and soccer. These options may become more critical as multiuse surfaces are developed and water availability forces greater use of synthetic fields.



10 Review and assessment mechanism for all policies

As a minimum, all policies should be formally reviewed as part of Hockey WA’s cyclical strategic planning process, i.e. approximately every 3-5 years. More frequent reviews will necessarily be undertaken on selected policies where: � The policy is being repeatedly challenged and causing hardship to clubs, � Change is occurring or being implemented over time, � New information or new technology becomes available that may influence the policy. A recommended practice is that all Board papers should include reference to applicable policies. Board decisions should then be guided by and reflect the existing policy, or the Board should cause a review or change of policy as a result of changed circumstances.



Attachment 1 - Model for Provision of Playing Fields for Hockey

As a guide to grass field provision (and not to be seen as a fixed or governing standard) the following is indicated by current hockey participation levels in Western Australia. The Hockey Census 2007 indicates the following participation in WA, ranking third behind NSW and QLD.

Club Hockey

winter summer indoor school modified total

18,331 2,593 783 20,633 3,038 45,378 For outdoor hockey provision by LGAs we need to consider the winter participation rate noting that summer users will use the same fields and schools operate almost exclusively from school grounds.

One predictor is drawn from a demand based planning model developed by Associate Professor Tony Veal from the University of Technology Sydney in 2004. Veal prepared a calculation of area of land required based on participation rates and frequency of participation. The approach is shown graphically below.

Gross Demand example: Hockey – 11 steps

1. Participation rate to be planned for: 1%

[ERASS 2006 – 1%]

Hockey Census 2007 for WA =18,331/2,103,800 =0.87%

3. Freq.: Times pa. per participant: 66

1 comp and 2 trainings per week

4. Person-events (games, practice sessions) per 1000 popn per annum: 660

5. Length of season: 26 wks?

6. Person-events demanded per week in season per 1000 popn: 25

7. Participants per event: 26

8. Demand: Events (bookings) per 1000 popn per week: 0.96

9. Capacity: Events per pitch per week: 12 x 2 hour sessions or 24 hours per week ?

10. Facilities/pitches demanded per 1,000 population: 0.081

11. = 0.0496 ha

or 496(say 500)m2

per 1,000 population

x

÷

÷

÷

2. Number:

= 10 per 1000

Figure 10 – Gross demand calculation

This flow chart indicates that a grassed area of 500m2 needs to be set aside for every 1,000 persons for hockey. Given that a field measures 100m x 61m giving an area of 6,100m2 per field, a hockey field would not be required until there were 12,200 people in a community.



Working this number back the other way, in a population of 12,200 people with a participation rate of 10 per 1,000, this would provide 122 players. On the basis of 12.2 players per team this allows the formation of 10 teams. If you require each team to play and train at the same time as another team on the same ground (no problem for games) and each team will play once and train twice per week then you must accommodate 5 pairs of teams x 3 sessions per week or 15 sessions per week. Assuming each ground can withstand about 25 hours of play per week, and assuming that not all of the 15 sessions run for a full 2 hours then it all just about fits. The problem is that you need a field as soon as you have 25 players or a community of 2,500 and you probably need a second field by the time the population reaches 15,000 to eliminate scheduling and wear and tear issues. Accordingly a dedicated hockey field per 12,500 people is considered an adequate provision rate. It should be noted that the average provision rate in metropolitan Perth at present is roughly one field per 15,000 for those LGAs that provide hockey facilities. As a guide we frequently consider one full size Australian football oval is required per 6,000 people. This sized field accommodates two hockey pitches and therefore is somewhat consistent with the broader planning for facilities approach. Attachment 2 - Population projections in WA Towns to 2021

This data is drawn from the Western Australian Planning Commission’s publication WA Tomorrow. Those population centres or LGAs that will exceed a population of over 25,000 by 2021 are highlighted. This is the target group to have a synthetic turf installed prior to 2021 acknowledging that not all locations will require a turf.



Table 34 - Population projections



Report 3: Strategic Plan 1 Issues impacting facility development

1.1 Population Growth

Population is the principal indicator of need for facilities for hockey in Australia. The Exercise Recreation and Sport Survey (ERASS) participation database, the Hockey Australia census and Hockey WA’s own team analysis data reflect an average participation rate across all ages (15 and over) of around 1% of the adult population. ERASS data only collects data for participants aged 15 and over. The ERASS returns show participation peaks in the 15-24 year bracket at 2.8%, drops to 0.7% in the 25-34 age group and interestingly shows a rise to 1.2% in the 35-44 bracket; after which it falls to less than 0.5% and trails off. It should be noted that children’s and youth participation rates are, however, considerably higher than adult participation rates. Generally participation rates decline from a peak around the end of primary schooling, suffer dramatically in the teenage years and then stabilise before further decline after about 25 years. This is consistent with Hockey WA participation rates. ERASS 2006 shows the WA participation rate as 1.8% for men and 1.3% for women (average 1.5%) however it is noted that there is a significant error factor in the data. Hockey WA’s data suggests a participation rate of around 0.87%. ERASS confirms that hockey is participated in predominately through a club or association (94.7%) and therefore facility provision can be seen to be strongly linked to club and association formation. We have used a catchment population base of 2,500 people to justify the first hockey field, a ratio of one field per 12,500 people in the catchment area and demand for a synthetic turf arising when an isolated catchment population exceeds 25,000. On this basis all isolated population catchments of 25,000 persons or more should be considered for turf development and support a minimum of 2 grassed fields. In the metropolitan area where catchments are generally not isolated and discrete, it is anticipated that a turf should be provided where a population catchment exceeds 50,000 within a 5km catchment radius, where there is not another turf within 10km and where the catchment is already provided with 4 or more grassed fields. A key indicator for the demand for additional grassed facilities is the desire expressed by the existing clubs. The survey and audit returns indicate that 88% of clubs are satisfied with the provision of natural grass playing fields. 69% have 3 grassed fields or less, 63% manage with only 2 fields and 38% only mark and use 1 field. Those that are seeking additional fields include:

� Melville who would like 4 grassed fields but only have 3

� Mundaring who would like 4 grassed fields at one location

� Corrigin who would like access to another field off the football oval

� Vic Park Xavier would like 4 full sized fields (one is size constrained)

� Old Guildfordians would like to have 3 full size fields with lighting for training purposes. Their problem is not one of space but of poor drainage.

Strategically it would appear that the standard measure for long term sustainable clubs would be access to 4 fields or as has occurred 3 grassed fields and one turf. Note that Melville is seeking an additional grass field to compensate for the area now occupied by their turf. Sharing of grounds is often a contentious issue, particularly in the winter season.



Survey responses advise that the most common winter season partners are Rugby followed by Football and Soccer. Sharing with Rugby appears to present the most challenges. Not only do rugby players ‘dig up’ the ground during scrums and other play, their code prefers a softer, longer grassed surface because of body contact to the ground. Conversely, hockey requires a hard, level, short cut surface to accommodate safe play with smooth ball roll and avoidance of injuries to ankles and knees whilst turning quickly. Summer season partners tend not to be problematic with the most common seasonal partner being cricket. Diamond sports and athletics also team well with hockey allocations. Access to grassed playing surfaces for hockey is predominately determined by Local Government’s seasonal allocation process. It is essential that clubs work with their local authority to ensure ongoing and repeat access to previous allocations and in particular where additional fields are required. A key factor in the provision of synthetic turf fields for hockey is that many fields are provided by or are located on the education sector land (private schools and universities) and this trend is set to continue. In addition to new facility development issues there are also concerns about retention of existing facility access. Current facilities are under threat from:

� Increasing demand from other sporting codes, particularly soccer, where hockey allocations are being lost or subjected to shared use and increased wear and tear.

� Changes to ground allocations and rationalisation of facilities as a result of new land use planning strategies within councils. This could affect Fremantle, Canning, Kwinana, Kalamunda, Mundaring and Kellerberrin.

1.2 Climate change impacts

Whilst temperature increase is acknowledged as a climate change impact on sport the installation of sports field lighting for evening play quite readily addresses this issue. The most significant climate change impact for outdoor sports will be the lack of water for playing field development and maintenance. Already the Department of Water has asked every LGA to prepare a water conservation plan and within the next 2 years will require them to restrict watering across their reserve areas to less than 7,500kl/hectare. Previous studies estimate that quality grass fields for hockey require as much as 14,000kl/hectare. In short, the water supply will be restricted or even selectively turned off and the fields will be brown and poor quality to play on.

For hockey the lack of water has the potential to limit both natural grass and synthetic surface development. It also has the potential to create an opportunity to take hockey to a new and competitive level through the use of hybrid and ultimately dry turfs. The development of new generation dry turfs must be considered an absolute priority for Hockey WA, Hockey Australia and the International Hockey Federation (FIH).

Should a suitable dry surface be approved by FIH, being able to offer to local government an alternative to natural grass field development that does not use water and can accommodate 2 to 3 times the volume of use of a grassed field, will be a compelling argument for the installation of new turfs.

A key question to consider here is that the major winter season competitor for playing field space is soccer. Whilst the field areas are not identical (91.44m x 55m for hockey vs 100m x 64m for soccer) there may be a strategic alliance for soccer and hockey clubs to combine in their approach to LGAs for the development of multi-use synthetic fields.

It is understood that synthetic surfaces for hockey and soccer are designed differently and therefore do not lend themselves to multipurpose or shared use. This may change over time as water availability and cost pressures increase. Nonetheless, the future development of hockey facilities in whatever shape or form will need to be focused on synthetic surfaces.



1.3 Sustainability through use

From a sustainability perspective it is noted that at present there are 8 turfs in the metropolitan area and 10 turfs located in the country areas. As a crude analysis and based on the returns from the club surveys, only 30% of clubs have access to a turf in country areas whilst in the metropolitan area 70% of clubs make use of synthetic surfaces for playing and training purposes. Within the metropolitan area clubs currently make use of 378 turf hours per week. This equates to an average of 47 hours per turf per week. Noting that for turf both playing and training there are usually (at least) 2 teams in operation at one time thereby indicating turf use for 24 hours per week. For discussion purposes let us assume that the reasonable utilisation capacity of a turf is 47 hours per week as follows. Note the spread of hours is indicative only:

Utilisation Summer Winter

Monday 5-10pm 5 4-9pm 5

Tuesday 5-10pm 5 4-9pm 5

Wednesday 5-10pm 5 4-9pm 5

Thursday 5-10pm 5 4-9pm 5

Friday 5-10pm 5 4-9pm 5

Saturday 2-4pm 2 8am-8pm 12

Sunday 2-4pm 2 8am-6pm 10

29 47

Table 35 - Turf utilisation (hrs)

This assessment would indicate that there is room for additional utilisation at the existing turf facilities.

The survey also asked for an indication of turf training hours clubs would like to use. For metropolitan clubs this question solicited a requirement for 170 additional hours of training per week as the desired level of access. Using a linear analysis to achieve 170 additional turf access hours based on 24 hours use per turf, then 7 additional turfs would be required. This is considered reasonably justifiable.

By extrapolating this argument further, let’s assume that of the club’s desired use they can only achieve 80% of their target due to cost of access and timing clashes. This would reduce the number of fully utilised turfs required to an additional 6 in the metro area. 1.4 Summary

In summary the key issues affecting facility development are seen to be:

� Population

� Participation rate

� Water availability

� Sustainability

These are discussed individually below. Notwithstanding any of the arguments related to demand for facilities the critical imperative will be the smooth and continuous transition to synthetic turf, ideally a dry turf. 1.4.1 Population

Metropolitan Perth has a current population of around 1.5million and this is projected to grow to around 1.85million by 20211. Assuming that the facility provision level is currently adequate, then on a straight facility per population growth basis, this would require 23% more facilities by 2021.

1 Western Australia Tomorrow 2005 by the Western Australian Planning Commission



In real terms this would mean a minimum of 2 new turfs and approximately 30 more grassed fields in Perth by 2020. There is a strong sense through club survey returns and workshop discussions that whilst the current level of grass field provision is adequate, the number of synthetic surfaces available is not adequate and therefore additional turfs beyond the current per capita provision rate will be required. 1.4.2 Participation Rate

ERASS shows participation rates for hockey in WA at around 1.8% for males 15 and over, 1.3% for females and an average of 1.5% of the population, the vast majority of which is club based. Hockey WA’s own census shows a participation rate of 0.87% when school activity is discounted. It is believed that it is the non-school activity that drives the need for new facilities and that strategic facility planning should not be unduly influenced by school participation. High levels of school participation are essential in ensuring longer term adult participation rates, but should not independently influence facility provision.

Assuming the participation rate is maintained or improved upon, then new demand for hockey facilities will come from an additional 3,000 to 5,000 players. Working on a medium to large club size in line with the sustainable club model outlined in Report 2 (around 25 teams) this would equate to 10 to 15 new clubs. Each club would ideally require one turf and 2 or 3 playing fields. These new clubs would require an additional 10 to 15 synthetic turfs and 20 to 45 grassed fields, noting that an additional 10-15 turfs in the metropolitan area would be overkill and affect the sustainability of existing and new facilities. A more reasonable number is around 7 new turfs working on a catchment of around 50,000 per turf.

As an aside and by comparison, the participation rate for soccer in Western Australia as reflected in the ERASS study is 6% for males and 1.3% for females with an average of 1.8% of the population aged 15 over involved in the sport. This demand is already impacting negatively on hockey access in some locations. Combating soccer’s demand for sports fields will be a major issue in maintaining access to playing fields. 1.4.3 Water availability

The table on the following page indicates the number of grassed playing fields available to clubs at present. The average number of fields for the larger clubs is 3 or 4. If water supply becomes a major limiting factor then transfer to dry synthetic surfaces will be critical. Maintenance of these 125 fields together with the development of an additional 20 to 45 fields in the future may become unfeasible.

Stirling 20 Hale 3

Curtin 6 Kalamunda 3

YMCC 6 Melville 3

Harlequins 5 North Coast Raiders 3

UWA 5 Newman Knights 3

Willetton 5 Old Guildfordians 3

Canning 4 Whitford 3

Fremantle 4 Woodvale 3

Lakers 4 Aquinas 2

Modernians 4 Dale 2

Rockingham, 4 John XX111 2

Victoria Park 4 Kwinana 2

WASPs 4 Riverside lions 2

Westside Wolves 4 Southern River 2

Blades 3 South Perth 2

CT Pirates 3 Suburbans 2

Table 36 - fields per club



1.4.4 Sustainability

The maintenance of synthetic turf fields and their ultimate replacement is a major cost issue for hockey clubs. So too is the requirement to maintain and progressively refurbish off field amenities such as clubrooms and changerooms. The following series of spreadsheet based tables indicates the capacity of metropolitan Perth to sustain approximately 17 to 20 turfs by 2021. The figures for facility use per week are described previously in this report and relate to current operations at PHS and other metropolitan turfs. The hourly hire rates quoted are average returns received taking into account the varying venue hire rates for training and competition and the gate entry charge levied for competition, discounted by 15% due to missed sessions, player non-payments and bad debts.

Revenue generation potential Part A

Winter Summer

47 hours per week 29 hours per week

121 per hour hire charge 95 per hour hire charge

5,666 weekly revenue 3,248 weekly revenue

Table 37 - Revenue generation Part A

Part B indicates that approximately $216,000 per year can be generated from turf hire fees. If 20% of these fees are saved to a reserve, just over $43,000 can be set aside each year. The remaining 80% can be allocated to turf operating costs including watering, sweeping, lighting and even debt retirement from the initial capital cost of construction. At the bottom of the table is an indication of the cost of turf replacement, comprising the carpet and the base. On average an allowance of $375,000 is considered adequate.

Revenue generation potential Part B

25 weeks winter revenue rates = 141,638

23 weeks at summer revenue rates = 74,704

4 weeks zero revenue = 0

52 weeks per year = 216,342

Total annual turf hire revenue 216,342 50 % income allocated to operating costs 108,171 20% allocated to debt retirement 43,268 10% allocated to ongoing repair and replacement 21,634 20% allocated to surface replacement reserve 43,268

turf replacement cost - carpet only 300,000

base replacement cost - every second time 150,000

average turf replacement cost 375,000 Table 38 - Revenue generation Part B

The final table Part C part shows costs and savings escalated over time. All figures in the table are escalated at 5% including the sum available annually for allocation to reserve, the interest earned on funds in the reserve account and the cost of the turf. We note that the cost of construction is currently running at 11.33% per annum however believe that in line with past experience that the cost of turf provision and replacement is not rising at this rate. Product improvements through technology advances together with the greater competition and a greater volume of product on the market is keeping turf purchase and replacement costs down. This is anticipated to continue.

The next table shows what happens when this regime is applied to the sinking fund reserve account.

In year 1 (nominally 2008) the club would allocate 43,268 or 20% of its turf hire revenue to the reserve. In each subsequent year this 20 % allocation would be continued but a 5% increase in the hire rate would apply. From year 2 the fund would earn interest at the rate of 5% per annum. The fund would grow due to both reserve contributions and interest earnings.



The cost of turf replacement would also grow at the rate of 5% per annum. The crossover point (when there are more funds in the reserve than the cost of replacement) will occur in year 9 under this model.

Part C Compounding turf replacement reserve value

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9

annual allocation 43,268 45,432 49,867 54,632 59,857 65,581 71,853 78,725 86,254

interest %@ 5% 0 2,163 2,272 2,493 2,732 2,993 3,279 3,593 3,936 total paid to reserve 43,268 47,595 52,139 57,125 62,588 68,574 75,132 82,317 90,190

Cumulative Total 43,268 90,864 143,002 200,127 262,716 331,290 406,422 488,740 578,930

20%

turf cost 375,000 393,750 413,438 434,109 455,815 478,606 502,536 527,663 554,046


Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8

annual allocation 43,268 45,432 49,867 54,632 59,857 65,581 71,853 78,725

interest %@ 5% 0 2,163 2,272 2,493 2,732 2,993 3,279 3,593 total paid to reserve 43,268 47,595 52,139 57,125 62,588 68,574 75,132 82,317

Cumulative Total 43,268 90,864 143,002 200,127 262,716 331,290 406,422 4,393

surface is replaced in year 7 at a cost of $402,029

turf cost 375,000 393,750 413,438 434,109 455,815 478,606 502,536 527,663


Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15

annual allocation 86,254 94,503 103,540 113,443 124,292 136,179 149,202

interest %@ 5% 3,936 4,313 4,725 5,177 5,672 6,215 6,809 total paid to reserve 90,190 98,815 108,266 118,620 129,964 142,393 156,011

Cumulative Total 94,583 193,398 301,664 420,284 550,248 692,641 848,652

surface and base are replaced in year 15 at a cost of $742,475

turf cost 554,046 581,748 610,836 641,378 673,447 707,119 742,475

Table 39 - revenue generation Part C

Note that only the turf surface will need to be replaced in the first cycle but funds need to be provided for both the turf and the base in the second cycle.

Also note that the critical element in this model is the 5% annual escalation in the funds sent to reserve. If the club does not manage a 5% increase each year then the replacement period extends dramatically. For example if only a 2% increase in the funds allocated to reserve the replacement periods are extended to year 8 for the surface only and Year 19 for the surface and the base. If there is no escalation, then the period extends to year 10 for turf and year 21 for both surface and base.

The final analysis in this sustainability section is to assess the number of turfs that could be sustained by Perth’s Population.

If you assume that each player will play once and train twice per week then each player will contribute about $15 per week to turf revenues. If you average 20 players per training session then you are receiving about $100 per session.

Assume also that you need to fill 47 hours of turf use per week with an average of 20 players per use. This will require 940 player outings or 313 individual players if they play or train on the turf on average 3 times per week. It is contended that if you can find the 940 player outings for the winter season then the summer season will take care of itself.

Therefore based on a projected population of 1.85 million in Perth by 2021, and the current participation rate of 0.87% of the population, then Perth will be able to sustain 17 turfs.



2 Current distribution of facilities

This map shows the current location of facilities and turfs in the metropolitan area (circled in blue). Note that proposed new turfs at Aquinas College and Scotch College have been included as they are committed or highly likely to be installed and do not present new planning or negotiations (circled in green).

Figure 11 - Facilities and turfs in the metropolitan area

Iluka Reserve Joondalup Arena Turf

MacDonald Park

Kingsway Reserve

Charles Riley Reserve

Newman College Charles Veryard Reserve

Fletcher Park

Burrendah Reserve

UWA Sports Park and Superturf

Perth Hockey Stadium Turf 1 & 2 Melvista Oval

Mt Claremont Oval Oval

Scotch College John XXIII College

Tregonning Field

Perry Lakes

Hale School and Aquaturf Breckler Park

Yokine Reserve

Altone Park

Barblett Oval Hartfield Park

Sutherlands Park

Morris Buzacott Reserve & Melville Turf

Trevor Gribble Reserve

Aquinas College

Richardson Park

Bob Blackburn Reserve

Trinity Manning

Stevens Reserve

Shenton Turf

Lark Hill Turf 12km

Orelia Oval

Ferndale Oval

Lilac Hill Park



This map shows the distribution of clubs at facilities. The dotted circles around each turf indicate a catchment radius of 5km.

Figure 12 - Club distribution in the metropolitan area

ECU Joondalup Lakers Joondalup Arena (Whitford and Harlequins)


North Coast Raiders


Vic Park Panthers

Willetton

UWA

Riverside Lions Westside Wolves

Westside Wolves John XXIII

Subs

YMCC

Hale Harlequin Wanneroo


Blades

Curtin Trinity Pirates Kalamunda

Southern River

Melville City

Willetton

Old Aquinians

South Perth Wasps

Dale


Fremantle

Wolves, Subs, YMCC

Kwinana

Canning

Old Guildfordians

Rockingham 12km



3 Proposed facility distribution for the next 5 years

This image shows the proposed facility provision within the next 5 years. Note that the currently planned facilities at Scotch College and Aquinas College will be complete. It is anticipated that a new turf facility will be established at Guildford Grammar to service the school, Old Guildfordians and potentially Blades hockey club. A priority in this period is a new turf for establishment for Harlequins, Modernians, and Stirling, potentially at Yokine Reserve and for Whitford at MacDonald Park. Fremantle is expanded or relocated or a new club is established in Cockburn.

Figure 13 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 5 years

New or relocated club target Prinsep Rd POS

ECU Joondalup Joondalup Arena (Whitford and Harlequins)


North Coast Raiders


Vic Park Panthers

Willetton

UWA

Riverside Lions Westside Wolves Oval

Westside Wolves

John XXIII Subs

YMCC



Blades


Southern River

Melville

Willetton

Old Aquinians

South Perth

Dale


Fremantle

Wolves, Subs, YMCC

Kwinana

Canning

Old Guildfordians

New turf target Yokine Reserve

New turf target Guildford Grammar

or North Swan Park

New turf target McDonald Park

Rockingham 12km



4 Proposed facility distribution for the period 5 to 10 years on

This period will require turf development for Southern River Hockey Club at Sutherland Park in Southern River, and ideally for the Kalamunda Club and surrounding private school clubs at Hartfield Park in Forrestfield. It is also possible that additional private school developments would occur at locations yet to be identified. The relocated or newly formed club in Cockburn should demonstrate need for a turf in this period.

Figure 14 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 5 – 10 years

New turf target Prinsep Rd POS



North Coast Raiders


Vic Park Panthers

Willetton

UWA


Westside Wolves

John XXIII Subs

YMCC



Blades


Southern River

Melville

Willetton

Old Aquinians

South Perth

Dale


Fremantle

Wolves, Subs, YMCC

Kwinana

Canning

Old Guildfordians

New turf target Hartfield Park

New turf target Sutherland Park

Rockingham 12km



5 Proposed facility distribution for the period 10 to 15 years on

This period will require turf development for Kwinana Hockey Club potentially at Orelia Oval and adjacent to the primary and high schools; and at Ellenbrook (for a club yet to be established). Assuming that the Wanneroo Districts Association has been embraced as part of the Hockey WA competition structure, their home venue is anticipated to be Joondalup Arena in the short term (and possibly Nanovich Park in the long term).

Figure 16 – Proposed facilities in the metropolitan area for the next 10 -15 years and on

New turf target Orelia Oval


Whitford

Wanneroo and Districts

North Coast Raiders


Vic Park Panthers

Willetton

UWA


Westside Wolves

John XXIII Subs

YMCC



Blades


Southern River

Melville

Willetton

Old Aquinians

South Perth

Dale


Fremantle

Wolves, Subs, YMCC

Kwinana

Canning

Old Guildfordians

New turf target Ellenbrook

Rockingham 12km

New turf target Nanovich Park

Princep Rd POS



6 Facility development requirements in the period post 2025

Future growth in the Perth Metropolitan area will by 2025 show the development of sizeable communities in the areas now designated as Brookdale, near Armadale; Keralup, located east of Rockingham and north of Mandurah and Pinjarra; Serpentine Jarrahdale Shire (particularly Mundijong) to the south east; and Alkimos Eglinton in the north. Similarly if the Hills Association were to be brought into the Hockey WA competition structure a further turf would be required potentially at Harry Riseborough Reserve in Mundaring.

Keralup is forecast to be home to as many as 90,000 residents subject to a variety of environmental clearances. Even if the site is significantly constrained the population is likely to exceed 50,000 and therefore warrant consideration of extensive facilities for hockey.

Figure 17 - Keralup location



The next major southern facility development could be located either at Keralup or potentially the regional open space at the intersection of Fiegerts Road and Pinjarra Road. This new facility would be supported by the turf at Lark Hill to the north and the Mandurah turf at Halls Head to the south. Below is the original site master plan for the Fiegerts Road site. The rectangular fields were proposed for soccer, however, future decisions will need to be made to relocate either soccer or hockey from Peelwood Parade Reserve in Halls Head when demand exceeds capacity of the site. It is understood that Peelwood Parade Reserve will not be able to accommodate both hockey and soccer in the longer term and one group will need to relocate to allow for expansion of the other.

Figure 18 - Original site master plan for the Fiegerts Road site

Serpentine Jarrahdale is currently preparing a district structure plan for Mundijong. This plan will work in concert with the current Byford Structure plan which is approximately 40% implemented. Both Byford and Mundijong will ultimately house around 30,000 residents. The current isolation of Mundijong is contradicted by the fact that it is geographically central to the area and will ultimately become the focal point for the Shire. In line with the benchmark or guideline that calls for a synthetic pitch once an isolated population centre exceeds 25,000, Mundijong should be a long term consideration for turf development. West of Armadale is Brookdale Regional Open Space, servicing the new growth areas of Harrisdale, Piara Waters, and Wungong Urban Water. Collectively, these new areas will more than double the population of the City of Armadale, pushing it from 55,000 to as much as 130,000 residents. The Brookdale Regional Open Space lies between Twelfth Road and Waterworks Road and in the long term may support a facility installation for hockey.



Figure 19 – Concept Plan for Brookdale Regional Open Space

In the north the next major new development is Alkimos Eglinton. The District Structure Plan (DSP) shown overleaf is currently being developed for this future city of around 50,000 residents. Further north of Alkimos Eglinton are the St Andrews and Capricorn Village developments in Yanchep and further north again is Two Rocks. It is likely that the Yanchep area will feed south toward Alkimos for its regional activities. The area highlighted on the DSP is proposed for regional open space and this site could readily accommodate regional standard hockey facilities, most likely in the period 2030 to 2040. Presently the northern most turf facility is Arena Joondalup. There are very few opportunities for hockey facility development (especially areas for a turf) in the subdivisions of Kinross, Butler and Jindalee. An alternative option but not necessarily one to replace the Alkimos development is to the east of Wanneroo on the border of Hocking. The City currently leases Nanovich Park to Racing and Wagering WA for trotting and horse and pony club activities. In the longer term this lease will expire and Nanovich Park could be considered for redevelopment as a district open space.



Figure 20 - Alkimos Eglinton structure plan

7 Role of Hockey WA in facility development

Outside of the Perth Hockey Stadium, Hockey WA is not anticipated to have a significant or direct facility provision role. It is essential, however, that the PHS be presented and maintained as the number one quality facility in the state at all times. It must be the benchmark and the standard against which all other venues are measured.



Indirectly, however, there are numerous roles and responsibilities that should fall to Hockey WA. The first is in ensuring that local government is fully informed of the requirements of Hockey clubs in accordance with the basic provision model outlined in Section 3 of Report 2. Secondly, Hockey WA must take a role in ensuring its future provision requirements in terms of land allocation are secured. This will require liaison with local authorities, the DPI and DSR to ensure adequate land is allocated for the development of turf and grass facilities in selected locations, generally as outlined in Section 10 of Report 3. A third role for Hockey WA is to provide financial support by way of a self supporting loan program to clubs as proponents wishing to develop new synthetic surfaces in identified development target areas. Hockey WA have provided a number of self supporting loans to clubs for this purpose and this is seen as highly positive in the grant application process. It is recommended that on receipt of the State Sporting Strategic Facilities Plan, the Hockey WA Board review its existing policy titled “Additional Synthetic Turf” to determine the level of and the conditions under which funding may be available for turf provision. A final role for Hockey WA is to liaise with the various equipment suppliers, and in particular turf manufacturers and suppliers, to ensure that product development and availability meets the needs of hockey in WA. Hockey WA should also take discussions with other state sporting associations regarding a collective demand for synthetic surfaces. As part of its equipment liaison role Hockey WA will be in a position to offer advice and guidance to clubs for their procurement needs. 8 Role of Hockey Australia in facility development

Perhaps the most significant role for Hockey Australia in facility development in the next era is to continue its push ensure that FIH approves a suitable long lasting, UV resistant and cool to play on dry turf for mass installation across Australia so that it:

� makes surface choice relatively simple

� allows Hockey Australia and in turn Hockey WA the capacity to endorse a turf manufacturer as preferred supplier

� allows for mass distribution and installation thereby reducing the unit cost

� negates the need for water and therefore is attractive to all tiers of government as a preferred sporting surface

Another role is for Hockey Australia to endorse the recommended facility specifications detailed in this report for Western Australian installations and to issue similar standards for all other states or regions.



9 Recommendations

1 Adopt the guidelines set out in the draft policy documents in Report 2 as the development parameters for hockey facilities in Western Australia.

2 Establish dialogue with the relevant local government authorities, the Western Australian

Local Government Association (WALGA) and the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DPI), with assistance from the Department of Sport and Recreation (DSR) and the Western Australian Sports Federation, to make the land allocation projections and facility design specifications detailed in this report known to all parties.

3 Facilitate dialogue between the individual clubs and the respective Local Government

Authorities as required to ensure that the future land allocations for hockey facility development are identified and secured as quickly as possible by incorporation into local authority land development and strategic facility planning processes.

4 Establish dialogue with the seven members of the Pubic Schools Sports Association (PSSA)

and other private schools and colleges in growth areas regarding their plans for the development of hockey facilities and specifically synthetic turf facilities, their use and availability by school and community clubs and their accessibility to Hockey WA for competition fixtures and affiliated club training purposes.

5 Seek to embrace the Wanneroo Districts Hockey Association Inc. as part of the Hockey WA

operation. 6 Advise the Department of Education and Training of the playing field maintenance

specification described in section 3.2 of report 2 and encourage them to develop and maintain the grassed playing fields at primary and secondary schools and colleges in accordance with that specification.

7 Work in conjunction with Hockey Australia and the International Hockey Federation (FIH) to

bring to the market as quickly as possible an approved dry synthetic turf surface. 8 Investigate the potential for a mass production contract for the provision of Hockey Goals

under license to Hockey WA for supply to all Western Australian Clubs. 9 In consideration of State Sporting Strategic Facilities Plan, the Hockey WA Board review its

existing policy titled “Additional Synthetic Turf” to determine the level of and the conditions under which funding may be available for turf provision.



10 Liaise with the City of Melville to determine the feasibility of access to a fourth grassed playing field on the eastern side of the entry to Morris Buzacott Reserve

Figure 21 - Fourth grass field at Morris Buzacott Reserve

11 Liaise with Guildford Grammar School, Old Guildfordians and Blades Hockey Clubs in conjunction with the City of Swan with a view to establishing a synthetic turf at Guildford Grammar School. The location shown below is indicative only and has not been endorsed by the school.

Figure 22 - Synthetic turf at Guildford Grammar

4

1

2 3

T

T



12 Liaise with the City of Stirling in association with Stirling City Rangers, Harlequins and Modernians to determine the feasibility of constructing a synthetic turf at Yokine Reserve.

Figure 23 - Synthetic turf at Yokine Reserve

13 Liaise with the City of Joondalup in association with Whitford Hockey Club to determine the feasibility of constructing a synthetic turf at MacDonald Park.

Figure 24 - Synthetic turf at MacDonald Park

T

T

T



14 Liaise with the City of Cockburn, together with the Fremantle Hockey Club to determine the feasibility of establishing a synthetic turf in the Cockburn area, potentially on reserve land adjacent to the freeway in Cockburn central.

Figure 25 - Synthetic turf in Cockburn

15 Liaise with City of Gosnells together with Southern River Hockey Club to determine the

feasibility of establishing a synthetic turf at Sutherlands Park in addition to the existing hockey fields.

Figure 26 - Synthetic turf at Sutherlands Park



16 Liaise with Kalamunda Shire and the Kalamunda, St Brigids and Mazenod Hockey Clubs to determine the feasibility of the establishment of a synthetic turf in the hills district, potentially at one of the colleges or alternatively at Hartfield Park in Forrest field.

Figure 27 - Synthetic turf at Mazenod College

Figure 28 - Synthetic turf at St Brigids

T

Mazenod College

T

St Brigids College



17 Liaise with the City of Swan regarding two potential hockey turf developments within the City of Swan (one in Ellenbrook and the other in the Midland / Guildford area). Potential locations include the proposed District Open Space in Whiteman Park for Ellenbrook, and North Swan Park and Lilac Hill Park for the Midland / Guildford area. Note that there is a possibility that Old Guildfordians will seek to develop a facility at Guildford Grammar.

Figure 29 - Hockey turf potential location to service Ellenbrook

Hockey Turf sited within

potential District Open Space



Figure 30 - Hockey Turf potential locations in the Midland / Guildford area

Potential Hockey Turfs

Development Sites



18 Liaise with the Town of Kwinana and the Department of Education and Training together with the Kwinana Hockey Club to determine the feasibility of establishing a turf in the Kwinana area, potentially at Orelia positioning the turf as part of the primary school oval site.

Figure 31 - Synthetic turf in Orelia

19 Liaise with Mundaring Shire and the Mundaring Women’s Hockey Club to determine the feasibility of establishing of a home for hockey in Mundaring at Harry Riseborough Oval in Mundaring including the establishment of a synthetic turf facility.

Figure 32 - Hockey facilities in Mandurah

Future Turf

Existing grass fields



20 Liaise with the City of Armadale, Armadale Redevelopment Authority and the Dale Hockey Club to determine the feasibility of establishing hockey facilities at the proposed regional open space to be developed at Waterworks Road, Brookdale. The installation should allow for 4 grassed hockey fields and associated club amenities in the first instance and subsequently the replacement of one field with a synthetic turf.

Figure 33 - Hockey facilities in Armadale



21 Liaise with the City of Wanneroo together with the Wanneroo Hockey Association to determine the feasibility of establishing hockey facilities in the longer term at Nanovich Park in Hocking. This reserve of approximately 28 Ha is currently leased for equestrian purposes but in the long term may be released for active open space purposes. The coloured area shown in the middle of the reserve does not encroach on existing operations and would accommodated a synthetic turf with associated amenities and 3 grass fields.

Figure 34 - Hockey facilities in Hocking

Site measures 120m x 295m

ccs strategic management...final report state sporting strategic facilities plan 2009 to 2025 march...

Documents