Spring Hill Village - A Plan For The Future

I would love to see spring hill get bigger I think what the Council has in it's long-term planning will be good for spring hill

The proposed development on the Western side is in the Cabonne Shire. As there has been no decision on the amalgamation with Cabonne, at present, how can Orange City Council pass a Master Plan that simply takes over Cabonne Council land when the Boundaries Commission have not yet made a Ruling?

Bearing in mind that there is support for Plan A and not for Plan B why does Council not split the Master Plan and deal with the two sections separately once the amalgamation issue has been settled and the boundaries have been reviewed. If it is decided that Spring Hill is to be become part of Cabonne Council by the Boundaries Commission and no longer part of Orange Council, what then with the dwelling proposal?. Alternatively if the region includes both Blayney and Cabonne, why rush the Master Plan? Orange City Council representatives, at the meeting admitted that there had not been any consultation with Cabonne about their Shire land on the Western side of the village. Why not?

The proposal is significant for the village. If it is Council’s intention to create two communities within Springhill, because of the constraints of the railway line, and the location in the low lying area, it would be in a Regional Council’s interest to understand the dynamics of a rural village community. Both Cabonne and Blayney are best suited to do this as they currently have small communities which they are reviving. Orange City Council is clearly not in this league. It has never had the experience. Take counsel from the experts. If not, the social and financial cost to the Springhill village and the region may well be enormous. We cannot afford this possible, and deliberate, disharmony.

Sally Playfair
Springside

As Plan B stands, Springhill cannot take possibly 100 more cars driving through the village on the poor quality road structure. At the Master Plan meeting with Council, the road issue was questioned, and the audience were advised by Council representatives that this was not on the agenda, and was, therefore, not under consideration. How can such a significant proposal be taken seriously without some indication of planning for access in and out of the precinct?

Felicity Hecht
Springside

The Plan A is appealing and will certainly beautify the village

Plan B is abhorrent. To consider developing 95 dwellings which are very small, and are under the flight path, and will be in a swamp, divided off from the rest of the village by a railway line, is setting up the village for an eastern and western set of dwellings with the eastern side very much impoverished – despite its newness. To deliberately plan to do this is even more intolerable.

A large percentage of the proposed dwellings are very small and one wonders who would willingly choose to live so far out of the major regional centres, in a small dwelling that has no rural aspect to it. Most people living in the Spring Hill village do so because of the ability to own a larger block of land, and have the space around them to enjoy the privacy and rural aspect they are seeking. Why would Council plan to bring in a community for whom the concept of a rural existence in a village will still remain to be foreign because the new dwellings have not provided the opportunities a regional village allows for? The aspect is the same as where the residents have come from – cluster type, small and under a flight path, and with limited open space that is either public or private.

At the meeting with the presentation by Oculus on the Plan, it was clear that the drafters of the Plan had no affinity with the culture or genre of the village. To try to impose a metropolitan suburban vision on a very small regional town 250 kms from the Metro CBD is patronising and short sighted. What we have in the Spring Hill area is unique. By planting more trees and allowing for more commercial activity will far more greatly enhance the village than building a large number of very small, and perhaps, low cost, dwellings.

Sally Playfair
Springside

I oppose the proposed Master Plan – mainly because I have to accept both Part A and Part B. According to council representatives – there was no option to accept just one Part. If the proposal was accepted then both Part A and Part B were the approved Master Plan.
As a villager I want to maintain the atmosphere of the Village and enhance it where appropriate – not destroy it.
If this is a Master Plan then it should also include the Proposed Industrial Estate which is only metres from the boundaries of the Village and could have significant impacts for traffic movements – however the Master Plan does not include this significant proposed development.
The housing development component of the Master Plan – has many concerns:
• It will divide the village physically and mentally
• The roads will not cope with the influx of this number of people
• Open spaces will be allocated to the new residents while existing residents will lose their agricultural vistas.
• The landscaping proposed is quite challenging due to the proposed housing development land being in a low lying area that is prone to flooding and this could impact on other areas of the village.

It is a positive thing that Orange City Council (OCC) wants to beautify the village with trees and to calm the traffic flowing through the village. However this could result in the narrowing of the existing thoroughfare and without providing an alternative route for large/heavy vehicles through the village – it will just make it more difficult for these vehicles to transit the road, whilst possibly in the process damaging any initiatives that may be put in place.

May I suggest that OCC should be considering instead:
• A heavy/large vehicle alternative route taking these vehicles outside of the village and away from Worboy’s and Seaton’s Streets would be beneficial
• The potholes need to be filled
• Drains need to maintained and mowed
• Some footpaths could be introduced
• Recreation Ground
o Toilets, & BBQ areas and buildings need to renovated
o The complete area needs to mowed including up the back
o The driveway could be sealed and a parking area added
o A pedestrian crossing could be installed at the railway crossing on Whiley’s Rd – allowing access from the Village
o Mini- grandstands could be supplied
• The cemetery could have parking and seating
• More light commercial enterprises could be added to the commercial precinct eg shops
• Spring Hill Temperance Hall needs to have a notice board outside for notification of Village meetings etc.
• A small sound system would be valuable for the Spring Hill Temperance Hall
• Why don’t you enhance our natural surroundings so that we can have additional tourism opportunities – such as a golf course instead of a proposed housing development to the east as well as recognising the significance of Martin’s Lagoon and nurturing its tourism possibilities.

I would like to see Spring Hill Village get bigger I love what you have pland go for it

I would like to thank Orange City Council for the opportunity to comment on the Village of Spring Hill.

A village is a small group of dwellings in a rural environment that already have a school and a church - That is Spring Hill Village

Why change it when what we have is so good!!!

So being designated as a village means the small community is generally based on agriculture and has open fields surrounding it. The major factors in this type of settlement are location of water sources, organisation of agriculture and landholding, and the likelihood of flooding – all important considerations for Spring Hill.

Valuable additions/inclusions to the master plan:
• Bus Service – a regular bus service between Orange and Millthorpe would assist with transportation to the village
• An Ambulance Service stationed at the airport – we have an ageing population and young families. An Ambulance would be beneficial to transport people quickly to hospital. It would also allow faster servicing of Millthorpe/Lucknow areas and the Great Western Highway as well as providing security if an incident occurred at the airport.
• Recreation Ground – needs:
o all areas mowed
o movable/small grandstands
o booths which allow different vendors to attend an event and showcase their wares/food
o a designated parking area
o existing buildings could be revamped and beautified
• Cemetery – needs :
o To be beautified, maybe some garden beds and seating
o A Cemetery Heritage walk – explaining the prominent families buried and their stories
o Re-open it to allow for Ashes to be interned in a wall
• Trees are always good if appropriately placed
• Roads – need to better maintained – sometimes the potholes have potholes. Consider re-surfacing areas that continually degrade instead of just filling the potholes.
• Housing Developments - There should not be the ability to subdivide land within the confines of the Village. Otherwise the “Village atmosphere will be lost”. Spaciousness helps to determine a village.
• Trucks could be limited/detoured to more suitable existing roads within the area instead of transiting through the main streets of the Village. If the road is narrowed large trucks turning from Worboys into Seaton may be stuck or destroy plantings.

I feel issues that need attention include,The rural feeling of Sping Hill should remain,any land sold should be in large blocks,Also the population should remain the same,0ver population causes lovely towns like Sping Hill problems,The recreation area needs a lot 0f attention and thought,example,water needs to be connected to the the building where the barbecue area is located,also a sink and taps,the serving bench needs replacing,a widow or two would not go astray,money spent wisely works well,maybe at times visitors could use the area,also signs need to be erected to keep the building clean after use,Street drainage is a big problem in Spring Hill,like our roads second class,water expected to run uphill, the water run off is bad, drains need cleaning,some areas need pipping in place,The open drains are dangerous to adults,more so children,there is also the hazard of vermin and health issues,In regard to traffic signs do help also speed humps in areas affected,narrowing of roads at key points nor plantings will solve the problem,if anything will be worst of .Access to main part of village needs to be by footpath?with wheelchair friendly ramps.

I would like to thank the council for their presentation at the Spring Hill hall.
What do I like most about Spring Hill, it would have to be the water. Like liquid crystal and never failing. It seems the population drawing from this aquifer is just right; enough for everybody. I hope this will not change.
I have concerns about a recent survey that contained questions closely aligned with the information the council was to deliver. The probity of this survey is in question for the following reasons:-
1. there seems to be no record of who the survey was given to.
2. there seems to be no record of who replied.
3. there was no confidentiality in the handling process.
4. I know of people who are not residents of Spring Hill village who were given the survey
5. I know of people who are not residents of Orange City Council area who were given the survey
6. I know of people who were given multiple survey sheets.
7. There seems to be no record of scrutiny in documenting the replies.
I think it is a breach of trust that council should accept the responses to this survey as being of the people of Spring Hill village.
The consultant who addressed the meeting explained that an increase in population could be achieved by subdividing the lots in the Heritage Conservation area and using the laneways as frontages. The main problem with this approach is Orange council's own Heritage Manual which states the following:-
PLANNING OUTCOMES - VILLAGE OF SPRING HILL
1. The low density character of the village is retained with lots having a minimum area of 1000 m2.
2. New buildings are set back to complement the setbacks of existing traditional buildings.
3. New buildings are designed to complement the traditional architecture of the village.
4. The reinstatement of verandahs over the footpath areas is encouraged for buildings positioned on or adjacent to the front boundary.
I think the only non-contradictory way the council can increase the population in this area is to revoke the Spring Hill Heritage Conservation area and list individual sites as having heritage value.
When it is considered that most of the in-fill that has taken place in the last 40 years does not comply with the planning outcomes listed above the only rational approach to achieve both aims is to protect what heritage remains and subdivide the rest.
It seemed strange to me that the consultant wanted only to subdivide lots within the conservation area of the village. I believe that the northern part of the village has as much potential in that respect. So, if you are looking to make a limited increase in lots within the village this is where you would start and at the same time avoid contradicting your own, documented, heritage planning goals.
Personally, I would like to see the population remain as it is.
The pedestrian rail crossing is a great idea and would, I am sure, increase the use of the Recreation area.
I think that the closure of the cemetery has created a lot of sorrow for many villagers and it is a simple, inexpensive, process for council to reinstate the cemetery; as they say, any problems can be engineered out. A lawn area for the burial of ashes and a memorial wall would be a good start.

I think the development of the Spring Hill area needs to be done to an overall well considered plan. You cannot look simply at the development of the village without taking into account the proposals for the surrounding area. This is difficult at the moment due to the Council boundaries resulting in two different management areas in the immediate town vicinity. The facilities of the town could certainly be improved by projects suggested such as tree planting, public toilets and improvements to the oval.
The improvement of drainage is a more difficult problem to solve and the proposal made at the meeting that it may be possible to expand the residential area of the village to the east would most likely only increase these problems. Areas zoned for residential development need to avoid low lying areas prone to water logging as this only results in long term problems. Other areas, such as Spring Terrace and Huntley, also need to be considered when looking for potential sites for housing developments. With the hospital being on this side of Orange it seems likely that there will be an increasing demand for housing in these areas.
Keeping an attractive rural feel would enhance this demand while industrial developments, like the waste disposal facility at Spring Terrace, only encourage people to look elsewhere for somewhere to live. Development is necessary but not at any cost. This area has been used extensively for vegetable growing and other horticultural industries in the past and can be again, provided the availability of good clean water sources is protected.
The Council spends considerable effort in promoting Orange as a tourist destination with activities such as Food Week. At least some of these people would arrive by plane. Currently the flight path takes you in over paddocks and the village – a clean green image. What a different impression would be made if the planes were to land in the middle of an industrial estate. First impressions are important for tourists and business people alike, what sort of image is best?
Providing an alternate route for heavy traffic would certainly improve the village. Hopefully the same consideration is being given to removing the heavy traffic from Spring Terrace.

I am against the village getting any bigger but would like to see improved street scape and better access to the recreation ground. Diversion of trucks would be great as well as repairs to the roads. A bus service from the village to Orange would also be advantageous.

Spring Hill is a great community that supports each other and has a mutual agreement to do the best thing we can for our great town. Issues that need attention include: Pedestrian crossing over the railway line to the rec ground, better access to the rec ground, upgraded services at the rec ground, toilets installed at the park, slowing down of speeding traffic, trucks diverted around or slowed down, beautification of the area including tree planting and maintenance, hall upgrades including beautification and better drainage for water run off. I believe we can achieve this by consulting with Orange City Council in a positive manner. All surrounding upgrades that include land development need to be considered with the airport development but this has nothing to do with Spring Hill upgrades or opinions to "their" town and these matters need to be addressed by Spring Hill residents only.

Leave the village of Spring Hill as it is, just fix the problems that exist that is drains etc;

Because the town is divided by Council boundaries a decision will need to be made about Spring Hill being Cabonne or Orange taking Cabonne land. The roads and infrastracture and the towns ability to grow is restricted by this factor.

Also this plan needs to be developed in conjunction with the Spring Hill Airport development - it appears that the two are separate, and they should not be as one will have an impact on the other. Both plans should be working together for the greater good of the Social and Economic development of the community.