THE EMERGING TRUTH
We would like to share with you some of the interesting and questionable material we are uncovering as we sift through the documents presented with the Call For Papers. Make sure you follow us on Facebook, as we endeavour to keep you up to date with the latest findings.
Traffic Troubles
Not only has the traffic report from Cambray Consulting highlighted the failings of Option 1, it has also reported errors and inconsistencies with the information provided to them by the RMS. In relation to the 2011 traffic count figures used for traffic modelling, the report has found that"these counts were undertaken on 12 July 2011, which we understand was during the NSW school holidays (4 July 2011 – 16 July 2011). Generally school holiday periods should be avoided when doing traffic counts, as the traffic conditions are generally not representative of ‘typical’ conditions. It may be therefore be worthwhile to undertake new manual traffic counts at these intersections, if these volumes are to be used as the basis for traffic modelling for the project".
One of the many concerns expressed within the community is the limitations of Option 1 as an effective solution of traffic congestion, due to the limited scope of improvement for existing intersections. Cambray Consulting also note these congestions issues. On page 16 of the report it states "the Windsor Street / Macquarie Street intersection is one of the current key capacity constraints along this route, and no upgrades to this intersection are proposed as part of the project". Further to this, any upgrades that were able to take place in the intersections would in turn attract more traffic onto this route.
It is also noted in the report that the conversion of the intersection at Freemans Reach Road/Wilberforce Road to a roundabout would alleviate both safety and capacity issues, however it reports that "there may be other alternatives for upgrading this intersection without necessarily demolishing the existing bridge".
The Cambray Consulting Final Report can be read here.
Premature Approval?
A document has been uncovered that makes us more than a bit curious as to when Minister Hazzard intended to approve this project.
Here, dated 15.8.13, is the front page of document 152 in the Call for Papers. It is an approval document ready for his signature.
So, BEFORE Minister Hazzard's department received the final reports from their independent consultants and BEFORE any recommendation was finalised for his consideration there is the Instrument of Approval? More here...
Impacts on Heritage
The following information comes from the Windsor Bridge Replacement Project, Independent Heritage Review, August 2013. This reports aims to "provide an independent heritage review of the historic heritage components of the WBRP (Windsor Bridge Replacement Project). The historic heritage reports for the WBRP will be assessed against published criteria, best practice standards and overall assessment of the quality of the work".
One of the key issues identified in the report relates to the apparent lack of investigation into heritage issues prior to the determination of Option1 being the preferred proposal, with the only detailed analysis occurring subsequent to this decision. On page 8 the report states
"Working Paper 1 says impacts are so major WBRP should not go ahead. RMS’s heritage consultants in Working Paper 1 state the proposed impacts on Thompson Square Conservation Area are so major the WBRP should not go ahead. But RMS has chosen not to accept this advice because they had already chosen to explore only Option 1 in this EIS."
In a nutshell? The heritage impacts of a major arterial road being built through the oldest town square in Australia were not investigated before Option 1 was chosen as the preferred design.
Read the full report here.
We would like to share with you some of the interesting and questionable material we are uncovering as we sift through the documents presented with the Call For Papers. Make sure you follow us on Facebook, as we endeavour to keep you up to date with the latest findings.
Traffic Troubles
Not only has the traffic report from Cambray Consulting highlighted the failings of Option 1, it has also reported errors and inconsistencies with the information provided to them by the RMS. In relation to the 2011 traffic count figures used for traffic modelling, the report has found that"these counts were undertaken on 12 July 2011, which we understand was during the NSW school holidays (4 July 2011 – 16 July 2011). Generally school holiday periods should be avoided when doing traffic counts, as the traffic conditions are generally not representative of ‘typical’ conditions. It may be therefore be worthwhile to undertake new manual traffic counts at these intersections, if these volumes are to be used as the basis for traffic modelling for the project".
One of the many concerns expressed within the community is the limitations of Option 1 as an effective solution of traffic congestion, due to the limited scope of improvement for existing intersections. Cambray Consulting also note these congestions issues. On page 16 of the report it states "the Windsor Street / Macquarie Street intersection is one of the current key capacity constraints along this route, and no upgrades to this intersection are proposed as part of the project". Further to this, any upgrades that were able to take place in the intersections would in turn attract more traffic onto this route.
It is also noted in the report that the conversion of the intersection at Freemans Reach Road/Wilberforce Road to a roundabout would alleviate both safety and capacity issues, however it reports that "there may be other alternatives for upgrading this intersection without necessarily demolishing the existing bridge".
The Cambray Consulting Final Report can be read here.
Premature Approval?
A document has been uncovered that makes us more than a bit curious as to when Minister Hazzard intended to approve this project.
Here, dated 15.8.13, is the front page of document 152 in the Call for Papers. It is an approval document ready for his signature.
So, BEFORE Minister Hazzard's department received the final reports from their independent consultants and BEFORE any recommendation was finalised for his consideration there is the Instrument of Approval? More here...
Impacts on Heritage
The following information comes from the Windsor Bridge Replacement Project, Independent Heritage Review, August 2013. This reports aims to "provide an independent heritage review of the historic heritage components of the WBRP (Windsor Bridge Replacement Project). The historic heritage reports for the WBRP will be assessed against published criteria, best practice standards and overall assessment of the quality of the work".
One of the key issues identified in the report relates to the apparent lack of investigation into heritage issues prior to the determination of Option1 being the preferred proposal, with the only detailed analysis occurring subsequent to this decision. On page 8 the report states
"Working Paper 1 says impacts are so major WBRP should not go ahead. RMS’s heritage consultants in Working Paper 1 state the proposed impacts on Thompson Square Conservation Area are so major the WBRP should not go ahead. But RMS has chosen not to accept this advice because they had already chosen to explore only Option 1 in this EIS."
In a nutshell? The heritage impacts of a major arterial road being built through the oldest town square in Australia were not investigated before Option 1 was chosen as the preferred design.
Read the full report here.
