Following Minister Wallace’s announcement of the commencement of the Independent Review into proposed upgrade of New England Highway (Hampton to Geham), SAVE have presented the following list of issues to Conics Pty Ltd, the appointed consultants.
Will the Review by Conics consider …….
- Existing road (condition, accident history, identified safety risks, traffic type and volume) and assess whether Main Roads (MR) proposed upgrade is justified in these terms?
- Extent of damage to ecological, environmental, visual amenity and cultural values of road that would be done by MR’s proposed upgrade and whether claimed safety benefits justify this?
- Whether the RACQ studies used by MR to justify the upgrade are actually relevant to this section of road? (referred to in report tabled in Parliament 3 Sept 2009 New England Highway Upgrade Project Hampton to Geham: Review of Scope and Design)?
- MR’s budget for projected scope of works (gap between cost and allocated budget)?
- Proposed upgrade in relation to MR’s Strategic Plan for region?
- Proposed upgrade in context of regional network and projected changes (what factors will impact on future volume and type of traffic)?
- Economic significance of regional tourism and how road upgrade might affect this?
- Visual amenity – to be assessed by what criteria?
- How MR’s proposed upgrade would impact could prefigure certain developmental directions and not others for the village of Hampton?
- How MR’s proposed upgrade would impact upon the cultural value of Cathedral Drive in terms of the district’s history and identity (i.e. Hampton was historically a landscape of tall timbers – if most of the trees are lost, how will this affect the sense of place?)
- The project’s effect on indigenous cultural values (need to re-seek traditional owner sign-off re failure of Waka Waka native title claim?)
- That what constitutes a safe road is not something that is objective, but something that is contested – by professionals, as well as by members of the public?
Assessing Ecological Values of Road Corridor – will the Review by Conics ….
- Update information in Review of Environmental Factors … (Connell Wagner 2006)?
- Undertake new or supplementary flora and fauna studies (needed because of changed conditions since 2006 – forestry harvesting, and area no longer in drought, etc)?
- Commission an Arborist to assess condition of roadside trees and recommend maintenance strategy?
- Consider whether vegetation clearing ‘offsets’ currently proposed by MR at Pechey are relevant to this project and to Hampton’s Regional Ecosystem.
Alternatives to Proposed Upgrade – will the Review by Conics ….
- Identify alternative design options that could meet identified safety, ecological, visual amenity and cultural needs?
- Consider how different road treatments might undermine or enhance visual amenity and ‘sense of place’.
- Consider how non-standard or ‘Extended Design Domain’ approaches could be used to improve the road safety (and asset preservation) without needing to remove over 1400 trees?
- Consider protection of roadside native vegetation in relation to State Forestry’s changing activities over time?
- Whether the minimalist approach to upgrade (as proposed by SAVE) could be developed as a model/new standard for ‘roads of special value’?
compiled by Anne-Marie Willis
for SAVE – Safe Avenue of Vegetation for Everyone
29 January 201
