Wallace has asked for the proposed southbound overtaking lane to be reinstated, despite the RPS (formerly Conics) review finding that the lane was “inappropriate from a safety perspective” because it was located on a downhill slope and would encourage motorists to speed.

SAVE are extremely angry and disappointed that the Minister has been prompted by members of this Project Reference Group, most notably the RACQ, who are lobbying in an effort to undermine the redesign of the upgrade according to the recommendations of the Conics Report. All these parties were consulted during the Independent Review. Their views have already been taken into account.

In effect, the Conics review recommended a compromise position. It was not the most desirable outcome from SAVE’s perspective. However SAVE accepted this compromise in good faith and has attempted to work constructively with the Department.

Is it any wonder then, that we are equally angry, disappointed and puzzled that Conics/RPS have reversed their original recommendation on the overtaking lane. If the lane was inappropriate back in March, what has changed to suddenly make it appropriate now?   When we put this question to the Minister, the reply, in writing, was: “Conics does not have specialist expertise in road safety associated with road design. When requested for a review, Conics sought expert advice from specialists in road safety within the Department of Transport and Main Roads. [our emphasis]” Bizarre. The independent consultant seeks advice from the party they’re meant to be advising!

The actions of the Minister and RPS set a dangerous precedent for dropping (by stealth), other recommendations of the Independent Review as the redesign and works are proceeding. This could result, bit by bit, in the reinstatement of the original design with just a few minor changes and an insignificant percentage of trees saved. What an immense waste of time, effort, money and public goodwill that would be!

Public and media interest in this issue remains high. Since work has begun on the upgrade, SAVE has received a number of calls from members of the public expressing concern over the extent of clearing being undertaken. Concern is also being expressed regarding the damage being done to existing trees by the second-rate method of clearing being used by the contractors.

The upgrade has only just begun, but SAVE is quickly losing faith in the PRG process. We are not prepared to tolerate Ministerial backflips and broken promises. If we are not satisfied that we can continue to work in good faith with Main Roads, we will withdraw from the PRG process and seek other means of furthering our aim to see a Safe Avenue of Vegetation for Everyone – motorists, the local community, and a regionally endangered ecosystem.

See the table below for Main Roads’ design and construction timetables.

http://www.mainroads.qld.gov.au/Projects/A-Z-Search/N-T/New-England-Highway-Hampton-to-Geham.aspx

CATHEDRAL DRIVE – A QUALIFIED WIN for SAVE

More than 900 trees will be saved with the approval of a modified version of the New England Highway upgrade between Hampton and Geham.

Minister for Main Roads Craig Wallace announced yesterday (Tues 11 May) that he has accepted the independent Report from consultants Conics recommending a revised design requiring about 486 instead of 1400 trees to be removed.

The Minister commissioned this report after protests from SAVE and the Queensland Greens about the extent of proposed tree removal. SAVE (Safe Avenue of Vegetation for Everyone) spokesperson Anne-Marie Willis said:

“We knew this section of road could be made safer without massive tree removal along its entire length. Conics’ Report shows it can be done.

“Their Report vindicates SAVE and the Greens’ claims that the socio-economic, cultural heritage, landscape and scenic values of the vegetation corridor had not been properly assessed in the first place, and therefore didn’t flow through to the final design and specifications.

“The new scheme will maximise widening of the identified dangerous stretches, especially around the Geham tip. Other sections of high ecological value and visual amenity will be given a different treatment to preserve the over-arching canopy. However, the driving lanes will be widened to 3.5 metres throughout, which goes to motorists’ concerns about the existing road being too narrow.

“Other recommendations by SAVE have also been endorsed including not going ahead with the truck interception zone and the southbound over-taking lane, and detailed tree assessment by a qualified Arborist.

“SAVE and the Greens will continue to monitor the project to ensure the positive measures announced by Minister Wallace actually happen on the ground.

“We thank the Minister for commissioning the independent review and hope it will be of value for road design in other environmentally and culturally sensitive areas throughout Queensland.”

ENDS

Further information Anne-Marie Willis, spokesperson for SAVE -

ph: 4697 8082

SAVE – Safe Avenue of Vegetation for Everyone www.cathedraldrive.wordpress.com

FINAL SUBMISSION FROM SAVE (Safe Avenue of Vegetation for Everyone)

EXISTING SITUATION

Positives:

-          10 km of straight road with generally good visibility

-          Flanked by tall eucalypts, forming an overarching canopy

-          An ecologically valuable, biodiverse vegetation corridor

-          A drive of high visual amenity and a favoured tourist route

-          A sense of place – high country and tall trees – contrast with wide open spaces of rest of highway

-          A significantly lower crash rate than adjacent sections*

-          Narrow driving lanes (requiring drivers to take more care, possibly contributing to lower crash rate)

-          Low traffic volume – and large trucks a very small percentage

Negatives:

-          Unsealed shoulders

-          Deteriorating surface

-          Worn line marking

-          Branch fall incidents

* crashes between 2000 and 2009: Toowoomba to Geham 192, Geham to Hampton (project area) 31, Hampton to Crows Nest 83 (Qld Police Disclosure Log 16/02/2010)

RECOMMENDED ACTIONS

A modified upgrade should be undertaken, the aim being to enhance the existing safety benefits of the road. Measures to achieve this include:

-       Generally maintain current width

-       Seal shoulders (this would be a major benefit in terms of both perceived and actual safety)

-       Limit ‘upgrades’ to identified problem intersections and ‘accident spots’ (e.g. Geham tip entrance)

-       Lower speed limits (80 – 90 kph; 60 kph through Hampton village)

-       Re-surfacing, but no major re-grading

-       Number of trees to be removed to be in the tens rather than the hundreds

-       Preserve all very old trees

-       Ongoing tree maintenance program to minimise branch falls

NO widening

NO truck interception zone

NO over-taking lane

NO to 1400 hundred trees being removed

TO FURTHER CONSIDER

-          Which intersection upgrades are really needed (given most are dirt roads)?

-          Where are turning lanes actually needed (given most are into infrequently used dirt roads)?

-          Trees to be removed around property entrances – how many are really needed for safety?

-          Hampton village requires master-planning before major road works that would affect its character are undertaken

Relocation of entrance to Geham tip, as well as some form of de-mudding surface or sealing to internal tip roads to prevent soiling of Highway

There is a confusing report in today’s Chronicle. The headlines (‘Road stays as major black spot concern’ and ‘Statistics show New England Highway section remains a crash risk’) are at odds with the story that follows. The story focuses on Queensland Police’s release of crash data for the New England Highway, north of Toowoomba.

Here is our version.

This data has been made public following SAVE’s application under “right to information”. It confirms that ‘Cathedral Drive’ is the safest stretch of the highway. Over 9 years there were 306 crashes between Toowoomba and Crows Nest. Just 31 of these occurred on the Cathedral Drive stretch.

Here is the breakdown.

Crashes between Toowoomba and Crows Nest from July 2000 to August 2009:

Toowoomba to Geham                                   192

Geham to Hampton (‘Cathedral Drive’)*       31

Hampton to Crows Nest                                  83

* this count includes all crashes in the 10 km section that Main Roads is proposing to widen and upgrade. Therefore, Mt Luke is included and Geham south of Connolly/Pioneer Roads is excluded.

The raw data can be viewed on the Queensland Police Disclosure Log www.police.qld.gov.au/rti/logs.htm .

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 …….

1. 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?
2. 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?
3. 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)?
4. MR’s budget for projected scope of works (gap between cost and allocated budget)?
5. Proposed upgrade in relation to MR’s Strategic Plan for region?
6. Proposed upgrade in context of regional network and projected changes (what factors will impact on future volume and type of traffic)?
7. Economic significance of regional tourism and how road upgrade might affect this?
8. Visual amenity – to be assessed by what criteria?
9. How MR’s proposed upgrade would impact could prefigure certain developmental directions and not others for the village of Hampton?
10. 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?)
11. The project’s effect on indigenous cultural values (need to re-seek traditional owner sign-off re failure of Waka Waka native title claim?)
12. 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 ….

1. Update information in Review of Environmental Factors … (Connell Wagner 2006)?
2. Undertake new or supplementary flora and fauna studies (needed because of changed conditions since 2006 – forestry harvesting, and area no longer in drought, etc)?
3. Commission an Arborist to assess condition of roadside trees and recommend maintenance strategy?
4. 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 ….

1. Identify alternative design options that could meet identified safety, ecological, visual amenity and cultural needs?
2. Consider how different road treatments might undermine or enhance visual amenity and ‘sense of place’.
3. 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?
4. Consider protection of roadside native vegetation in relation to State Forestry’s changing activities over time?
5. 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

CONSULTING company Conics has been chosen to conduct an independent review of the proposed upgrade of the New England Highway Upgrade between Hampton and Geham.

Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace said Conics was chosen following an assessment process.

“The assessment looked at three key criteria: relevant experience of key personnel; previous experience in conducting similar reviews or independent studies and capability to carry out the review,” Mr Wallace said.

The review will consider and assess safety records, needs of motorists, ecological and environmental impacts, cultural and heritage significance, technical aspects of the design and other design options.

Conics will begin the review, which is expected to take about eight weeks to complete, today.

Its review will include consultation with the local community and interest groups.

ABC Southern Queensland (radio):

Independent consultants have been appointed to review a controversial highway upgrade on the northern Darling Downs

The State Government wants to widen the New England Highway between Geham and Hampton but local residents say that involves the unnecessary felling of 1,400 old-growth trees.

After several protests last year the Main Roads Minister Craig Wallace agreed to hold an independent review into the project.

The study, conducted by Conics, begins today and will look at the safety record of the highway, the environmental and heritage impact of the upgrade, the needs of motorists and the technical aspects of the plan.

The review is expected to be completed in March.

Well worth a look for anyone interested in the ecology of Cathedral Drive, and sound reasoning why the road upgrade should proceed with the removal of as few trees as possible.