Here are my thoughts/notes on the CRG meeting held on 3 November.

Generally my opinion is the Project team will let nothing stop this project.  My input has not been incorporated into the study.  They still have done nothing about a representative from Fig Tree Pocket.  The last meeting will be February 2009.  Politicians are the only people who will stop this project and provide the better alternatives the western suburbs of Brisbane need.

General Overall comments:

1. The design specifications/philosophy have been cut and adapted for cost cutting measures and to minimise land resumptions at this time (but will still be required in ~10yrs when the Centenary Hwy Interchange will need to be upgraded.)
2. Main Roads initially led the meeting to believe that they had progressed from the 6 interchange options from the Pre Feasibility Study to the 2 new interchange proposals being the only options for consideration. But later, when I questioned the merit of areas of the proposals the Main Roads Project Leader replied that the community can question and consider any “other” proposals/issues.
3. The whole CRG process is nothing to do with consultation.

Typical cross section:

A normal cross-section with only minimal cutting and filling requires ~39.9m width. To fit this arrangement between Kenmore Road and Gem Road would require cutting embankments or vertical retaining walls up to 8m high (plus the noise barriers of ~4m minimum height.)  I have since been advised near Sachs Crt the cutting will need to be 16m.

In order to fit the proposed 4-lane roadway into the existing 40m width corridor, current design standards have been compromised.

This “newsletter 2” proposal section, as shown on the Main Roads CRG visuals, has:

1. removed the 5m central median separating carriageways – replaced with a concrete barrier (that will bounce noise).
2. removed the 2.5m shoulder each side, and say 2.0m shoulder is to be used by cyclists
3. removed the dedicated 3.0m width pedestrian / cyclist pathway on one side
4. removed the 2.0m maintenance strips on each side.

Vertical Geometry (Visual Impact):

The Main Roads “visual” slides were misleading with regard to the dramatic visual impact of the proposed cuttings and raised/filled lengths of the road.

The said visual slides were shown from directly above and did not show the dramatic +/-8m vertical cuttings and/or raised/filled road lengths which would cut-off the southern section of Kenmore from the remainder of the suburb. In particular the visual scar of such an enormous raised road would be greater than that of the Berlin Wall.

Gem Road proposed to be cut:

This further isolates those people south of the proposed road and makes emergency services access issues with just one access. Build a tunnel if they have to as I requested in the first meeting that they had to consider.  At the meeting they advised it was the only option they didn’t consider for Gem Road.  All traffic will have to use Sunset Road which floods in its lowest part.  The social impact of this separation has not been addressed fully.

Centenary Hwy Interchange:

This interchange is a major engineering problem and a particularly expensive item to rectify.  Problems with the inadequacy of the existing Centenary Hwy; in particular gradients too steep, road curve too tight and the Fig Tree interchange and Centenary Bridge both being too close for traffic merging and weaving.

So the Main Roads has decided to stage this interchange development without acknowledging it. (This was a consideration in the pre Feasibility Study.)

The two current interchange options are both interim only measures providing “service” interchange only, with T-junction traffic lights. Such a connection is for the “connection between a major and minor road.”
This will create traffic build-up / bottlenecks and the interchange will eventually need to be upgraded to a full interchange, as shown in the Pre Feasibility Study, and the local people will have to go through all the disruption again – including the additional resumptions as per Pre Feasibility Study needs.

Costs:

In every area the Engineering specifications have been minimised or avoided to effect dramatic cost cutting. For example:

1. Centenary Hwy Interchange being staged to avoid the huge upfront cost. (They will pay a lot more later on to totally re-do it when connect to Warrego)
2. Minimising land resumptions at this time (still large with over half of land requirement circa 130,000 square metres needing to be resumed)
3. Gem Road being cut. Not considering tunnelling.
4. The typical cross-section being compromised to minimise the extent of vertical retaining walls and cutting embankments.
5. Noise issues not being fully implemented (will not meet own noise code).

Further points raised:

1. Main Roads admitted that they have separated from the Centenary Highway upgrade project and it may totally change the interchange and footprint.  They have made a “best guess” at how to do an interchange.

Main Roads told us they had come up with options that reduced the number of resumptions for the Kenmore Bypass required to 88 (63 entire homes and 25 property leaving the homes).  However, many properties would additionally be required to upgrade the Centenary Highway if that project decides to do that.  So, they have written to some owners saying their property is not required for the Kenmore Bypass but the Centenary Highway Main Roads project may write to them and say they do require their property.  The result of this is to reduce the costs allocated to the Kenmore Bypass and the perception of its footprint.

Main Roads admitted they have bought properties already under the hardship regulations, thereby reducing the amount of resumptions they need.

At least one CRG member was furious, stating it was sounding like a fait accompli.

2. Two lanes in each direction. Speed limit 80 kph. Central concrete barrier. 2 metre outside shoulders could be used by commuter cyclists, one shared footpath/cycle path, but no provision for emergency services or breakdowns.  They have removed the pedestrian/ cycle path from the south side that was recommended in the prefeasibility assessment.

A 60 kph speed limit was ruled out which would have had the benefit of reducing the noise.

3.  Centenary Highway Interchange has 2 options. They are not full interchanges because they are stating the Kenmore Bypass will be a minor road and therefore they can build a “service” interchange.  Both options include traffic lights.  They will both be slightly different.  Option A allows FTP, Chapel Hill and Southern Kenmore to access the bypass.  Option B doesn’t.  Option B allows direct access onto Centenary Highway but Option A goes via lights at the FTP interchange.

4.  Both options for Moggill Road interchange will be signalised with lights and the traffic modelling will decide which option is chosen.

Proposed bypass will continue along Moggill Road if option B is selected as it (the bypass) will be the main road through and traffic wishing to use Moggill Road will need to indicate and turn off the bypass to access Moggill Road.  I would wonder what Kenmore Village and traders would think of that!

5.  Gem Road will be cut so traffic from the river side of Gem Road will have to use Sunset Road for access.

I pointed out that Sunset Road has flooded over many times in my lifetime, forcing residents to use Gem Road.  Main Roads took a note of this and had not considered that as an issue.

The current 433 and 431 bus services will be cut to this area!

6.  Connecting the two sides of Kenmore. There are 3 options to choose from between Gem Rd and the Dog Off Leash area.  All CRG preferred option C which was an overpass connecting Marland Street and Sunset Road through Kingfisher Park.  It was the only option that did not require resumption of homes.
They talked about BCC bikeway plans for this area – well what are they and why can’t they do them without the Kenmore Bypass?

Kenmore Road - There is one option next to the Terraces shops for people to access the cycle/ footpath.

Kenmore Road near Centenary Highway – There were options that were not in the newsletter for pedestrians to go cross over to go south to Kenmore Road and then down Musgrave St to the pedestrian/ cycle path that would be re-built along Centenary Highway.

Kenmore Road over Centenary Highway will be realigned with a new bridge – requiring the resumption of more homes.

Visualisation – Main Roads presented a 3 D creation of travelling over the top of the Kenmore Bypass – presumably by helicopter.  This totally under represents the visual impact that the Kenmore Bypass will have on the area.  In parts the fill will be 10 meters with noise barriers on top.

7.  Noise – this really makes me angry.  All locations facing the corridor were assessed as really low noise currently which means they have to use the more stringent criteria for a new road.  This criteria however, is still enormously higher than what the current noise in the corridor is!  Noise barriers will not be continuous and they are recommending limited them to 4 meters high.  They would have to go 8 metres high to lower the noise levels but due to affects on air flow and shading they don’t want to do that.  They say that they will provide air conditioning and other mechanical ventilation where the noise can’t get to the criterion.  If you have air conditioning you get nothing.  If you don’t want to run air conditioning 24/7 too bad.  You pay to run the air conditioning.  It you have an outdoor room, you had better enclose it!

8.  The engineering firm conducting the environmental study found no evidence of koalas in the corridor.  They could not explain what the koala markings on the trees were from, nor why they didn’t attend the walk in the corridor, even though the minister and the department were invited.

9.  As for other flora and fauna, they basically said there was nothing of great significance and the Kenmore Bypass would not be stopped for anything they found.

10.  They stated that there will be “no changes to existing land use”. Does a four lane highway that replaces a park, Pony Club, Dog Off Leash area, Bushland habitat, waterways, and lets not forget a large number of homes not constitute a change?

11.  Water and soils etc.  Basically they are still testing and they say they will mitigate for road run off.  The Centenary Highway Project will deal with that end – so how do we know that our concerns for Cubberla and Moggill Creeks and afflux for homes are being dealt with adequately?

He didn’t say but the water is good quality currently.  They only found a prawn and catfish in the aquatic surveys.

There are acid sulphate soils near Moggill Creek but they say they will ensure during construction they do not mix with water and air as that would create iron oxides and acids that would destroy the area.  Given Moggill Creek is tidal in this area they will need to control this well.

11.  Regarding the socio-economic assessments, they are about to commence community consultation.  They didn’t explain the process for this.  When I think about all the increased petrol, electricity use, increased health costs, stress, social disconnection etc. I can’t see how they can get a true assessment on this.

For those not at the meeting, we were asked two questions -

1.  What will be the key issues for the organisation or individuals that I represent?

My response with 10 minutes of explanation was  – devastating and that we haven’t been listened to at these meetings and their studies are not comprehensive or thorough enough.

2.  What are the key opportunities/benefits?

My response – there are none to my group unless they are property developers.

I am sorry I have been unable to affect any change in direction or acceptable mitigation of the very enormous negative impacts if the Kenmore Bypass proceeds.