Stephanie

Perhaps this is the time for residents of the Moggill-Bellbowrie-Anstead-Pinjarra Hills-Pullenvale-Karana Downs area to start an action group to get this bridge issue debated in the community.

We need to assess the level of interest from local residents and businesses and we need to actively lobby the Queensland Government and BCC through petitions etc to at least get a planning study underway.

Michael

Also a bridge from Bellbowrie connecting into the Centenary overpass. This would pass mostly over empty prison property and would get Bellbowrie, Pullenvale, Moggill, Karana Downs commuters to the Centenary/Western freeway much faster than going through Kenmore. A mogill bridge to wacol would accomplish this as well.
Another point I havn’t seen much in the media, and one that would get many other residents involved against the bypass, is that this would be phase one of the Warrego Connector. I have written to three papers regarding the lack of bridges creating bottlenecks like Kenmore and have never been published.
Karalee, Pullenvale and additional residents would be more involved if they understood that they are next.

Robert

I have to admit I am getting pretty confused about all this. Mr Flegg has described the separation of the Kenmore Bypass project and the Warrego - Centenary Highway studies. OK fine, but why would they be under review simultaneously and sharing public submission data about the same route.

If there are other feasible options for managing commuter traffic and they are being dismissed by the government without consideration then it is illogical.

Also given that we see Mr Flegg basically distilling the argument down to Moggill Road upgrade or Kenmore bypass, all the while trying to steer to the bypass option - see Westside news. What is $45M in resumptions say 80 homes against a couple of hundred, plus the thousands or so others directly effected as they are next to/near the road.

There is something funny with all this and I cannot reconcile it in my mind. I think we are being sold a line.

If it was my project and I wanted the Warrego highway extension to happen I would get the Kenmore Bypass in as a first step. The locals would be backed into a corner by then.

To be honest it seems we have run up aginst a hidden agenda, that we are only a part of. There is already a plan somewhere of how the system will look with all the little projects linked together.

Obviously the governments are trying to implement this plan piecemeal to make it managable for them. I think to them there are no other options, just the plan they are trying to implement.

I hope I am proven wrong, but it doesn’t look good.

Kathy

I’ve re-read the article in the Westside News and while he’s been quick to accuse us of false or misleading information in the past, I’m not sure Mr Flegg actually said the anti-bypass group had suggested widening Moggill Road as an alternative. What I understood from his newsletter and the article is he’s got his hands on a secret study by the Main Roads. Am I missing something??

But can someone please tell me exactly which points our group is being “misleading” about or has “incorrect”. Is there somewhere they say what we have wrong?

And Mr Flegg – I ask again, why is it all shock, horror on your part about turning Moggill Road into a “highway” and resuming homes there, but the same actions are fine in our part of Kenmore, Pinjarra Hills. How many homes have to be resumed or badly affected here before it’s shock, horror for this part of your electorate too???

Yes, perhaps that is NIMBY of me. I defy anyone in the same boat not to feel that way, but in this instance I think what us particular NIMBY’s are saying is, WHAT is the bypass going to achieve? Why do so many think it will be a miracle solution when it still has to merge with a heavily congested Centenary Highway. And how can people possibly believe the bypass isn’t an open invitation to the extended link to the Warrego Highway. Perhaps they won’t mind sharing their bypass with mega quantities of long-haul trucks.

The Warrego link aside, the bypass may ease Moggill Road congestion but when the vehicles can’t merge onto the Centenary Highway the bypass will back up – as we’ve said all along, hundreds of millions of dollars simply to move the problem from one location to another. And as the bypass opens the door to much more development in the outer Western suburbs, Moggill Road will soon be back to square 1.

Some say the northern link (Toowong Tunnel) will solve the congestion on the Centenary Highway. (Re my previous comment on Kingsford Smith Drive, I must have that wrong, they wouldn’t be so silly as to put more traffic onto that road, the tunnel must bypass KSD??) But with the Centenary Highway, Western Freeway, Northern Link road being proposed as an alternate long-haul truck route (an ‘inner ring road’ bringing thousands more vehicles into the area) won’t any benefit from the tunnel be minimal? And that’s where my cynicism in the past has come in – I’ve said before, I’ve heard vehicles are deliberately channelled into potential toll areas simply so private consortiums will invest. Is it just me, or does it simply does not compute that any smart thinking government or council would deliberately encourage more traffic and particularly long-haul trucks into inner suburbi??

Robert

Kathy, don’t know if you have seen it or not but for misinformation go to Bruce Flegg’s website and look under “State Government speaks out about bypass disinformation”.

Pamela McNeil

How is it, that DMR can send out letters re resumption when the process is supposedly still about consultation etc….I feel that DMR and government have bought into this whole Flegg argument. Do we need to meet with the Minister or the Premier once again?

Liz

I agree totally - what is this ‘consultation’ process? Has the DMR already made it’s decision and the ‘consulation’ process is a charade?

Kathy

Thanks Robert. I hadn’t seen that – I can be ‘thick’ sometimes but still don’t understand how any of those three points is misleading on our part.

Point 1 - the Bellbowrie Bridge – how is it misleading to say it’s an alternative? I don’t think we were saying it’s an official alternative, just that the option makes sense and should be considered. Is there some “engineer-al” reason why it’s been dismissed so readily when it’s been paid for by the developers ( I have no idea re the technicalities of bridges etc, perhaps the river banks won’t take the pylons or whatever). Or is it simply the bridge has been left so long the price the developer paid won’t equate to the cost to build now.

Point 2 - isn’t the Moggill Pocket arterial road there for all to see on the WBTNI site. It’s asking too much to expect us to believe they’ll do a mega expensive 3.2 km bypass for a relatively small part of the population. All we did, unlike Mr Flegg, was right from the start make people aware the arterial road was on the ‘drawing board’.

Point 3 – how is that misleading when an official estimate is 25,000 vehicles will use the bypass in years to come - that’s without the Moggill Pocket link in the equation. In Mr Pitt’s statement of 20 April one of the issues listed re the bypass is Centenary Road congestion. Even with the northern link, Toowong tunnel in place, will that be effective with the additional load placed on the Centenary Highway, Western Freeway. Isn’t it common sense to get traffic away from inner suburban areas, not encourage it into them??

Robert

Lauren, where the discussion of “misinformaiton” came from was from some material I saw on Bruce Flegg’s website. See http://www.moggill.net under “State Government speaks out about bypass disinformation”.

As for the conduct of the process of option development, the design phases, and how this relates to potential resumptions etc I am still confused.

I get the feeling that Bruce Flegg is an advocate of the Kenmore Bypass. The business we saw in West Side News seems to channel the argument in the direction of the Kenmore Bypass, which I guess is what Bruce wants.

I also identify with the concern that if the Bypass happens it makes the Warrego extension more viable. Although I don’t have access to design and cost data, it just makes sense that that would be a logical next step in the process of road development.

So you don’t need to be Einstein to see that Mr Flegg will push his desired option with all the resources and information he has at his disposal.

We are at a disadvantage here of course. I see for a number of reasons.

I don’t know how extensive the option development process has been. Neither do I know how we could find out. I am also flat out understanding why Mr Flegg hasn’t tried to adress the concerns of the community by actively working through the data the MRD has produced on whatever options to help us understand what is actually going on i.e.we are still none the wiser as to what other “secret information” is out there.

Honestly this seems a lot like mushroom farming to me.

Finally I am stretching to understand why we haven’t seen any constructive input from the powers as to why any other options/ideas etc are not viable. These are all technical issues with technical solutions. Mr Flegg isn’t qualified to comment as far as I know. He is just playing politics to get his desired option through. If this is his approach then he should get out of the way. We need proof and facts not press releases.

The situation has served to polarise the community and what is that good for.

I have read a lot of the the words in this blog and I see a lot of good thinking and valid concerns. What I don’t know is how our people can be heard by the people who need to hear and have their concerns addressed in a meaningful way. No wonder people feel put down, resentful, powerless etc.

The way it is now it feels like we are being railroaded. Surely our leaders (I use the term loosely given recent experience)can do better than this.

Jacob

Finally I am stretching to understand why we haven’t seen any constructive input from the powers as to why any other options/ideas etc are not viable. —

I’ll bet that this is because either enough of the community hasn’t been asking for it or the governmental monolith can’t move that quickly.

If it’s the first of these, the community opposed to the bypass has to build up enough momentum to ask officially for other studies. These alone will take years and the commute will stay as it is (at best) until those studies say yay or nah.

If it’s the second of these, it’s the same problem that we all have to deal with when it comes to bureaucracy. Keep on the pressure and eventually it will get done. However, this has exactly the same short/mid-term outcome as the first option.

Personally, I don’t think a bridge from Moggill to Wacol would make the difference that all here seem to expect. The Ipswich motorway isn’t a good way into the city either, and if it crossed to Sumner Rd, the traffic will still end up at the same place and will only shift the problems to Riverhills instead of Kenmore. As a public transport user, i don’t think i’d be inclined to catch a bus (even high frequency) to catch a train (at wacol/darra) either. It certainly wouldn’t reduce my commute as every change over adds at least 10 minutes to a trip.

So, my point, if we want to know why other options can’t/haven’t/won’t be explored, we need to ask SPECIFICALLY for those answers.

Doug Young

Interesting to note the comments here about ‘consultation’. I’m in a battle with DMR at present & finding that ‘preferred options’ have been apparently set in concrete over 6 months before residents advised that there is a need for their property. Seems this is typical of the Bligh government. Tried phoning the NLP for info on their policy & was told ‘we don’t have any policies yet’ !!!