The following formal submission have been made public
Submitter: Prof. B.M. Bodart-BaileyRaising of London Circuit
I strongly object to the NCA approving the Raising of London Circuit (RLC). Richard Johnston (Life Fellow, Planning Institute of Australia) as qualified city planner has set out the arguments against RLC in his detailed submission to which I subscribe. Below I would just like to draw attention to two points.
With the rapid increase of cars, city planners all over the world are taking measures to separate vehicle traffic from pedestrians and cyclists. Usually this takes the form of pedestrians/cyclists only zones and traffic lanes separated from walkways in such a fashion that pedestrians cannot access vehicle traffic.
Recently the head of the national office of road safety, Gabby O'Neill attributed the ACT’s low traffic fatality rate (2.25 per 100.00 vehicle registrations as against the Australian average of 5.57) to the fact that the ACT has a large number of path- and cycleways separated from car traffic keeping pedestrians and cyclists safe.
RLC intends to do exactly the opposite. This is inviting the traffic fatalities the ACT until now has managed to avoid. In addition to other hazards, the proposed change will produce impatient pedestrians dashing across the road at red lights when they deem the approaching traffic to be at a safe distance. Further, the elderly and physically challenged usually find it difficult to cross the road in the allotted time. Finally, all over the world, be it Melbourne, Tokyo or Berlin, there are incidents of terrorists or crazed individuals purposely driving into an assembly of innocent people. People and cars must also be in future separated like they are at present: there is already a bridge spanning Parkes Avenue for pedestrians and cyclists to get from Civic to the lake safely and at their leisure. It is difficult to understand why this fact is ignored and the erroneous assumption made that RLC is necessary to create this connection.
Canberra’s first traffic light was on Canberra Avenue and London Circuit. As the lake was filled in and Canberra Avenue became an arterial road linking what are arguably Canberra’s two most important sites, namely Parliament House and Civic, the traffic light was deemed insufficient to regulate the flow of cars. The elegant solution of the clover leaf access required elaborate and expensive road works but has proven its worth for over half a century now. To destroy this iconic road pattern providing access to Canberra Ave and replace it with a suburban traffic light is nothing less than absurd if not a sacrilege.
An approval of this work is not in accord with the NCA’s mission statement, namely “To advance the National Capital as a valued and respected place for all Australians by ensuring it is well planned, managed and promoted consistent with its enduring national significance.” RLC means wreckage of a well-planned road system which is playing an important role in the lay-out of our capital, destruction which will put an end to the free flow of traffic on arguably Canberra’s most important arterial road, much used to introduce state and other visitors to the Bush Capital.
Nor is the scant attention paid to the greenhouse gas emissions of the proposed project in accord with the NCA’s duty of ensuring that our capital “is well planned, managed and promoted consistent with its enduring national significance."
At a time when climate change is threatening the safety of generations to come, Canberra, in tune with its national significance, should play an exemplary role in reducing C02 emissions. This cannot be achieved when the environmental impact assessment of RLC is entrusted to a company like AECOM, tasked with obtaining approvals including that of the NCA as part of a $93 million contract with the government. With such vested interest, it is totally predictable that AECOM would conclude that the project generates no C02 emissions of significance.
The fact is that no assessment of C02 emissions can be calculated before the source of the infill is known and variables like the damage to roads caused by over 5.000 trucks carting the infill to the site, emissions from the traffic chaos the trucks will cause, plus scope 3 emissions of the manufacture of the trucks and all other equipment is assessed in addition to the use of fossil fuel etc.
Further, the heat-island effect created by the proposed high-density infill of the area now occupied by the clover leaf access to Commonwealth Ave is totally ignored. The recent IPCC report singles out the heat-island effect as an important topic, and for Canberra where summer temperatures have been steadily rising, it is especially significant. The heat bank created by the mass of concrete of this proposed high-rise infill together with the hot air emitted by cooling systems will degrade this area for visitors and residents alike; quite apart from obstructing the iconic view of the parliamentary triangle mentioned in other submissions.
Moreover, after the Chief Minister’s announcement that the government will be investing in government ‘hubs’ all over the ACT to enable public servants to work close to home, with staff working in these hubs on average no more than two days a week, the construction of additional office towers in Civic is becoming an unnecessary and totally avoidable source of greenhouse gas emissions, degrading the environment of our capital on a permanent basis. Here again, the mission statement of the NCA demands that approval of RLC is withheld.
On the introduction of self-government for the ACT, the forerunner of the NCA was created “to maximise returns on the Australian people’s substantial investment in the National Capital and requires the asset to be properly managed, maintained and its value reinforced.” RLC does none of this. To the contrary, it wrecks an expensively constructed well-functioning traffic system in Canberra’s core representative area, obstructs the long vistas for which our capital is famous and creates an unpleasant rise in temperature for visitors and residents.
Neither does RLC “provide the people of the Territory with an attractive, safe and efficient environment in which to live and work and have their creation.” To the contrary, it ruins that environment, as outlined above.
Moreover, the NCA has the responsibility for “planning and providing public transport and maintaining the amenity of the city for people who live there.” Again, RLC does exactly the opposite. It is no secret that the proposed RLC is essential for the fulfillment of a political agreement for Labor to gain the support of the Greens in exchange for a light rail system. London Circuit needs to be raised so the light rail can proceed over the Commonwealth bridge to Woden. However, with the introduction of battery-operated buses, the light rail extension has become redundant. The proposed light rail extension will not only cost the taxpayer well over $2 billion, money that should be spent on the health and education system and government housing, will produce massive amounts of C02 with the construction of the infrastructure, but will also take twice as long to transport passengers between Civic and Woden and will result in the elimination of express buses as it has in case of the Gungahlin line, with transport time for many increasing considerably.
The NCA’s duty is to stop our capital being wrecked on account of such political arrangements of the government in power. The Australian public expects that the NCA fulfills its duty of protecting our capital from the injurious effects of such arbitrary political arrangements and does not bend to political pressure.
With the rapid increase of cars, city planners all over the world are taking measures to separate vehicle traffic from pedestrians and cyclists. Usually this takes the form of pedestrians/cyclists only zones and traffic lanes separated from walkways in such a fashion that pedestrians cannot access vehicle traffic.
Recently the head of the national office of road safety, Gabby O'Neill attributed the ACT’s low traffic fatality rate (2.25 per 100.00 vehicle registrations as against the Australian average of 5.57) to the fact that the ACT has a large number of path- and cycleways separated from car traffic keeping pedestrians and cyclists safe.
RLC intends to do exactly the opposite. This is inviting the traffic fatalities the ACT until now has managed to avoid. In addition to other hazards, the proposed change will produce impatient pedestrians dashing across the road at red lights when they deem the approaching traffic to be at a safe distance. Further, the elderly and physically challenged usually find it difficult to cross the road in the allotted time. Finally, all over the world, be it Melbourne, Tokyo or Berlin, there are incidents of terrorists or crazed individuals purposely driving into an assembly of innocent people. People and cars must also be in future separated like they are at present: there is already a bridge spanning Parkes Avenue for pedestrians and cyclists to get from Civic to the lake safely and at their leisure. It is difficult to understand why this fact is ignored and the erroneous assumption made that RLC is necessary to create this connection.
Canberra’s first traffic light was on Canberra Avenue and London Circuit. As the lake was filled in and Canberra Avenue became an arterial road linking what are arguably Canberra’s two most important sites, namely Parliament House and Civic, the traffic light was deemed insufficient to regulate the flow of cars. The elegant solution of the clover leaf access required elaborate and expensive road works but has proven its worth for over half a century now. To destroy this iconic road pattern providing access to Canberra Ave and replace it with a suburban traffic light is nothing less than absurd if not a sacrilege.
An approval of this work is not in accord with the NCA’s mission statement, namely “To advance the National Capital as a valued and respected place for all Australians by ensuring it is well planned, managed and promoted consistent with its enduring national significance.” RLC means wreckage of a well-planned road system which is playing an important role in the lay-out of our capital, destruction which will put an end to the free flow of traffic on arguably Canberra’s most important arterial road, much used to introduce state and other visitors to the Bush Capital.
Nor is the scant attention paid to the greenhouse gas emissions of the proposed project in accord with the NCA’s duty of ensuring that our capital “is well planned, managed and promoted consistent with its enduring national significance."
At a time when climate change is threatening the safety of generations to come, Canberra, in tune with its national significance, should play an exemplary role in reducing C02 emissions. This cannot be achieved when the environmental impact assessment of RLC is entrusted to a company like AECOM, tasked with obtaining approvals including that of the NCA as part of a $93 million contract with the government. With such vested interest, it is totally predictable that AECOM would conclude that the project generates no C02 emissions of significance.
The fact is that no assessment of C02 emissions can be calculated before the source of the infill is known and variables like the damage to roads caused by over 5.000 trucks carting the infill to the site, emissions from the traffic chaos the trucks will cause, plus scope 3 emissions of the manufacture of the trucks and all other equipment is assessed in addition to the use of fossil fuel etc.
Further, the heat-island effect created by the proposed high-density infill of the area now occupied by the clover leaf access to Commonwealth Ave is totally ignored. The recent IPCC report singles out the heat-island effect as an important topic, and for Canberra where summer temperatures have been steadily rising, it is especially significant. The heat bank created by the mass of concrete of this proposed high-rise infill together with the hot air emitted by cooling systems will degrade this area for visitors and residents alike; quite apart from obstructing the iconic view of the parliamentary triangle mentioned in other submissions.
Moreover, after the Chief Minister’s announcement that the government will be investing in government ‘hubs’ all over the ACT to enable public servants to work close to home, with staff working in these hubs on average no more than two days a week, the construction of additional office towers in Civic is becoming an unnecessary and totally avoidable source of greenhouse gas emissions, degrading the environment of our capital on a permanent basis. Here again, the mission statement of the NCA demands that approval of RLC is withheld.
On the introduction of self-government for the ACT, the forerunner of the NCA was created “to maximise returns on the Australian people’s substantial investment in the National Capital and requires the asset to be properly managed, maintained and its value reinforced.” RLC does none of this. To the contrary, it wrecks an expensively constructed well-functioning traffic system in Canberra’s core representative area, obstructs the long vistas for which our capital is famous and creates an unpleasant rise in temperature for visitors and residents.
Neither does RLC “provide the people of the Territory with an attractive, safe and efficient environment in which to live and work and have their creation.” To the contrary, it ruins that environment, as outlined above.
Moreover, the NCA has the responsibility for “planning and providing public transport and maintaining the amenity of the city for people who live there.” Again, RLC does exactly the opposite. It is no secret that the proposed RLC is essential for the fulfillment of a political agreement for Labor to gain the support of the Greens in exchange for a light rail system. London Circuit needs to be raised so the light rail can proceed over the Commonwealth bridge to Woden. However, with the introduction of battery-operated buses, the light rail extension has become redundant. The proposed light rail extension will not only cost the taxpayer well over $2 billion, money that should be spent on the health and education system and government housing, will produce massive amounts of C02 with the construction of the infrastructure, but will also take twice as long to transport passengers between Civic and Woden and will result in the elimination of express buses as it has in case of the Gungahlin line, with transport time for many increasing considerably.
The NCA’s duty is to stop our capital being wrecked on account of such political arrangements of the government in power. The Australian public expects that the NCA fulfills its duty of protecting our capital from the injurious effects of such arbitrary political arrangements and does not bend to political pressure.
Temporary works on Vernon Circle
This will become unnecessary once RLC has been stopped.
Signalisation of traffic at the intersection of Parkes Way and Coranderrk Street
This will become unnecessary once RLC has been stopped.