In Section 4.5.4 of the November 2016 EIS for the Rankin Park to Jesmond bypass, the planners ‘investigated’ and ‘costed’ two alternatives for maintaining the cycleway between Jesmond Park and Jesmond. I just get the feeling that both these options were put forward simply as ‘straw men’ in order to be dismissed, and avert objections that had been submitted.
The first option is for a ridiculous, towering and twisting overhead bridge, like something out of a Dr Seuss book1, that would cost $30 million!!!! That’s surely a joke solution, like the obviously wrong answer examiners often put in a multiple choice question.
The second option investigated while less ridiculous is on closer inspection just plain dopey. Its for a subway that would cost $3 million, but is dismissed because (among other things) it would be subject to flooding.
But seriously, if you’re going to propose a subway route (purple dotted line) that is along the lowest point in the landscape and right next to a stormwater drain – of course its going to flood!
Why not route the subway 100m further south (red dotted line in the diagram below) where the land is 8 to 10 metres higher and not subject to flooding? I get the impression they’re not really trying hard enough to find a solution, and that they don’t really want to try.
There are plenty of other ideas – but are the RMS interested?
- Refer to the Bunglebung Bridge, in “Did I Ever Tell You How Lucky You Are”, by Dr Seuss, 1973.
The second RMS map.
The path could go only ~70M south so it passes under the two levels right under the blue diamond. They could move the south bound on ramp a little further west with a slight bend so the the length of the cycle way tunnel could be ~20 shorter.
The RMS definitely have not tried or have been directed by the current government to exclude any concessions to cycling given their hard line on cyclist.
Pingback: The many shades of ignorance | Kiss Your Path Goodbye?