campaign home | background | letters | ongoing |
CRAG originally proposed a solution to ensure that the Canal Reserve cycleway would remain as safe as it once was for the community. However, that is now history as the NSW State Government refused to acknowledge the safety issue and pressed ahead with the Prospect Highway without the promised bridge.

We have retained the web page below so that everyone can understand what was proposed and the community frustration at the time.

The Prospect Highway has been built and a corridor reserved for the proposed Liverpool to Blacktown Transitway.

We now have a signalised crossing at the bottom of two hills crossing a highway used by heavy vehicles servicing the adjacent warehouses and ever increasing traffic using the the highway to avoid congestion in the neighbouring suburbs.

How long will it be before a child rides their bike down those hills and ends up under the wheels of a B double when they could have been safe if the NSW State Government had honoured their original promise.

This campaign is not about obtaining something extra, it is about returning the Canal Reserve cycleway to its former safety level.

there is a solution
Last update 3 December 2020

(example letter)

Since April 2008 the RTA (now RMS), Boral and the NSW State Government have been using blatant stalling tactics with all approaches from the community regarding the return of a safe cycleway. This procrastination and outright refusal to respond to the community leaves us without a clear answer to whether we will ever have a safe cycleway returned.

There is a solution, it has been there all the time, but the Government and Boral seem to be intent on ignoring this obvious solution.

Back in May 2008 we mentioned the solution on our bridge web page. When Boral advised that they were providing $700,000 for the cycleway and spending $500,000 for the signalized crossing CRAG posed the question as to why this $1.2 million couldn’t be used to build a bridge.

Finally, someone else has also asked the question.

On 21 October 2008 Councillor Ross Grove moved the following urgency motion at the Holroyd City Council (now Cumberland Council) Meeting:
"That Council expresses its concern at the state government's approval an "at-grade" crossing of Reconcilliation Road to reconnect the Lower Prospect Canal Reserve cycleway and further more investigates the contribution made by the developer towards construction of the crossing with a view to renegotiating with Boral and the Department of Planning for the reconnection of the cycleway through a much safer overpass or underpass."
The motion was passed unanimously by Councillors.

CRAG can see the solution, Cumberland Council can see the solution.

Why can’t the RTA, who caused the problem, see the solution?

It seems we have waited long enough for the RTA and Boral to find the solution. It seems that history is repeating itself. CRAG had to write the original Management Proposal to have the Canal Reserve created and it now seems we need to present a solution to the RTA and Boral.

The community does not want a signalized crossing. Advertising for the sale of land in the estate indicates that 300,000 vehicles per week will travel through the site, which highlights just how unsafe the crossing would be.

This whole scenario is similar to the Beresford Road bridge (Greystanes) over the M4 saga, back in the 90s. We are lead to believe that that two lane vehicle bridge cost in the vicinity of $890,000 and was funded by various government contributions along with funding from advertising on the bridge itself.

That proves the approach can work, so that is exactly what we are proposing as a means of funding the cycleway bridge. The cycleway bridge would be longer, but not need to be two lanes wide. Given these factors and allowing for inflation we estimate that a cycleway bridge would cost in the vicinity of up to $1.3 million.

Given the community does not want a signalized crossing or the extensive ramps to the crossing, Boral’s quoted figure of $1.2 million mentioned earlier combined with advertising rights on the bridge (remember 300,000 vehicles per week exposure) could easily cover the costs.

Since CRAG originally proposed the solution the RTA has made claims that a bridge is too expensive. After stalling for six months the outlandish figure of $4 million dollars has been thrown around by the RTA without any substantiation.

Given that we know that the RTA does not want to build a bridge, despite their earlier commitments, how can the community just accept unsubstantiated figures. The community is not looking for a fancy bridge with lifts and other expensive options. A simple bridge, like the ones over the M7 are all that is needed, and we find it hard to believe that those bridges cost $4 million each.

So why can’t it be done? That’s the question we need you to ask the Roads Minister.

Write/email the Minister (details below) and ask for a clear answer as to why the existing funds cannot be used to build a cycleway bridge.

Ask your friends, neighbours, relatives and workmates to write as well.

 If you are pressed for time we have included an example letter that you are free to copy - go to our example letter page for text you can copy and paste into a letter or email, we have even prepared the letter in pdf format that you can print, fill in your details, sign and send off.

It is important that you write only to the Minister.

If nothing else has been proved since this campaign commenced it is that the RTA has no intention of engaging the community in a meaningful way as they have shown no willingness to find a solution acceptable to the community.

So write to the Minister today and demand that she fix the problem.

Here is an example letter to the Roads Minister to save you time.
campaign home | background | letters | ongoing |


















Visitor Counter