Value Caloundra Community agree that reducing congestion at Caloundra Road roundabout is important. This objective must be balanced with other community and environmental values. Land for the CTCU comes from open spaces and parklands cherished by the community, sites of successful small businesses, and a relatively coherent and connected network of two-lane streets that people easily walk and cycle around.
Caloundra’s identity as a home or a place to visit is closely linked to its natural beaches, bushland, open spaces, parks, walking and cycling paths and community facilities.
This group shares grave concerns with other community groups, residents, local business proprietors and individuals about this proposal, but to date, the Sunshine Coast Council has offered limited respect for, or consideration of, these concerns. .
An accountable consultation process for community members to express their objections to the CTCU concept design and have these concerns transparently acknowledged, documented, and responded to with due process and presented in a consultation report.
An engineering Business Case is required to demonstrate why the road must be this big and to acknowledge and and balance traffic outcomes against other values.
The Council have recently distributed a Community Update leaflet about the project to people in 4551 postcode. This is the most significant engagement process Council has undertaken on the CTCU. The engagement materials suggest, the opportunity has passed for community members to express their objections to the CTCU concept design.
The consultation process currently underway, should have been undertaken to develop concept designs to better understand impacts and values of this area. The broader community should have been involved in an inclusive consultation process, that involved them in decision-making, consistent with the vision of Council's Community Engagement: Excellence in Engagement Framework.
Elected members should have had access to detailed community consultation studies that proactively sought feedback from the broader community on the concept design for this project and also explored peoples reactions to the areas impacted.
This project has not been built and as far as we can see, the community has not been given enough information to understand why properties, parks and businesses should be destroyed to provide for the wider road corridors proposed. This is a key reason why we are advocating for 2LanesNot4 to be assessed as an alternative option.
The process used to engage with the community on this project, is in stark contrast to how the community has been actively engaged with, early in the concept design process on other projects including: Caloundra Centre Activation Project and the Sunshine Coast Mass Transit Project.
Why has Council not conducted any community surveys to seek and collate feedback on the project?
Why has it been assumed that maximising traffic outcomes should over ride all other values in this area?
Why are there public reports available demonstrating that a smaller road option has bene considered and justifying the need for the large road with enormous impacts ?
How were community and environmental values around Ben Bennett Bushland Park, and Bicentennial Park fed into the development of the concept design?
Why is it that environ
Council have been the trustees of Ben Bennett Bushland Park since 1969. The reserve was established due to the advocacy of Kathleen McArthur and Rotarian and Councillor, Ben Bennett. The Rotary Club Caloundra note that the park is; “….is a haven of peace, only seldom abused” (Caloundra Rotary, n.d), and contains “…high biodiversity values including regional ecosystems and important habitat” (Sunshine Coast Council, 2017, P5). This road design is a significant departure from a legacy of preservation and protection and will severely abuse the habitat and resident species of the park.
This is a content preview space you can use to get your audience interested in what you have to say so they can’t wait to learn and read more. Pull out the most interesting detail that appears on the page and write it here.
Desirable standards of service for traffic models are desirable NOT not essential
Decision makers have been advised the road will ‘fail’ on opening if the road is not built to the plan developed. When a bridge fails, there is risk of collapse and life is threatened. When a traffic model fails, it fails to meet the ‘desirable’ standard of service. This means, some people will need to wait a bit longer.
The word ‘desirable’ is used extensively in engineering. It provides flexibility to enable competing values to be accommodated. It’s commonly not possible to provide the ‘desirable’ outcomes for one criterion, because it involves unacceptable outcomes for another.
This is why it’s essential to inform decision makers about competing values in an area. It’s essential that traffic model outputs are not described in absolute language. It’s essential that decision makers are not relying on one group of specialists to define the land use for an area.
See, Part 4 Local Government Infrastructure Plan (sunshinecoast.qld.gov.au) Table 4.4.2.1.1 Urban transport corridors standards, Maximum desirable volume / capacity ratio by location, for further information about SCC Desirable levels of service.
We use cookies to analyze website traffic and optimize your website experience. By accepting our use of cookies, your data will be aggregated with all other user data.