Widen Shoalhaven Dr underpass

With respect to the Bulls Hill underpass, Chris Holstein calls on the State Government to "justify abandoning the project" ("Holstein questions level crossing decision", Peninsula News, November 14) but Mr. Holstein must be living in a parallel universe.

In the real world, it is up to proponents of proposals to justify their propositions.

Has the Central Coast Task Force carried out traffic counts, done origin and destination studies, prepared engineering estimates and calculated cost-benefit ratios?

When the underpass suggestion is more than a thought-bubble, it will be time to lobby the Government to provide funding, and I'd suggest that we are far from meeting any objective criteria for the massive public works involved.

The fact that $15 million has already been squandered on a ridiculous vote-buying gambit doesn't justify pouring another $115 million (at least) into an exercise for which there is no commensurate beneficial evidence.

Mr Holstein claims that, "over two decades, the railway crossing has caused several incidents and has been dangerous", but where is the evidence of this danger?

Has a single person been injured in one of the "incidents" that Mr Holstein refers to?

If this is a criterion, I'd suggest that the improvement of Woy Woy Rd is a much higher priority: it is only necessary to examine the patchwork safety barriers along this route to see where most "incidents" occur.

However, my suggestion of widening the Shoalhaven Dr underpass would immediately improve traffic flows on the Peninsula, would cost far less than the Bulls Hill project and could defer the necessity for other capital works well into the future.

The Bulls Hill underpass will bring trucks onto Nagari Rd and allow them to filter onto Hillview, Dunbar and Veron Rds, whereas a cars-only underpass at Shoalhaven Dr will keep trucks on the main roads, to everyone's environmental benefit.

If the Council Administrator had any gumption, he would be examining possibilities like this instead of wasting time on reviews of the useless Regional Plan which he is anyway already overriding with subdivision approvals.

Incidentally, I commend to Mr Holstein an examination of Fowler's English Usage where he will find the meaning of "begging the question", a construction that he obviously does not understand.

Email, 17 Nov 2016

Bruce Hyland, Woy Woy