The Draft Regional Transport Plan 2041 is now on exhibition, with comments being invited (closing on February 24).
It is 88 pages of difficult reading – verbose, poorly organised and diffuse in its approach – which doesn’t much repay the effort of getting through it.
If the intent is to discourage anyone from attempting to respond to it, it manages that purpose quite well.
In typical fashion, it is heavy on mentioning goals, and allows for much studying, liaising, evaluating and reviewing, but doesn’t present a great deal in the way of concrete actions or timetables that would engender confidence that the 2041 horizon is a realistic one.
Furthermore, there is no hint of the level of resources that would be required to achieve the many aims identified in the document.
Can the plan be implemented with the same level of resources as is now available or will additional funding be required: if the latter, where is this funding coming from?
Much of what is set out sounds more like an improbable wish list than a serious planning exercise.
One startling finding is that Gosford is more than 30 minutes in access time from most of the LGA.
I have pointed this out on multiple occasions and have suggested that this is one reason why Gosford is unsuitable as the regional centre which should be nearer the population centre of gravity which is around Tuggerah.
However, the conclusion of the Regional Plan is that Gosford should be within 30 minutes of the whole LGA, without giving any indication of how this desirable situation could be brought about.
It is all very well to wish that this were the case, but, in the old saw, if wishes were horses, beggars would ride.
Let us see a blueprint for a system that would bring the northern extremities of the LGA within 30 minutes of Gosford, and we should then be able to make an intelligent comment about it.
The crux of the publication comes in the Key Initiatives section which lists 80 items that have to be dealt with over the next 18 years.
Of these, 12 are in the “Delivery” phase, 25 are in the “Planning” phase, and 43 are in the “Investigation” phase.
A “plan” where more than half of the “key initiatives” haven’t even been investigated doesn’t seem to have yet reached a level of maturity that justifies the name: “kite-flying” could, perhaps, be used instead.
This is apart from the fact that many key initiatives seem to have only the most tenuous connection to practical transport outcomes.
For instance, the 12 initiatives now being delivered on include “technological advances”, “reconciliation activities” and “innovation challenges” (whatever they all mean), while others are so picayune that the writer must have been scraping the bottom of the barrel to make up an even dozen (e.g., tactile line marking on the M1 at Mount White), and still others are so vague that they might mean anything (or nothing), e.g., Woy Woy road network improvements.
It is difficult to discern the purpose of this publication.
Obviously, it is of no value as a “plan” from which programs and projects might be derived.
Many of the matters “for investigation” are an embarrassment to read: a planning student could have put them together from a textbook, without ever visiting the Central Coast.
By the way, has anybody ever seen more than two-thirds of the Woy Woy bicycle racks in use every normal day, as the Plan claims?
I find it hard to recall a day when I’ve seen more than a bicycle or two in the racks and I have often wondered at the pointlessness of their provision.
Obviously, the view from Department of Transport headquarters in Sydney is different to mine.
Email, Feb 7
Bruce Hyland, Woy Woy
Regarding your question “has anybody ever seen more than two-thirds of the Woy Woy bicycle racks in use every normal day?” Since the bike shed was installed on the northern end of the bus interchange a few years ago, many bicycle riders stopped using the old bike racks in favour of the shed. This is because the bike shed provides a higher level of security (swipe card access plus cctv) and shelter for rider and bicycle. Prior to COVID the bike shed was often at capacity during weekdays, with overflow onto the old bike racks.