A Gunnedah resident says works done during the Blackjack Creek Flood Mitigation Project have created a safety hazard for pedestrians and drivers.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Aygen Gold and her family live off Wandobah Road and during the project a new driveway was created to access their property and their neighbour’s.
As part of the works a causeway was constructed where the channel meets the Golds’ new driveway. Mrs Gold said “the new crossing constructed under council’s direction is unsafe to us, our tenants and any visitors that may use the right of way to our property at 81-109 Wandobah Rd”.
Council’s new creek crossing has created an unsafe area and needs to be corrected before anyone is seriously injured.
- Aygen Gold
Mrs Gold said there is a lack of visibility when approaching the causeway from Wandobah Road and the angle of the incline restricts the types of vehicles that can travel through it.
The Gold’s main concern is the safety of their son and the neighbouring children who use the driveway to walk to Wandobah Road to catch the school bus.
The driveway is regularly used by trucks, cars and horse trainers.
“Council’s new creek crossing has created an unsafe area and needs to be corrected before anyone is seriously injured,” Mrs Gold said.
The access road to a private property has been constructed to the agreed standard, which was a requirement of the agreement.
- Carolyn Hunt, Gunnedah Shire Council
Gunnedah Shire Council Council’s development and planning manager Carolyn Hunt said the access road is designed for vehicles to cross a flood channel and meets the Austroads Guide for Stopping Sight Distance guidelines and the RMS Typical Rural Property Access Standard.
Mrs Gold said she and her husband were not consulted about the design, however, Ms Hunt said they were “consulted on the access included in the original work plan and were satisfied with the access at that time”.
“The access road to a private property has been constructed to the agreed standard, which was a requirement of the agreement,” Ms Hunt said.
When the Golds raised the issue of visibility and safety, council’s contractors undertook more work on the western approach to the channel crossing and installed a speed limit sign.
“While I appreciate that council has erected 20km/hr speed signs at the crest of the crossing, the fact remains that when driving on the eastern approach to the crossing, a driver cannot see who or what is already in the channel,” Mrs Gold said.
“We feel that the only way to safely do that crossing is to put in concrete culverts so we can go over the top.”
Mrs Gold said she and her husband had a meeting with council staff on May 17 and suggested that the level of the crossing be raised.
She said they were told that it was too late to change the causeway and the funds were not there to do it.
When Mrs Gold read in the NVI that the project came in under budget by more than $200,000, she said it was “like salt in the wound”.
Council said the cost savings were based on the work plan approved by the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) following its grant application.
"The savings mentioned are the difference between the cost of quoted works and the actual cost of the works once completed,” Ms Hunt said.
“Council was unable to include additional works as part of the work plan due to grant guidelines and the original work plan having already been signed off by OEH.”
Ms Hunt said the council suggested the installation of a gate near the channel to slow vehicles.
“The property owners were advised to consider the option and come back to council with a proposal. To date, the property owner has not provided council with their preferred option,” she said.
Ms Hunt said any proposed amendment to the access would have to be fully funded by the council and the council is “working towards a mutually agreeable solution”.
