Agenda – Meeting Tuesday 16 June 2015

Agenda – Meeting Tuesday 16 June 2015

AGENDA: NORTH CANBERRA COMMUNITY COUNCIL GENERAL MEETING 7.30 pm TUESDAY 16 June 2015 – Note new venue: Majura Function Room Majura Community Centre, 2 Rosevear Place Dickson – click for map


  • 7.45 pm: Economic Development Directorate: City to Gungahlin corridor walking & cycling improvements
  • 8.05 pm: Roads ACT: Dickson intersection upgrades
  • 8.25 pm: Minister Shane Rattenbury, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Justice, Sport and Recreation; Minister Assisting the Chief Minister on Transport Reform.
    • The Community Council has asked the Minister to address the four questions at Attachment 1.
  • Brief presentation by Steve Doszpot, Shadow Minister for Education and Training, Sport and Recreation, Ageing and ICT


  • Attendance and Apologies
  • Confirm minutes of preceding General Meeting 19 May 2015
  • Actions arising from the Minutes


  • Report on Committee decisions since the previous General Meeting:
    22 May (Attachment 3) and 5 June.

Treasurer’s report

Planning and Development Forum report

  • Report from 11 June meeting

Residents’ Association reports (Canberra City, Dickson, Downer, Hackett, Lyneham, O’Connor, Pialligo, Reid, Turner, Watson)


  • Possible NCCC Submission on National Capital Plan Review – Comments close 4.30pm 22 July.
  • Possible NCCC Submission to Taxi Review – Closing date 29 June
  • Questions for Meegan Fitzharris (MLA for Molonglo) at the July meeting

Any other business

Close of meeting

Attachment 1: Four questions for Minister Rattenbury

  1. As Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, did you approve the reclassification as Major Collector roads of Miller Street (north of Macarthur Avenue), Officer Crescent and Ebden, Chisholm, Donaldson, Brigalow and Banksia Streets?
  2. Why were the classifications of these roads increased without consultation with the local community?
  3. Why were these roads reclassified as major collector roads despite failing to meet the requirements of Table 2A of the Estate Development Code of the Territory Plan?
  4. Monash University Professor Graham Currie reports that HOV bus lanes are a quarter the cost of light rail[1]. What is the likely impact of transit lanes, relative to light rail, on greenhouse emissions due to:
  • infrastructure, including production of construction materials such as steel and concrete?[2]
  • bus trips that would otherwise be made by light rail?[3]
  • fewer cars, carrying more people in order to qualify to use transit lanes and thus benefit from shorter travel times?
  • bus trips that would not be made by light rail, because some light rail journeys would involve additional bus-tram transfer delays?[4]
  • bus trips that would not be made by light rail, because light rail would make driving more attractive by reducing car travel times?[5]
  • shorter trip distances, because transit lanes will not reduce driver-only car commute times and so will not encourage people to live farther from their workplaces?[6]

Background to questions 1-3

The 2012-dated document “TRUNK ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE STANDARD No. 03” on the TAMS website at contains a list of arterial and major collector roads in the ACT.

In 2014 Roads ACT informed the North Canberra Community Council that the following roads were now major collector roads:

  • Officer Crescent;
  • Ebden Street;
  • Chisholm Street;
  • Donaldson Street (which runs past the entrance to Ainslie Primary School);
  • Brigalow Street (which runs past the entrance to Brindabella Christian College and Lyneham Primary School);
  • Banksia Street;
  • Miller Street (north of Macarthur Avenue).

[1]        Currie, G, 2009, Research Perspectives on the merits of Light Rail vs Bus, BTRE Colloquium, Canberra 18-19 June 2009, slide 37: Capital Costs per Mile – Light Rail and BRT systems: Light Rail US$34.7 million per mile; Bus on HOV Lanes 8.97; Bus on Arterial 0.68.

[2]        See for example Arundell, L, 2012, Greenhouse emissions from ACT travel;
Dave, Shreya, 2010, Life Cycle Assessment of Transportation Options for Commuters, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), p.11;
Chester, Mikhail V. Life-cycle Environmental Inventory of Passenger Transportation in the United States. Institute of Transportation Studies, dissertations. 2008.

[3]        See for example Currie 2009, p. 46; Arundell, 2012; Dave, 2010.

[4]        “The Transport Elasticities Study shows that improving public transport travel times is the most important factor in encouraging greater use of public transport.” The Sustainable Transport Plan for the ACT, ACT Government, 2004, p.19.
Light rail will replace many bus through-services with services that involve bus-tram transfers. Transfers delays will include 2 minutes of walking between bus and tram stops, up to 90 seconds of waiting at pedestrian signals, and up to an hour of waiting for a connecting service. See also Currie, 2009, p.27.

[5]        Capital Metro’s Business Case reports (p. 51) micro simulation study results that light rail will reduce 2031 car commute times from 57 to 42 minutes.

[6]        By reducing car commute times by 15 minutes (Capital Metro Business Case, p.51), Capital Metro will make it feasible for people to live 15 minutes’ drive (approx. 20 km) farther from work destinations such as Civic. This will mean longer commute distances.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *