NICB Rankin Park to Jesmond Bypass

I obviously support the bypass it has been needed for a long period of time. I do have a massive objection to the missing on and off ramps to McCaffrey Drive. It will mean that a lot of traffic still needs to use Croudace Street and Lookout road to access McCaffrey Drive. It will also see the ongoing congestion of the local roads around McCaffrey Drive/Croudace Road at Elermore Vale. I recognise there would be increased costs however it is more cost effective to include them now rather than later when it is realised that it is necessary for the ramps.

Once again little respect shown for residents in the area or those using facilities in the area, including the John Hunter Hospital
Proper data collection would have included where traffic to the major hospital in Northern NSW was coming from. The saga of waiting again for another entrance to or from the hospital continues.
The proposed plan will do nothing to alleviate congestion on McCaffery Rd as traffic exits the Link Rd and travels via Jubilee Rd, McCaffery Rd to the John Hunter Hospital.
Let the architects of this proposal leave Sydney and live on this route for a while. Perhaps the sole purpose is to get Sydney travellers to the north quicker, don't worry about what happens to the local commuters!

The pedestrian path on the half interchange theoretically leads to "existing tracks". These tracks are unsafe and barely useable. What is needed is is a properly constructed cycleway (as has been proposed at numerous other locations near the bypass). With improved pedestrian and cycle access to the hospital from the west, particularly the suburbs of Elermore Vale and Wallsend, then some of the current problems of traffic and congestion would be alleviated. These suburbs are undergoing rapid infilling because of their proximity to the hospital.

More thought should be put into the future access to the hospital, for non car commuters.

A cycle way from the west to the hospital may reduce some of the demands for on/off ramps at McCaffrey Drive.

As a keen cyclist I am disgusted that there is not provision for safe cycling in the plan. A cycleway adjacent to the freeway, as they have in Brisbane, woukd allow connection to the existing cyclists and into town. Please encourage cycling and help get cars off the road. Please offer safe cycling solutions.

My community feedback would be:

The proposed project removes all of the street parking along Lookout Road, between Grandview Road and Macaffrey Drive. This street parking is utilised by hundreds of people, mainly hospital staff, but also outpatients and visitors, every day. Given that public transport to the hospital is severely limited and given that parking at the hospital is either unavailable or extremely expensive for regular attendees, could you please ensure that the project addresses the issue of free (or low cost) parking within walking distance of the hospital. I note that extension of the light rail to the hospital would reduce parking demand and potentially address this issue.

I presume that the hospital was originally located (and the RNC subsequently relocated) to this site due to the environmental ambience. Instead of the sea air, the patient aspect was replaced with the bush view. I don't have it to hand, but I'm am reasonably sure that there is evidence regarding the wider patient environment and its influence upon health outcomes. Consequently, could you please ensure that the project adequately mitigates the visual and noise impacts from the perspective of a patient at John Hunter Hospital.

My feedback is provided as an individual and not on behalf of any institution or wider group.

Thanks and regards,
Simon Deeming

The East-West shared pathway at the Northern (Jesmond end) interchange should not involve pedestrians and cyclists crossing the three-stage intersection (bypass access roads). The project should have a bridge/ tunnel to allow pedestrians/ cyclists to pass through the whole Northern interchange without the risk and time delay of road crossings.
The lack of a bridge/ tunnel for pedestrians / cyclists is short-sighted and will cause delays to traffic as traffic is stopped to allow pedestrians and cyclists cross the three roads.

The project as proposed is generally supported. However, I have concerns that the non-provision of the north facing ramps at the southern interchange will increase traffic on local roads. It will also deny a substantial population (users of McCaffery Drive) of getting northbound access to the new road. Without these ramps there will be negative impacts on other intersections and local roads - verified in the traffic analysis. There is an increase in traffic on Grandview Road and Cardiff Road (and most likely Marshall Street) and a decrease in level of service where these roads intersect Lookout Road. This seems to be brushed over in the EIS. The relatively low additional costs of providing these ramps as part of the project now would have longer term community benefits. These ramps should be included.
The other issue which is obvious from the traffic data is that this project falls short of completing the inner city bypass as a limited access road. Traffic signals on the southern 'quarter' interchange will cause delays to through southbound traffic and the project does not address the major traffic pinch points at Cardiff Road and Carnley Avenue. This must be addressed as part of this project to give it credibility! The EIS emphasises the bypassing of 11 sets of traffic lights but conveniently excludes the impacts that the remaining signals on the route will have through traffic between Bennetts Green and Sangate. This must be addressed in some one in the EIS, either mentioned as a future project or be included as part of this project. The community would want to know what the RMS strategy is for addressing this issue.

It seems very short sighted not to include a link between McCaffery Drive and expressway going north. A simple one lane on ramp is all that is required. Otherwise traffic will be diverted onto Grandview Parade which is designed for local traffic only (speed humps, windy road, slow traffic).

Also a link going north on expressway to John Hunter Hospital as well as the south ( ie link coming from and going to south).
There is only 2 single lane roads in and out of JHH which both feed into Lookout Road, so any major issue here will cause major problems which could be alleviated by the above addition.

The off ramp at Newcastle Road coming from south needs to be enough to carry more cars than planned otherwise there will be a bank-up on the expressway from south for cars turning right onto Newcastle road. This section of Newcastle Road is one of the busiest parts so traffic trying to merge may be quite slow at am peak hour.

I regularly ride my bike along Jesmond Bike path to work. Accessing Victory Parade and then through into brickworks park. The present design of the bypass road removes the end section of bike path and will result in the need to cross three sets of pedestrian lights or riding on the extremely busy Newcastle Road.

It is great to see that Newcastle council has just recently upgraded Victoria Parade with a bike path and bike lanes and upgraded the bike path through brickworks park. Adding three sets of lights across what will be one of Newcastle's busiest intersections will discourage people to use alternate transport and will be dangerous.

I note that a dedicated overpass is being provided over Newcastle road (which is an excellent idea), the same (or underpass) should be provided to provide access to Victoria Parade / Southern side of Newcastle Road. This will also allow safer access between Elmore Vale area and the University.

The project will cost hundred of million dollars so it is not disproportionate amount of money to spend.

For the most part I am in favour of the proposal as I have been caught in the congestion on Croudace road on many occasions.
But I have concerns over the cycleway through Jesmond.
I am a regular user of the cycle path through the Park as it provides a safe route to my employment.
I believe further thought should be put into maintaining a safe access though this park. i.e.. not crossing main roads.
We as a community should be promoting healthy travel options (walking / riding), building safe off road options, not taking them away.

I submit that the at grade crossing of 3 roads is a unreasonable interruption of the EAST-WEST cycleway. This cycleway carries commuting and recreational cyclists from Hamilton to Wallsend and has recently been extended to Glendale. I suggest two possibilities to create a more acceptable situation. Firstly, an overpass structure for pedestrians and cyclists or secondly, realigning the traffic lanes so that both direction lanes are adjacent about 150 m south of the proposed crossings and are crossed via one set of traffic lights. This is approximately the alienment of the existing cycleway. The proposed traffic lights at the intersection with Newcastle will obviously have to remain and the extra lights to the south would only operate on demand. Under this proposal, The 2 side lanes giving access to and from Newcastle Road could be downgraded to pedestrian crossings similar to the Turton Rd- Lambton Rd intersection on the North-South cycleway

I was unable attend the community information session held at Silver Ridge Community Cottage on Saturday 26th November and I will be away on Thursday 1st December as well.

I have written to you (a while back, maybe over a year ago) concerning what I see as a lack of pedestrian access between the western side of the new bypass and the eastern side. In particular a very well used bush access which is the most direct route between Sygna Close and the most western point of the JHH property.


You have accommodated a wildlife access well to the south, and you have an overpass further to the north (near the existing staff carpark) and the bridge access further north again. However, I feel that an access directly from Sygna Close would enable bushwalkers to cross under the bypass without having to traverse like a mountain goat to the overpass further south.

Have you done studies on how many bushwalkers use these existing paths (there are lots!)and what strategies do you have in place to create new walking pathways to the overpass crossing you have planned?

People currently use these bush tracks for exercise. Many of these people walk to work, use the tracks to exercise and maybe walk their dog. Lots of mtb riders use these trails for recreation. Will you restore the trails so they link up again?

The overpass is not very pedestrian friendly. It will mean walking alongside moving cars and on the eastern side of the overpass, it will require the pedestrians to cross a lane of traffic. This is not suitable for the several kids who previously were able to ride safely and road free on these trails. It will completely spoil the reason why people enjoy walking in the bush, to be car, noise and exhaust free. You need more underpasses, not overpasses.

I am not against progress. I will welcome and use the new bypass. However, I don't think you have given enough consideration to bush users in general. Your crossings are not suitable or effective for bushwalkers and mtb riders.

Further to the above, I think that it is insane that traffic cannot access the bypass by turning left at the top of McCaffrey Drive!

Would you kindly reply to the questions I have raised in this email. I am happy to meet with you in person, on site or elsewhere to explain my concerns.




Yours sincerely




Alison Senkalski (0432 435555)

The bypass definitely needs access to John Hunter Hospital from both directions. It is a major hospital with lots of visitors everyday from all directions. If you have a loved one in need of fast medical assistance speed and quick access is vital. Changes also need to be made at the McCaffrey Drive to enhance traffic flow. If you have ever tried to drive early morning or late afternoon along this drive like I have done you would know what a bottle neck this road (as well as Lookout Road) is. What is proposed needs amendment to cater for the traffic. You will not only have the traffic from McCaffrey Drive and Lookout Road but also traffic coming from the north on the bypass. It is going to be an even worse nightmare than what it is currently

we were aware of the corridor when we purchased our land, the bypass did not include a off ramp that was to come within 36 mt to our address. And although over the years there have been general information thats goes out to the public in certain postcodes, this was not good enough. As this off ramp only comes close to the 7 properties at 150 Birhgrove Dr (and it seems our 7 home subdivision is the worst effected area of the 3.4k proposed road) I would have expected as a common curtsy the RMS would send personnel letters to these 7 owners with the proposed changes explaining the possible losses to the home valuations and the issues they will occur with noise etc whilst you build the bypass and the off ramp.

We then could of addressed your proposal with the proper feed back in the required time frame, which might of had a difference. ie like it was changed for the Rankin Park residents we would expect the same consideration

Or we could of chosen to sell our property earlier. We put our home up for sale 3 weeks ago and had a offer which now pulled out due to the Bypass and off ramp being so close to us.

Newcastle Council and Newcastle Cycleways Movement have been making excellent progress with providing safe off-road cycle routes through Newcastle. At present it is possible to cycle from Belmont to Glendale on off-road cycleways or on quiet streets.

This means that cyclists are safe from potential injury from collisions with vehicles and do not experience prolonged exposure to car fumes.

This proposal is a giant backwards step.

Suggesting that cyclists can use the shoulder shows a failure to understand the hazards that cyclists face in using the shoulder of a busy road. Shoulders are frequently in poor condition as they are not maintained as a road surface and may be littered with detritus requiring cyclists to maneuver in ways that motorists may not predict.

Removing this segment of safe cycleway will significantly reduce the utility of the connecting cycleways from Jesmond to Glendale and from Jesmond park to Hunter Stadium and from there to the CBD, Kotara and Belmont.

The onward effect of this will be a reduction in cycling uptake and the associated health and environmental benefits.

I strongly object to the poor provision for cyclists and pedestrians at the overpass proposed at the Northern Interchange - Jesmond Park. The only means of improving these conditions considered by the planners are so extreme and expensive that they are clearly not feasible and there appears to be no consideration of cheaper options proposed by outside parties. This makes the "consultation" process appear something of a sham.

Whatever form this project takes, this will be a great asset to the Newcastle region.

Can I suggest that we need a separate bike /pedestrian pathway parallel to the roadway, similar to what is on the M7 in Sydney.
Also, access to the John Hunter hospital needs to be from both directions.

I understand bush recreation locations face a finite lifetime in a growing city, but severing a critical bike link in a growing city is counter-productive. Years of impassioned labour in Newcastle are finally seeing fruit in the form of collective shared and cycle ways that link the key suburbs neighbouring the university and the habourside. Why undermine that by putting an enormous barrier in the middle of one of those precious links?

Please reconsider the proposed severing of the cycleway at the Northern interchange - this beautiful site offers an attractive way to encourage non-vehicle travel between Wallsend, Jesmond and Lambton. I use it regularly to access Jesmond from the eastern suburbs. Finding cycle-safe routes in that area is difficult and that path is crucial.

The Jesmond Park Cycleway is a heavily used route by both recreational and commuting cyclists, as well as by a great number of walkers and runners. It should in no way be destroyed like it will be here, there should be at least a tunnel under the new roadway so the Cycleway can remain in its current route. having to cross several signalized intersections is totally unacceptable, particularly when small children are involved, many small children are taken on the Cycleway because it is quiet and well away from roads. Reiterating there must be a pedestrian/cycling tunnel where the existing shared cycleway runs from Victory Pde and Illoura St

I wish to note my objection to any plans that will halt or negatively impact on the existing shared path/cycleway that runs east-west behind Jesmond Park. I use this path regularly as a walker, runner and cyclist. The extension of the bypass over Jesmond Park must include a tunnel for the shared path so that regular path uses are not negatively impacted by the new bypass road construction.That is, are not forced onto roads or a complicated network of lights and crossings that would slow the current journey along that shared path.