Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (27 March) . . Page.. 926 ..
Leave granted.
Mr Kaine: I present the following paper:
Gungahlin Drive Extension-Objections to the Standing Committee on Urban Services' Committee Report No 67-Letter, dated 21 March 2001, from Chair, Save the Ridge to The Chair, Standing Committee on Urban Services (including Attachments A and B).
The document read as follows:
www.savetheridge.org.au
Save the Ridge
P.O. Box 204
O'Connor,
ACT, 2602
Harold Hird
Chair
Standing Committee on Urban Services
Cc: David Rugendyke, Simon Corbell
Cc: all MLA's
21/3/01
Objections to Urban Services Committee Report No 67 - Gungahlin Drive Extension
Mr Hird.
Save the Ridge on behalf of its members objects strongly to the Report handed down by the Urban Services Standing Committee Inquiry into Gunghalin Drive Extension, in particular recommendation 24 that GDE be built to the East of the AIS. The Report is biased, has ignored significant new evidence that was put before the Committee and has misrepresented the views of Save the Ridge and a large majority of the community who made submissions to the Inquiry.
We believe a written explanation from the Committee specifically addressing the following issues is required.
1. Why did the Committee choose to completely ignore new evidence that was presented to the Inquiry, including:
- Evidence of Environment ACT's criticism of the adequacy of the PA.
- Evidence that the eastern option will undermine one of the basic tenets of the Y Plan.
- Evidence that the Eastern option can only be an 80kph arterial because of the topography of Bruce Ridge and the AIS, whereas the Western option is capable of a 100kph parkway standard transport link.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .