Traffic fix is signed and sealed

Bypass the bypass, Hobart’s already paid for a way out, writes John Livermore

WOULD a western bypass ease Hobart’s traffic congestion?

A State Growth traffic report of 2017 cites its own 2016 study of traffic movements through Hobart.

This showed that during morning peak time, more than 75 per cent of journeys that start in the east, north or south of Hobart end in the city.

In the afternoon peak, more than two thirds of journeys ending in the east, north or south began in the city. A GHD report in 2012 found a similar split.

The State Growth study supports my case that the bulk of traffic is CBD-bound and the Evers Network’s tunnel proposal is no solution to congestion. In 2011, the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources, in “Congestion in Greater Hobart: Response to Issues”, made critical comment on similar previous proposals. Tunnels and bypasses, it said, were “vastly out of proportion to the traffic issues and reflects an infrastructure approach rather than a network or system-wide perspective to address traffic issues”.

DIER concluded that building a tunnel or a bypass was unlikely to solve traffic issues on Macquarie or Davey streets because most traffic was not through traffic.

The DIER report also raised concerns that building a tunnel or a bypass was likely to have an impact on Hobart’s many heritage buildings.

A proposed bypass could skirt the CBD to the west and connect the Southern Outlet to the Brooker Ave and the Tasman Highway.

Such a route would likely impact Hobart’s many heritage buildings, and involve extensive property acquisition, particularly between Molle and Melville streets.

An elevated freeway would also create a significant visual impact against the backdrop of Hobart CBD and the foothills of Mt Wellington. The lower slopes would also be affected by a bypass from McRobies Gully to South Hobart.

The State Growth Hobart Transport Vision 2018-2030 states, “Constructing more roads alone will not solve the problem. It will simply create more traffic, more inner congestion and reinforce reliance on the car. Increasing the proportion of the population using public transport will reduce traffic congestion across the entire road network”.

Then-infrastructure minister Rene Hidding endorsed the proposed infrastructure investment to bring this desired result:

1. Investment in a new CBD transit hub.

2. Infrastructure facilities for a new ferry service.

3. Activate the northern suburbs rail corridor for passenger transport.

4. Davey and Macquarie street transit priority measures.

5. Priority measures on key northern and southern arterial corridors for passenger transport.

Of these, 1 has yet to be acted on; 2 is at consultation stages; 3 was a late conversion by the Minister after years of consultants’ reports and delay but no clear action to date; 4 is in operation after a tussle by the State Government with Hobart City Council over road governance; and 5 is in the process of being implemented.

What is missing from this mix is park and ride into Hobart from Kingston (recommended by the RACT in 2010) and Sorell.

The Mercury in 2018 estimated at least 11 reports had been made on Hobart’s traffic problems.

The State Government set in train yet another in 2018, hiring GDH to investigate a western bypass of the CBD.

Due to its virus recovery spending, the State Government is in no financial position to fund what could be $500 million on a bypass.

We do not need a congestion of transport consultants.

Bypass the bypass and make the 2017 Hobart Transport Vision a reality.

John Livermore is fellow of the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport and editor of Laws of Australia: Transport. These do not necessarily support the views expressed.