UNDER THREAT - FROM - MELBOURNE METROPOLITAN RAIL AUTHORITY AND THE VICTORIAN GOVERNMENT

MMRA conflict of interest Transport Management Plan

Editors Note. The quote from this report shows how between them the Minister and MMRA have just about shut off the chance to consider any alternative to the disastrous Domain station plan.

Inquiry and Advisory Committee Report.

Environment Effects Act 1978
Planning and Environment Act 1987
Melbourne Metro Rail Project
5.8 Precinct 7 – Domain Station
5.8.1 Key issues
The Committee considers the key issues relate to:
alternative location for the Domain station
the need for a station at Domain
safety risks associated with construction traffic, particularly students and staff of Melbourne Grammar School
accessibility to residences and businesses
emergency vehicle access
disruption to tram services
pedestrian access and flow
Page 34 of 294

QUOTE
The Committee is particularly concerned with the potential conflict of MMRA acting as both chair of the TTWG and final approver for the TMP under the EMF.  An independent chair would remove the potential conflict and allow the MMRA’s participation in the group to be a support role for the chair. By comparison, the Committee notes that TN44 states that the (Page 35) Parkville Precinct Reference Group (PPRG) will have an independent chair appointed by the State Government, with terms of reference.

In relation to the nomination of key stakeholders within EPR TA, it is noted that no specific definition is provided to determine who might qualify as a ‘key’ or ‘key affected’ stakeholder. Whether a party made a submission to the Committee does not in itself lead to a definition or limitation of potential key stakeholder status. The EPR at SC3  requires the preprements for the whole community are met. Chapter 7 addresses the identification of key stakeholders further.‘Incorporating’ rather than ‘considering’ stakeholders’ responses in the TTWG’s response on the TMP will add a higher level of transparency on how stakeholders’ comments are considered. Given that elements of the transport assessment is not complete, resulting in the EPR containing requirements for more analysis rather than clear performance measures,a high level of transparency is considered appropriate.

5.8.2 What did the EES say?
VITM was used to determine the quantum of traffic diverted due to the closure of Domain Road at St Kilda Road and the reduction in traffic to one lane (plus cycle and tram lanes) in each direction …… continues on..

Page 60 of 294
Continues to page 70 This is a must read part of this PDF. It highlights many of the transport problems that MMRA and the Government gloss over.

Full report:
https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/9820/Melbourne-Metro-Rail-IAC-Report-MASTER-21Nov-FINAL.pdf

When MMRA are queried on the the location of the station, they state they are bound by the Minister’s determination that it must go under St Kilda Road.
What hope is there for a different outcome.