Dear Editor,
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
It has come to pass that despite calling an extraordinary meeting of council and diverting $250, 000 to remedy urgent works on the Gundy Creek Bridge Renshaw McGirr Way Wellington's technical service department was instructed to complete this project post haste. The completion of this project has suffered the same fate as "Devon Loch" in the grand national steeplechase it has crashed to terra firma in the shudders of the finishing line. This simple engineering task has taken four months and expended hundreds of thousands of dollars yet it cannot be finalised until a couple of white lines are marks on the road? (what utter bull). This ignominious debacle into service delivery will be presented in his monthly report to council by Wellington's director of technical services. Hopefully councillors who have studied this report may like to question the location of this project for the director appears somewhat confused in this locality which has acquired a phantom name (Gundy Creek Road). As Pauline would ask: please explain. As to your inference that locals have removed the timber associated with tree pruning and the small branches containing leaf matter has been (PILED AT THE BASE OF TREES BY WHOM?) This process is in line with NSW environmental practices? The removal of timber from any roadside reserve is a criminal offence, If the director has any information to substantiate his claim he should lay that evidence to council's ranger for appropriate action. If the director has no proof (the locals removing this timber he must apologise to the so-called locals for publicly stating they are engaging in criminal activities put up or shut up). Wellington's mapping systems indicate that the project is in a red zone, fire prone lands these areas come under the bushfire acts of 1997 and 2000. They define these acts in bushfire seasons for obvious reasons will render the NSW environmental practices as null and void. It is my opinion both as a qualified master tree grower of Australia and a long time environmentalist that timber prunings constitute a fuel load. This dry inflammable matter if piled at the base of trees is not good environmental practice it is rather rank stupidity.The director is nearer the truth when he states his department does not have sufficient funding for certain aspects of road maintenance or the actual replacement of Gundy Creek B will only eventuate if and when Council receives funding to do this. The most pleasing aspect of the director's report is that the director is fully aware that process methods and changes to operational work practices and process methods must be changed. This will happen in 2015 however my mail has it that this director and several other council hierarchy will presently decorating the quarterdeck will not be around when these changes are implemented. Might well you state fit for the future, but the future is not fit for you.
Frank Barker