Newsletter 63 – Bradfield Park

Sydney Harbour Bridge Cycle Ramp Complete Story – when government won’t listen

It starts back when the Sydney Harbour Bridge was completed. The disruption to North Sydney was so great that Bradfield caused land that was resumed for the Bridge and no longer required to be put in a trust for the benefit of the people of North Sydney – that land became Bradfield Park.

When opened to the public in 1932 the Sydney Harbour Bridge never anticipated a future city with commuter cyclists in 2024.

When a western pedestrian walkway was converted for cyclists in the 1960’s, the 55 stairs at the northern end at Milsons Point became a slight challenge for a new generation of bicycle commuters wanting fast active transport.

Bicycle NSW vigorously lobbied Transport for NSW as early as 2016 to ease the problem of pushing bikes up and down a ramp at the stairs. Transport for NSW then commissioned a design study to generate options that would solve the perceived problem and were encouraged to build a cycle ramp to fit the
historically sensitive site “physically, aesthetically, operationally, culturally, socially, sustainably, and
economically.”

Heritage and architectural experts were engaged as this was the world-renowned Sydney Harbour Bridge
– a national treasure. Cox Architecture (https://tinyurl.com/hwj6h46x) and Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects (tinyurl.com/yewj34m8) were both adamant that any new cycle ramp structure should be placed outside the Sydney Harbour Bridge and the Bradfield designed approaches (heritage curtilage). Why? Because they are, on any measure of international significance.

Transport for NSW is not noted for sensitivity to heritage and the environment (think of the Warringah “Freeway”). With that in mind, in early 2021, Transport for NSW proposed two options for this Cycle Ramp for the public to choose between two structures located, where else, in the curtilage –
• a Linear Ramp along the spine of Bradfield Park through the centre of Bradfield Park,
• an enormous loop over and rendering useless the sports fields in Bradfield Park

Neither of these options were responsive to the actual site conditions and the practical needs of the cyclists coming and going across the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Yet Transport for NSW invited the public to choose between these two flawed options and not surprisingly the Linear Ramp through Bradfield Park North was preferred by the public over the only alternative – the big spiral that ate all of the sports grounds at Bradfield Park Central.

As for the heritage and parkland destroying Linear Ramp solution, the single-issue cyclists commuting
northwards loved it as it was this or nothing. But the general public was adamantly opposed to the
damage being imposed on the park and bridge heritage. The Linear Ramp solution didn’t work for
cyclists going east and tourism cyclists from the south side of the Harbour that were expected to come to
the Kirribilli Markets and Milsons Point village and foreshore attractions, a key Transport for NSW project
objective.

In June 2021 the Community Cycle Ramp (facebook.com/groups/cycleramp) was proposed as an
alternative solution to solve all the many problems of Transport for NSW’s Linear Ramp.
• It was a viable harm free win-win alternative that achieved all of the cycling needs, was located outside of the Sydney Harbour Bridge curtilage and parkland, and actually served a larger catchment of cyclists.

Above: Solution that preserves the playing fields and park put forward by the community and rejected by Transport for NSW

In August 2021, Transport for NSW published a response to all the public submissions to their plans and
erroneously stated that the Community Cycle Ramp was inadequate because it needed to be much
longer, or it would be too steep.

It wasn’t until February 2022 that the Transport for NSW project team admitted that they had:
• “got it wrong” and did not fully understand the actual level changes involved.
• miscalculated the height climb by two metres and that error equated to a ramp that required it to be more than forty metres longer than needed.

Documents available through the Freedom of Information process revealed that
Transport for NSW failed:
• to heed their own heritage design guidelines and
• to determine solutions that would respect this important iconic place for all Australians.

With a tin ear Transport for NSW repeatedly ignored the advice of Heritage NSW, North Sydney Council and its own heritage experts in favour of a Bicycle NSW supported Linear Ramp that was to be built directly on heritage curtilage and parkland at Milsons Point.

What’s the point of community consultation?

In April 2023 the Heritage Council called for experts and citizens to comment on the suitability of building
the Linear Ramp on national heritage protected Sydney Harbour Bridge parkland.
• Over 8,000 people signed a petition objection to the design advocated by Transport for NSW
• Hundreds of stakeholders wrote in with their objections including experts such as Professor James Weirick (https:// tinyurl.com/2p99v32p) and Engineers Australia (https://tinyurl.com/38677c8m).

Transport for NSW worked with a third architectural company for a favourable report approving the heritage destruction.

Then the Heritage Council basing its decision on a summary prepared by Transport for NSW ignored or was it oblivious these objections and voted its approval

Next, Transport for NSW worked with its contracted consultant for a favourable report approving the heritage destruction. Not surprisingly, the Heritage Committee rubber stamped Transport’s bid for approval to build on heritage land – despite of knowing there was a workable alternative supported by the North Sydney Council, Engineers Australia and over 8,250 community members.

Is there really a growing need for the ramp? What the data tells us

Transport for NSW’s monitoring devices of cyclists crossing the Sydney Harbour Bridge at Dawes
Point (https://tinyurl.com/3bj9k8jx) showed:
• in early 2024 that in the past 5 years cyclists on the Bridge had declined by 27% and
• an average of around 600 return trips each day.

But then …..nothing happened until March 5th, 2024 when Transport for NSW announced a $43 million
contract had been awarded to Arenco (NSW) Ltd. With design costs added, the spend rises to $67 million for the benefit of around 600 riders a day.

There you have it, one of the precious few inner-city parks will be unnecessarily destroyed, trees
removed and construction will take at least 18 months. All of this taxpayer spending is going ahead over
the objections of 8,250 residents and stakeholders (https://chng.it/BQCzQpVkvQ).

Insane Spending Priorities

Just pause and think about the Minns Governments priorities – one 200 metre bike ramp costing $67m (assuming Transport for NSW can deliver a project on time and within budget) versus 4 primary schools (costing $15m each) with money left over for books and computers.

The Government could build an elevator for a fraction of the cost of the ramp – but why look for cost effective solutions?

North Sydney Council and open green space

There was a time when North Sydney Council held the power to stop the build and preserve Bradfield Park. Transport for NSW needed Council’s consent to apply for heritage clearance and so offered Council $2.5m, enough to get a majority of Council to go with the money.

However, Council has not yet consented to construction. In fact, Council holds the land on trust so can’t deal (sell, lease) with the land.

The question of the day – will Council protect the park for its beneficiaries, the people of North Sydney?

Our community has established a Facebook Group – you can keep up with this story by visiting the Group’s facebook page.