TD;DR: Minister Corey Wingard didn’t answer any of my questions (are you surprised?)

###

On 6 May 2021 , I wrote to Minister Corey Wingard (CC’ing the Opposition Leader Peter Malinauskas, CEO and Acting CEO of City of Charles Sturt and City of Charles Sturt councillors Alice Campbell and Paul Alexandrides) with the following message:

###

Dear Minister Wingard,

I am an owner/occupier in Renown Park South Australia (local Council Ward of Hindmarsh and state electorate of Croydon), where the proposed Ovingham Bridge bypass will be built by the Department of Infrastructure and Transport.
 
On 12 December 2020, I attended a community information session was held at the Austrian Club in Ovingham by the Department of Infrastructure and Transport so:
 
“Community members could view the updated design for the project, and understand how the comments and feedback received at the sessions in August 2020 has shaped the design. In addition to the community information session, updated project information is also available in an updated virtual engagement room, where there is the opportunity to provide further feedback on the updated design” as printed on your departments website.
 
I provided feedback and a proposed alternative open space solution to:

1. Richard Hughes (Coordinator Open Space & Property Projects at the City of Charles Sturt) via email on 5 February 2021;
2. Councillors Paul Alexandrides and Alice Campbell at the City of Charles Sturt via email on 12 February 2021; and
3. Lisa (no last name given) from Public Transport Projects Alliance (acting on behalf of the Department of Infrastructure and Transport) via telephone and email on 18 February 2021.
 
My feedback and alternative open space proposal included:

1. A strong community demand with 553 signatures on a public Change.org petition;
2. 38x qualitative comments supporting the reasons for signing;
3. 4x quotations from potential installers outlining approximate costs;
4. An extensive list of existing facilities that would be replicated in the current design indicating oversupply; and
5. A state government published report on the lack of participation and use with the type of facilities suggested in the current design.
I was told in the telephone conversation with Lisa (and Ruby Rushforth via email) on 22 February 2021 that they “expect to confirm the final design before mid-year.”

In addition:

1. Councillor Paul Alexandrides told me via email on 22 February 2021 that “there will be a process for the community to voice their desires”; and
2. Councillor Alice Campbell told me via email on 1 March 2021 of “options for council being involved and this could include providing further facilities such a skate half pipe.

On 1 April 2020 I was told via telephone by Stephanie Hensgen (PTPA-wide Community Stakeholder Engagement Manager at Public Transport Projects Alliance) that the design had been updated with a "futsal court".

After many attempts at communicating with City of Charles Sturt and Public Transport Projects Alliance from 5 February 2021 about my proposal, on 30 May 2021 I met with:

1. Richard Hughes (title and organization named above)
2. Rebekah Maxwell (Transport Officer at the City of Charles Sturt);
3. Stephanie Hensgen (title and organization named above); and
4. Andrew Nicolson (Alliance Interface Manager at the Department of Infrastructure and Transport / Public Transport Projects Alliance).

I was told in that meeting, words to the effect the:

1. The final design had been completed and submitted to City of Charles Sturt Council for sign-off (there is currently no public document reflecting this); and
2. That all three organizations (City of Charles Sturt, Public Transport Projects Alliance and Department of Infrastructure and Transport) did not want to spend more time or effort opening my open space proposal to residents for feedback as it would delay the construction and cost money those three organizations did not want to spend.

So why delay the meeting with me for almost 3 months?
 
No evidence of any community demand for the facilities in the now closed design was provided by those three of those organizations, and I was told on 30 May 2021 the “community input” was merely “no one objected to “plaza spaces, community courts” that City of Charles Sturt, Public Transport Projects Alliance and Department of Infrastructure and Transport ideated.
 
This has all the hallmarks of City of Charles Sturt, Public Transport Projects Alliance and Department of Infrastructure and Transport taking the easy option and considering their own agendas and not community needs they are intended to serve.

Because I am still being not taken seriously, I am seeking an explanation from you and your department of:

1. Why a meeting with me was scheduled after the design was closed, despite me contacting all organizations nearly 3-months earlier (and ongoing throughout that period of time) and being told that the open space designs had not closed and was open to feedback;
2. Why the Department of Infrastructure and Transport misrepresented in their public document dated December 2020: “design of these spaces will continue with input from councils, the community” when it did not do that;
3. Why the Department of Infrastructure and Transport misrepresented in their public document dated December 2020 :that “community input” was merely “no one objected to plaza spaces, community courts”; and
4. How the Department of Infrastructure and Transport will remedy these issues including my proposal in the final open space design.

Your department has not transparent with the public, not following due process and not upheld your values of:

1. Working “as part of the community”; nor
2. Delivering “valuable social infrastructure”.

I am not sure if this laziness, indifference or intentional delay, but it is certainly a poor-form and a bad look leading up to an election especially with 550~ disappointed residents.

If I do not hear back from you or your department within a reasonable amount of time, my next steps are to consider:

1. Making a Freedom of Information request of your department to seek all evidence of all aspects of the community consultation to do with this project, communication to the Council about when the open space plans were finalised and all internal communication about me and that mentions my name; and
2. Approaching every state-based media outlet as there are numerous angles they would be interest in with this story.

As your department love “courts”, the ball is in your court now.

Yours Faithfully,

Orren Prunckun

###

On 29 June 2021, Minister Wingard wrote back to me with the following:

###

Dear Mr Prunckun

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding the Ovingham Level Crossing Grade Separation Project.

This $196 million project jointly funded by the Australian and South Australian governments (50:50) will involve raising Torrens Road over the existing Ovingham level crossing, meaning motorists will no longer be delayed in traffic waiting for trains to pass.

Removing the level crossing on Torrens Road at Ovingham will not only improve safety and cut travel times for the 21,300 vehicles on average that pass through the crossing each day, but also improve walkability and create a new community open space.

| acknowledge and appreciate the community’s interest in this important project.

The Department for Infrastructure and Transport (DIT) has advised that as part of the project's early design and review process, the draft concept design was released to the public for community feedback in July 2020. Following this, four community information sessions were held during August 2020 to discuss the initial concept design and to seek additional community feedback.

In addition to the above, the community were invited to provide feedback via a virtual engagement room, DIT’s website and an online feedback form which concluded on 30 November 2020. These online tools ensured that engagement with the community continued during COVID-19 restrictions.

All community feedback was reviewed and considered resulting in the concept design being updated to include:

• improved connections to shops, schools and services on both sides of Torrens Road.
• improved access in and out of residential areas connecting to Torrens and Churchill roads.
• safe, active and inviting areas under and next to the bridge with increased open space available to residents.
• opportunities for public art.
• minimising the amount of vegetation removed and enhancing biodiversity and canopy coverage.
• reduced road noise and improved amenity for residents.

Following the consultation period, a community information session was held on 12 December 2020 to provide the community with an update of how feedback obtained was used to inform the updated design.

| am further advised that DIT has met regularly with the City of Charles Sturt and City of Prospect councils to discuss the scope of works, delivery timelines and other project related matters. DIT has received acceptance from both councils to progress to detailed design consistent with the revised concept design.

DIT has also advised that a meeting was held on 30 April 2021 with yourself, Council officers and project team members to allow you to present your proposal, however as you have been advised by the project team, your proposal to install a steel half-pipe underneath the bridge was not supported.

Please be assured that as the project progresses, expected to be complete in 2023, further information will be collected, key stakeholders engaged and the design will be refined using this information. The project team will continue to work closely with the community, local businesses and stakeholders to keep people informed of project plans and progress, particularly as the design is developed.

| trust this information is of assistance.

Yours sincerely

Hon Corey Wingard MP
Minister for Infrastructure and Transport

###

Minister Wingard, has not been of assistance, nor has he answered any of my original four (4) questions, those being:

1. Why a meeting with me was scheduled after the design was closed, despite me contacting all organizations nearly 3-months earlier (and ongoing throughout that period of time) and being told that the open space designs had not closed and was open to feedback;
2. Why the Department of Infrastructure and Transport misrepresented in their public document dated December 2020: “design of these spaces will continue with input from councils, the community” when it did not do that;
3. Why the Department of Infrastructure and Transport misrepresented in their public document dated December 2020: that “community input” was merely “no one objected to plaza spaces, community courts”; and
4. How the Department of Infrastructure and Transport will remedy these issues including my proposal in the final open space design.
So on 1 July 2021 replied to Minister Wingard with:

###

Dear Minister Wingard,

Can you show me reference to where the cut off date of 30 November 2020 was communicated? All the evidence I have collected and sequenced in chronological order indicates this is and was not the case.

In addition, your letter to me dated 29 June 202, further conflicts this by saying "design will be further refined" and "as the design is developed".

Once you have the facts correct without the inconsistencies, please let me know. If it's a case you simply don't want to consider my proposal, just be honest and say it and save us all time with the spin.

Orren Prunckun

###

I’ll keep you all informed as it progresses.