Crash concern

By Kath Gannaway
A CONCERNED Healesville resident last week predicted mayhem in Healesville’s East End if changes are not made to new line marking at the entrance to the new Innocent Bystander Winery/Beechworth Bakery development.
Barry Potter contacted the Mail after observing what he said was a “crazy” three lane alignment of Maroondah Highway.
Mr Potter said a shared centre lane, designed to enable vehicles heading east to turn right into the new development, and vehicles heading west to turn right into Rutter Avenue, would have vehicles meeting short of their turning point.
“The possible scenarios are either the cars collide head-on, or there is a stalemate with neither vehicle able to turn where they need to in order to safely access either Rutter Avenue or the entry to the (bakery) car park,” Mr Potter said.
These latest concerns come with two weeks to go before the planned opening of the winery, and some three weeks after major concerns were raised about the safety of the pedestrian crossing at the front of the development.
Lines prematurely painted at the pedestrian crossing were quickly blacked out after reports to VicRoads of a near miss involving a pedestrian using the unguarded crossing.
More confusion followed over what requirements were in place for pedestrian lights.
Developer Ian Braham told the Mail yesterday (Monday) that in both cases the works carried out had been in accordance with plans provided to and approved by VicRoads.
“It is my understanding that before any permanent line-marking is carried out by the contractor it is inspected by a VicRoads representative,” he said.
“The drawings signed by VicRoads are the same drawings our contractor works to. That (the new line marking) is what we have been instructed to do and what we have approval for,” Mr Braham said.
He said the same criteria applied to the pedestrian crossing but added that the initial requirements had changed following his own concerns and those of the public about the safety of the crossing.
“We were the ones who initially raised those concerns with VicRoads because we felt it was not safe,” he said.
“All the way through the process the pedestrian crossing was probably more like the pedestrian refuge up the road,” he said.
“Pedestrian lights were never discussed but the way it’s spun out, it’s different now,” he said.
“It’s a condition of our permit that we can’t open until the lights go in and that’s what will happen,” he said.
VicRoads has conceded that the plans for the pedestrian crossing as submitted by the developer were approved by VicRoads but say electrical plans were not.
“It became evident to VicRoads that the developer’s interpretation of the permit requirements did not align with VicRoads’s standards,” VicRoads regional manager Andrew Hall said.
He said VicRoads had since met with the developer to clarify the planning permit and it was agreed that flashing lights were needed.
With regard to the line marking VicRoads said the layout and constraints at the intersection have dictated some compromise be made with the placement of arrows.
“Signage at the location advises drivers to keep left of the traffic island when entering the bakery development,” Mr Hall said.
“VicRoads considers that this arrangement provides a safe and practical solution, taking into account the physical constraints of the site.
“However,” he said, “VicRoads has identified some minor changes to the line marking that will further assist drivers making the right turn into the bakery development.
“These changes will be made by VicRoads by the end of August,” Mr Hall added.