Gladesville Bridge Marina seems to be attracting a lot of opinions?

what's yours?

edit: this is what I'm on about-

www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.smh.com.au/national/nsw/a-scar-on-our-waterway-anger-over-10-million-sydney-marina-expansion-20210114-p56u41.html

and my opinion is in favour of it with some fair issues that have been raised being properly addressed

Those are the issues I believe need to be addressed. If they add more boats you automatically add more cars to a development like this. I like to hear how that and other issues can be solved?

I think it's a needed development but will the positives out weigh the negatives?

I originally commented on the DA submitted by Gladesville Bridge Marina, including as below; if this DA is approved it could well see the beginning of the end of sailing activities west of Wrights Point - except for the dinghy classes at Concord Ryde.

Council and RMS surely must be totally aware of the impact of worsening pinch points on the river, especially by a DA which is for over a 100% expansion of the marina capacity and hence will remove a significant expanse of navigable water on the south east side of the bridge, as well as create significant impacts regarding local wind and tidal currents as well as large powered vessel wash.

It is noted that RMS is spending nearly $1bn to address road pinch points (see link below), yet at the same time are consciously considering significantly worsening the Parramatta River navigable waterway pinch point at Gladesville Bridge. www.rms.nsw.gov.au/projects/easing-sydneys-congestion/pinch-point-program/index.html

As is well known, at the north west end of the Gladesville bridge there is a rock shelf which presents a significant yacht grounding depth issue. So further encroachment of the south east side of the under bridge navigable waters cannot be compensated by moving more traffic to the north west end of the river under the bridge, also noting the bridge arch impact on masts. Surely a danger can marker should be placed by RMS off that rock shelf, equivalent to the one which is placed off the south west side of Betts Bay adjacent to the Gladesville Wharf. The south east side of the river under the Gladesville Bridge obviously has the most navigable depth. Clearly yachts cannot take advantage of all this depth since mast height issues come into consideration, depending on the size of the yacht. Clearly the >100% extension of the marina and further encroachment of the navigable channel will obviously severely further restrict sailing skiffs and yachts using the river under the bridge, in their regular races traversing this area both ways. The impact of this marina extension on the local navigable water area under and adjacent to each side of the bridge, as well as the local tidal currents and winds, and increased large power boat wash onto the foreshores, should not be underestimated. The already present wind funnelling impact under the bridge is well known - this is an inherent result and obviously not in question - all yachts attempt to manage it with due planning. Obviously the worst wind conditions are from north east through north west, and correspondingly south west to south.

The point is, with the navigable width under the bridge going to be clearly reduced, and this area being traversed simultaneously by yachts (racing and cruising) as well as more power boats of increasing size and at differing stages of manoeuvring as they exit and enter the marina, the congestion will obviously increase and the overall potential danger to safe boating will also increase. It is noted that this area is increasingly used by large power boats from the existing Gladesville Bridge Marina and the more recently developed Cabarita Marina, as well as Sydney Harbour ferries and the many party cruise vessels and water taxis. Of course all of these vessels as well as racing and cruising yachts, not to mention kayaks and small fishing boats, should have an entitlement to use the waterway, but obviously if the waterway becomes excessively constricted and artificially pinched so as to create an unacceptable safety hazard and cause more foreshore wave wash impact, then this clearly needs to be avoided. It is noted that numerous sailing clubs use the at present reasonably navigable waters under and adjacent to the Gladesville Bridge in their racing calendar...including yachts from Middle Harbour who enjoy their race to Bedlam Bay and back, and from Balmain Sailing Club in their bridges race.

I would like to respectfully point out that this marina development is very significantly different to the Cabarita marina expansion which has occurred over the recent years. That development has not enchroached onto the Parramatta River main thoroughfare - since there is a significant rock shelf off the north side of the development, with associated danger piles - nor the entrance into Hen and Chicken Bay. Hence marina development and sailing / boating activities have been able to be reasonably accommodated going forward, with little impact on the latter as long as power boats stick to the signed speed limits. Of course the significant difference is the Gladesville Bridge itself - there is no bridge at Cabarita. We are not aware of any other bridge on Sydney Harbour which is under threat of such gross marina development at and under any of its ends including the adjacent waterway expanses, hence reducing the navigable water and creating an unacceptable pinch point as well as wind and tidal current impacts, and foreshore erosion wave impacts.

It is strongly recommend that this DA be declined in it's entirety, since a very large percentage of navigable water will be lost at the Gladesville Bridge river pinch point, and numerous other unacceptable impacts as factually detailed above will ensue. I welcome the opportunity to attend a council meeting to discuss this further and clarify any and all inputs made, as may be needed.

r13 said..
I originally commented on the DA submitted by Gladesville Bridge Marina, including as below; if this DA is approved it could well see the beginning of the end of sailing activities west of Wrights Point - except for the dinghy classes at Concord Ryde.

Council and RMS surely must be totally aware of the impact of worsening pinch points on the river, especially by a DA which is for over a 100% expansion of the marina capacity and hence will remove a significant expanse of navigable water on the south east side of the bridge, as well as create significant impacts regarding local wind and tidal currents as well as large powered vessel wash.

It is noted that RMS is spending nearly $1bn to address road pinch points (see link below), yet at the same time are consciously considering significantly worsening the Parramatta River navigable waterway pinch point at Gladesville Bridge. www.rms.nsw.gov.au/projects/easing-sydneys-congestion/pinch-point-program/index.html

As is well known, at the north west end of the Gladesville bridge there is a rock shelf which presents a significant yacht grounding depth issue. So further encroachment of the south east side of the under bridge navigable waters cannot be compensated by moving more traffic to the north west end of the river under the bridge, also noting the bridge arch impact on masts. Surely a danger can marker should be placed by RMS off that rock shelf, equivalent to the one which is placed off the south west side of Betts Bay adjacent to the Gladesville Wharf. The south east side of the river under the Gladesville Bridge obviously has the most navigable depth. Clearly yachts cannot take advantage of all this depth since mast height issues come into consideration, depending on the size of the yacht. Clearly the >100% extension of the marina and further encroachment of the navigable channel will obviously severely further restrict sailing skiffs and yachts using the river under the bridge, in their regular races traversing this area both ways. The impact of this marina extension on the local navigable water area under and adjacent to each side of the bridge, as well as the local tidal currents and winds, and increased large power boat wash onto the foreshores, should not be underestimated. The already present wind funnelling impact under the bridge is well known - this is an inherent result and obviously not in question - all yachts attempt to manage it with due planning. Obviously the worst wind conditions are from north east through north west, and correspondingly south west to south.

The point is, with the navigable width under the bridge going to be clearly reduced, and this area being traversed simultaneously by yachts (racing and cruising) as well as more power boats of increasing size and at differing stages of manoeuvring as they exit and enter the marina, the congestion will obviously increase and the overall potential danger to safe boating will also increase. It is noted that this area is increasingly used by large power boats from the existing Gladesville Bridge Marina and the more recently developed Cabarita Marina, as well as Sydney Harbour ferries and the many party cruise vessels and water taxis. Of course all of these vessels as well as racing and cruising yachts, not to mention kayaks and small fishing boats, should have an entitlement to use the waterway, but obviously if the waterway becomes excessively constricted and artificially pinched so as to create an unacceptable safety hazard and cause more foreshore wave wash impact, then this clearly needs to be avoided. It is noted that numerous sailing clubs use the at present reasonably navigable waters under and adjacent to the Gladesville Bridge in their racing calendar...including yachts from Middle Harbour who enjoy their race to Bedlam Bay and back, and from Balmain Sailing Club in their bridges race.

I would like to respectfully point out that this marina development is very significantly different to the Cabarita marina expansion which has occurred over the recent years. That development has not enchroached onto the Parramatta River main thoroughfare - since there is a significant rock shelf off the north side of the development, with associated danger piles - nor the entrance into Hen and Chicken Bay. Hence marina development and sailing / boating activities have been able to be reasonably accommodated going forward, with little impact on the latter as long as power boats stick to the signed speed limits. Of course the significant difference is the Gladesville Bridge itself - there is no bridge at Cabarita. We are not aware of any other bridge on Sydney Harbour which is under threat of such gross marina development at and under any of its ends including the adjacent waterway expanses, hence reducing the navigable water and creating an unacceptable pinch point as well as wind and tidal current impacts, and foreshore erosion wave impacts.

It is strongly recommend that this DA be declined in it's entirety, since a very large percentage of navigable water will be lost at the Gladesville Bridge river pinch point, and numerous other unacceptable impacts as factually detailed above will ensue. I welcome the opportunity to attend a council meeting to discuss this further and clarify any and all inputs made, as may be needed.

Totally agree r13. I've been sailing on this stretch of water for 50 years and seen the changes especially in that area which was a pinch poinbt before the marina expansion some years ago and the encroachment of swing moorings into the channels. Two Rivercats passing in this area not a lot of water left!!! I notice there are now a lot of vacant swing moorings (commercial) between the old bridge and Wrights Point. Do the same rules apply for them? No boat get rid of it? Open up the area That site can never have enough car parking to support any development beyond what it was many years ago. If this development gets the nod there should be an inquiry.

I find it somewhat amusing that so many seem to believe that the proposal will diminish the usable waterway for all, the proposal is to almost double the length of the existing marina towards the bridge replacing a number of moorings with the finger pier extensions. There appears to be in the proposal a provision for side ties to the existing and proposed extension which would minimally reduce the waterway width and some better use of the access point allowing for the moorage of larger vessels without adversely affecting the waterway use by others.
In short I would suggest that it is a better use of the existing locale.
The landside issues are, I would suggest, another matter which will probably kill the proposal.
The claim from waterfront dwellers that it will restrict their access to the water are a nonsense, put forward by those that do not want their views diminished. No one owns a view.
The complaints remind me so much of the claims put forward by residents of many small townships on major highways when an announcement is made about by-passing the town with a new stretch of road, oh woe is me , the town will die etc etc.. when the reality is it usually is better.

troubadour said..

UncleBob said..
I find it somewhat amusing that so many seem to believe that the proposal will diminish the usable waterway for all, the proposal is to almost double the length of the existing marina towards the bridge replacing a number of moorings with the finger pier extensions. There appears to be in the proposal a provision for side ties to the existing and proposed extension which would minimally reduce the waterway width and some better use of the access point allowing for the moorage of larger vessels without adversely affecting the waterway use by others.
In short I would suggest that it is a better use of the existing locale.
The landside issues are, I would suggest, another matter which will probably kill the proposal.
The claim from waterfront dwellers that it will restrict their access to the water are a nonsense, put forward by those that do not want their views diminished. No one owns a view.
The complaints remind me so much of the claims put forward by residents of many small townships on major highways when an announcement is made about by-passing the town with a new stretch of road, oh woe is me , the town will die etc etc.. when the reality is it usually is better.

With respect do you use this waterway? As it is currently at least the water to the East of the marina arms is somewhat usable to get to the right when going down stream. If there is a fixed marina arm there this will not be possible.

Hi, I have only used that body of water half a dozen times, so no I don't regularly use it, when you say the water to the East of the marina arms is somewhat usable to get to the right when going down stream, am I to understand that you are referring to the area of moorings? My understanding is that the existing marina would have longer arms, not any other alteration, however if one is used to navigating through moorings then yes, it will affect the use. As I have said, the landside issues will probably kill the proposal anyway.

It is not unreasonable to conclude that the planned marina extension, with the arms extending north east to nearly directly under the bridge, is effectively halving the navigable width of the river channel under the bridge. Hence this would significantly increase the risk of incidents at what is already freely acknowledged as being a pinch point.

Spot On r13

I come through this bit of the river pretty much every time I go out, travelling from Kissing Point Bay to the harbour proper and back again.

It is a pinch point, no doubt, but there are a couple of others just as bad. Putney/Mortlake punt, Cabarita Point/Parramatta River Sailing Club and to a lesser extent Sydney Boys Rowing shed across to the old stone jetty near Searles Monument. I've never had a real problem in any of them though. At least there's a no wash zone from the old to the new Gladesville bridge so 'most' people slow down a bit.

I do have to agree with UncleBob though in that if the new arms are only occupying the space the existing moorings do (those red swing moorings I understand all belong to Gladesville Marina) then there's no less usable river for transiting. I make it a habit to stay out of mooring fields unless I'm stopping. I know PRSC rules say you can't go in to a mooring field when racing, I thought that was just normal but happy to be corrected.

I do think the landside issues will be a much bigger problem.

There seems to be demand for the additional berths. Ryde Council have approved a DA for a marina and apartments at the old Halvorsens shed at Putney, there's talk of River Quays at Mortlake being reinstated eventually and pretty sure the marina at Wentworth Point is approved too. That last one will be stink boats though being above all three Ryde bridges which are only 10m or so off the water.

The width of the channel just West of the GB is 130m. Less if you are travelling upstream in vessel with air draught (us). I understand the other pinch points you mention Serenite but at least they are offset, not abeam of each other so it effectively opens up if opposing vessels keep right.
Have a look at Sixmaps app.
Another problem is some ferry Masters not slowing especially at the Putney Punt.
I sometimes go inside the moorings between GB and Wrights Point when travelling downstream. I am doing less than 6 knots and try staying in the channel with a River Cat up ya clacka. Overtaking vessel keeps clear??? Apparently doesn't apply to ferries. They put the hammer down no matter what when they clear the no wash zone.