Inland Rail - Albury to Illabo

To propose to have a large number of double stacked freight trains running regularly through the centre of the city of Wagga is just not an option and an alternative route needs to be explored and costed. The disruption to traffic in the construction and then ongoing is not acceptable and would be very detrimental to the future liveability and progress of Wagga. Noise and vibration another backward issue for Wagga
If the route does not get altered why not run single stacked trains initially to ascertain the actual amount of freight that will be moving.There may well be less freight than projected and there may not be the need to alter bridges at all if single stacked trains can cater for the amount of freight.
The inland rail doesn't go to Sydney Woolongong or Newsastle so why is there suddenly going to be so much more freight moving between Brisbane and Melbourne ?

As a resident at 68 Brookong avenue Wagga Wagga the rail line is directly behind us. I am very concerned about the escalation of vibration & noise from both the type and length of trains that will passing behind us as. The increased frequency of these trains will further disrupt sleep and lifestyle and this is of great concern to family life as well as mental health.
From a Community perspective we are also concerned about the the increased traffic in the area particularly along the Bourke and Docker St whilst the development is taking place. Furthermore when the development is complete and traffic needs to wait at the level crossing for several minutes for an 1800 metre train to pass this will cause further congestion along these corridors from both directions.
Please at least visit some of the homes in this area already experiencing rattling windows and noise when trains pass and you will understand why this project is simply not suited to our area and should be diverted around Wagga Wagga and not through it.
Thank you so much for taking time to read this

The project will have a detrimental effect on Wagga Wagga.

1. The vibrations from the trains will impact on the quality of life of residents, diminish land values and possibly impact the structural integrity of buildings within a large area surrounding the track.

2. The projected and actual number of trains will also have a negative impact. An increase in train traffic will impact all facets of Wagga life in a highly negative manner. It will take far longer to cross at level crossings. The trains will disrupt residents with their noise pollution and make emergency service access dangerous for consumers.

3. The Edmondson Street crossing closure will make life very difficult for an extended period during realignment. The extra traffic trying to use other access points to and from Central Wagga and Turvey Park will create a logistical nightmare. The added height to the bridge once completed will also negatively impact the Edward St intersection making it an unsafe area due to such a significant sloping change approaching the main road.

4. South Wagga Public School and Kildare High Schools are located at a very close distance to the tracks. An increase in train frequency and sizes will possibly have a debilitating effect on these school communities.

I do not object to the project - I do object to the route going through the city of Wagga Wagga because:
1. increased interruption to north/south traffic flow.
2. Greatly increased noise to South Wagga Primary School and Kildare College because of increased track usage.
3. The release of toxic diesel engine exhaust fumes through Wagga Wagga city.
4. No on going long term financial gain to the city - will be a train corridor only.
5. The absolute nightmare to local Wagga Wagga traffic during construction of Edmondson Street and Glenfield Road bridges.
6. The negative impact the inland rail track will have on the desirability of living in Wagga Wagga

As long term residents of Coleman Street living less than 100 metres from the track and the Docker Street level crossing, we are very concerned about the considerable adverse impact of the proposed Inland Rail on the amenity of our Turvey Park home and residential street.

We are concerned that all of the impacts have not been properly assessed and addressed. It appears that operational effects on our immediate area of the track haven’t been considered because the existing train track requires no alteration.
Surely we are going to be subjected to increased noise and vibration from longer, heavier trains?

We have been told that the wait times at the Docker Street level crossing at the end of our street will be unchanged.
How is this possible with trains of significantly longer length passing through more frequently and with the population expansion to the south of Wagga for whom the Bourke/ Docker corridor is the main route to town?

What of the urgency of emergency vehicles needing to access the hospital which is within one block of the Docker level crossing ?

What of the potential traffic congestion around the new street-level hospital carpark which will have its access just north of the level crossing?

What of the busy Coleman and Chaston Street intersections which are less than 50 metres south and north of the level crossing?

It appears that developing impacts to our area have not been considered.
Any increase to traffic congestion in this area will be hugely detrimental to the amenity of local residents and southern city commuters.

We are not averse to the notion of the Inland rail project but we are very concerned at the impact it will have on our local area and the southern city residents.

If the track can’t be re-routed can we please consider an underpass road route at the Docker Street crossing.
As Coleman street residents we’d be very happy to have our Bourke end of Coleman Street turned into a cul de sac.

I am both objecting and providing comments to the proposal.
Please find attached submission.

I support the Inland Rail project but I am totally against the freight trains passing through the centre of Wagga Wagga CBD. From where I live we can already hear the noise of the freight trains in the night in the summer when the windows are open. The increase in pollution will cause a rise in asthma-related illness. The traffic congestion while the changes are made to the crossing points will be unbearable. I wonder how the travel times for the Sydney-Melbourne XPT services will be impacted. If freight trains are occupying the tracks, how can we ever hope to realise the hope of a very fast inter-city train passing through Wagga Wagga? 'Doing it cheap' was the modis operandi when the Gobba Bridge was built, vision was lacking. Longer-range vision is needed to ensure that this project is done correctly from the beginning. I care about future residents of our lovely town, even if I will be dead.

While I am in favour of the Inland Rail Project overall in principle, I object to the Albury to Illabo section of the proposed rail line in its current form given the major impact the project will have on the City of Wagga Wagga. To plan a major double stack rail corridor from south west to north east of the city right through the main CBD area effectively dividing the city in half is simply ridiculous. The environmental, social, economic and cultural impacts the current plan creates are unacceptable.
It is clear the planned route using the existing low volume freight and passenger rail corridor is simply a cost reduction approach.
The plan must be redone by re-routing the proposed freight line around the city from either:
a) the south west, across the Murrumbidgee River to the west of the Gobba Bridge and Charles Sturt University to Bomen; or
b) around the south eastern edge of the city, east of Wagga Wagga Airport across the Murrumbidgee River to Bomen.
Either of the above suggestions will involve more cost in initial construction, but will alleviate likely major rectification and congestion costs later on.

Qube supports the project and seeking clarification on several issues.

I object to the proposal while the plan to run the Inland Railway through the city of Wagga Wagga using existing lines remains in place. I will support the rerouting of the line around the city on its way north to the Bomen industrial complex.

I believe that not enough information regarding the impact on existing infrastructure has been taken into account. Vibration and
noise levels to the houses adjacent to the rail corridor, and those in surrounding areas will increase considerably. This will impact structural integrity, and lifestyle of these residents. Running a major rail infrastructure through large residential areas is not considering the impact this will have on citizens and families. These are well established suburbs have been in existence for many years vibrations are going to affect foundations over a considerable area. Noise levels are quite high during the evenings, I can attest to this as I reside in an area not far from existing line, and am woken during nights by current rail traffic numerous time, my windows and doors vibrate as well.
There once were trees along the rail corridor in an attempt to reduce the noise but they were removed during the construction of a new fence, and no mitigation has replaced them.
I do not see in your proposal any mitigation for noise reduction , or vibrations in the suburbs surrounding the rail corridor.

I object to this project due to the lack of consideration and planning of the following: There has been no investment in investigating an alternate route bypassing the Wagga Wagga City Centre which is urgently required as it would limit the impact on the community of Wagga as a whole. The business case developed has many inconsistencies including confusing information and data on train lengths, frequency and impacts on our community. There should be a whole of corridor impact assessment urgently undertaken - not just sections of the rail corridor in our local government area. Acoustics disturbances, high levels of constant vibrations and constant industrial high level noise 24/7 is what is being proposed and yet there is no investment in the delivery of infrastructure upgrades up front as part of this project to specifically mitigate against these environmental issues that will greatly impact on the daily lives of residents, school students, business and everyone in the Wagga health precinct and wider community - our community is being threatened by this poorly planned project that has failed to undertake adequate consultation with the community of Wagga. An increase in number and length of trains as predicted will cause extensive delays and queuing at Bourke/Docker St this will result in life threatening delays for emergency service vehicles eg ambulances to access both hospitals in our Health precinct. Fire Brigade and Police services will also be detrimentally impacted. Please consider these important issues to be addressed as part of this project.

I have ticked I object to the project above. This is true. I object to the current route. Alternatives should be, at the very least, considered. I also wish to provide comments.
Noise and Privacy and Safety of our Citizens are my concerns with this project. I don't believe the proposed route is the best route to get the rail through Wagga and out to Bomen. I have concerns that the viaduct bridge that runs through North Wagga, would even be able to with stand withstand the increased loads.
The line should run from Uranquinty across the flood plains of Moorong and then onto Bomen.
Our current rail line was planned when our city was new. Then the rail line sat on the outskirts of the town. That outskirt is now Central Wagga. Leave the rail line there for Passenger trains if you must, but, send the double height goods trains via a new rail line. The longer and more frequent stoppages of traffic, in Wagga, to facilitate the new sized loads and increased frequency of trains can only lead to death and disaster. Our Ambulances and emergency services may be caught on one side of the city and unable to cross to the other side of the rail line, to get to our hospital, as they wait for the 1.8 Km train to pass. Madness.
A new line that traverses the flood plain and skirts Wagga, but still heads to Bomen, might be the more cost-effective solution given the work that is proposed for bridges and crossings within the Wagga boundaries anyway.
I believe an alternate route has not even been considered. Wagga Wagga City Councils concerns and those of it citizens need to be addressed.
Cassidy Bridge currently sits at the back of my property. I have already had ongoing issues with privacy and security in regards this Bridge. I have had my property vandalized, have been abused and had rocks thrown at me by unruly gangs, who currently plague our city. I have taken measures myself to gain some protection & privacy with the planting of bamboo along my fence line.
I am requesting that if the line runs through Wagga, that any new Cassidy Pedestrian Bridge have adequate screened sides on it, to prevent people getting into my yard and onto the roof my garage.
There have been issues also of people throwing garbage bins onto the lines and people in distress, wanting to jump off the bridge. This has to be addressed.
Ideally, I would like the bridge removed, given there are two others within close proximity.
If it stays at its current location, I would like the bridge crossing section to actually be moved even further down from where the plans show the crossing to be now. Further down towards the Station and utilizing the 'Telstra" property at 20 Brookong Ave, Wagga, to provide access to the public, onto the bridge from that site.
The current plan on submission has the actual crossing bridge further east than it is currently, which is good, but the stairway proposed at the top of the first entry ramp will be so much higher than the current crossing height. I would like to see this removed and people not given the option to climb a stairway instead of using the proposed switch back. This I believe will mostly put the crossing out of my sight which would be fabulous.
If the use of the "Telstra" land is not possible why not put the bridge at the end of Fox Street, close the McDonalds. This would still provide access to Kildaire College.
If it must stay where it is, I would like the walkway to the bridge from Brookong Ave to be at a lower gradient onto the railway property, so that people are not overlooking my yard. This would require the switch backs proposed to be longer in length within the rail corridor, but I believe there is adequate room within the railway property. The lower gradient of the walkway might also prevent homeless people and truant students from setting up home under it.
When I recently renovated and extended my property, I had to have the noise from the rail line measured and an expensive report written with solutions to mitigate the rail noise incorporated in my plans. What are NSW's Governments intentions with regards the extra noise and vibrations that will be caused by larger loads and longer trains running at more frequent times? It is my understanding that there has been no EIS done on the lengths of the lines that are not getting replaced. Leaving the idea that you will wait to see if there is a problem, after it is built, and then address it. Could ARTC incorporate noise paneling as seen in major city areas, along the length of railway that runs through residential areas.
The railway must take into consideration the amenity of the people living within the affected areas of this new heightened type of rail transport. Looking for the fastest and most cost-effective way to transport goods is not always the best result in the long run.
I believe those of us who live along the rail line are going to have vibration damages to our properties and our amenity destroyed with the increased frequency and length of trains proposed.
The value of our properties will decline. I am asking you to re think this plan help us prevent these problems.
To think of a long term solution for Wagga and consider what the best & most cost effective design for this project really is.
Not to just go ahead with a plan as is, that will cut our city in half, right through our heritage conservation area.

I love the idea of using rail rather than road traffic. It was always disheartened me that the rail connection between Melbourne and Sydney (the 2nd busiest air route in the world, with 54000 flights p.a. in 2019) had many sections that were single track, and few trains per day.

However, I think that the inland rail in its current design should not use the existing rail path through Wagga.

The increased length, size and weight of the trains, with accompanying extra engines will greatly negatively impact the whole city of Wagga and its increasing population. With two level crossings within Wagga (and Docker St being a busy road and becoming busier with more housing being built at Lloyd), extra length and frequency of trains will cause major disruption for emergency services and other road users. An existing train of 980m has Docker St closed for approximately 5 minutes. A train twice as long will likely cause a delay of 8-9 minutes.

I am concerned that there seems to be a “we’ll fix it if it breaks” approach to the possible noise/vibration impacts of the trains to houses, such as ours, along the railway line. Surely it is possible to calculate the sound implications beforehand.

Wagga will not benefit from the nationwide reduction of road freight that the Inland Rail will hopefully bring, because very few of the trucks presently travelling in Wagga carry intermodal containers. It will increase these around Wagga though, as they access the Bomen site.

A route that bypasses the city should be used, removing the required work on the three road/pedestrian locations in Wagga and allowing the growth of Wagga to continue without the complications of this major long-term infrastructure project.

I have concerns for this project as it is directly impacting my family, my neighbourhood and my community. From the information I have read and the meetings I have attended regarding this project, there has been no mention of an alternative rail route around Wagga Wagga not going through the centre. I feel with the enormous expense needed to proceed with this project and the disruptions to the Wagga community, have not been fully measured. I am worried about the long term and short term environmental impacts of the construction and destruction of the foot bridges and overhead bridges to accomodate the passing of a double decker train. At present my children walk to their school using the bridge to cross the railway line daily to attend their school, I am worried about the impact of the vibrations and noise which will come from the increased rail traffic and what kind of compensation will be provided for cracking and movement in older houses, I am also very very concerned and alarmed at the possible life threatening delays that could occur due to the proximity of the rail project to the hospital/medical precint. I feel that it is putting suburbs such as Tolland, Ashmont. Glenfield at a disadvantage for reaching and connecting to emergency services and to the central district of Wagga.

Dear Sir/Madam
I am writing in response to the Australian Rail Track Corporation’s (ARTC) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for its proposed Illabo to Albury section of the Inland Rail corridor.
Junee Railway Workshop lease the Railway Roundhouse facility at the southern end of the Junee railway yard from ARTC.
Junee Railway Workshop would like clarification on some aspects of the proposal, as exhibited. See attached submission.
In reviewing the EIS, Junee Railway Workshop have been over looked in the management and planning of the building of the over bridge in Junee. Junee Railway Workshop require access to the roundhouse Facility to move rolling stock from Junee Yard to the Roundhouse facility in day working hours. The rail access is under the bridge. We object to the 9-hours of shut down in daylight hours. This will have a major impact on our business. This will also impact on the freight rail operator who us our facility. I ask that after reading our submission we may have a conference with the freight rail operators and Junee Railway Workshop to plan and resolve the access issues.
Regards
Wayne Robinson
Director
Junee Railway Workshop

INLAND RAIL: ALBURY TO ILLABO SECTION

Thank you for the opportunity to make a submission regarding this section of the Inland Rail project.
*
The portion of the Main South railway line which currently passes through Wagga Wagga does so in the centre of the city. This present track alignment is the proposed route for that part of the Inland Rail between the new Kapooka bridge in the south to Bomen in the north. I have several points of objection to this proposed route, and a suggestion for an alternative.
*
Wagga Wagga is, at present, a city of about 65,000 people, with a projected increase to 100,000 by 2040. It is the largest inland city in New South Wales and affords its citizens an ideal place to live, work and bring up a family. We, the citizens of this city, cherish what we consider to be such ideal conditions and have a strong desire to maintain them – even improve on them – so that anyone who chooses to live here in the future will be delighted to do so, and would thank us for going to great lengths to protect the liveability.
*
Wagga Wagga has been chosen as the site for one of the State’s Special Activation Precincts. Work is underway on this project at Bomen, to the north of the city, to establish what we hope will be of benefit not only to New South Wales but to our city as well. Part of this development is the Riverina Intermodal Freight & Logistics hub (RIFL). Additional railway access has already been provided to this hub. This new section of track is expected to be brought into use in October 2022 by Visy, who have already established a large area for container storage and trans-shipment of products from their Tumut mill. That this point of trans-shipment is on part of what will become the Inland Rail will be of great benefit to all users of the Special Activation Precinct as they begin operation at the site.
In order to maintain the attractiveness of our city as a place to live for the Precinct’s new workforce, and others who move to Wagga Wagga in support roles, we believe that the current proposal to upgrade the current alignment to Inland Rail standard, providing for double stacking of containers and the maintenance of adequate train speed to fulfil the expectation of an 85 km per hour average between Melbourne and Brisbane, will create such an amount of noise nuisance, and of traffic delays at the two level crossings, that the desirability of our city as a place to live will be seriously downgraded. Indeed, the disruptions caused by track works and bridge reconfiguring during the upgrade will be sorely felt by the users of the busy roads that will be affected.
*
In relation to the current proposal, I have concerns about the long-term viability of the existing viaduct across the northern floodplain.
This viaduct was built in its current steel infrastructure arrangement between 1897and 1901, which means that its basic components are more than 120 years old. Concrete reinforcement was carried out several decades ago, and during 2006/7 a new rail bridge over the river was constructed and installed.
I believe it is imperative to have a realistic engineering assessment of the viaduct, its structure, faults (if any), and its likely suitability to last for the next several decades without need for replacement. I am sorely afraid that, being as old as it is, it will need much work – even reconstruction – sooner than later.
With my two concerns in mind – the disruption during Inland Rail reconstruction in the city and the downgrading of the character of the city and its liveability, and the uncertain future of the current viaduct – I would ask our planning authority to consider a proposal, one that several of us have discussed over the last few months. It involves constructing a new viaduct, a new crossing of the Murrumbidgee River, and a complete bypass of the city proper. There are several components:
• A new alignment, leaving the Main South about 500 metres south of the end of the Bomen passing loop and traversing gently sloping ground in a due-westerly direction until it meets the floodplain
• A new viaduct which crosses the floodplain in a westerly direction, reaching the Olympic Highway which is then crossed by an overbridge
• A new crossing of the river and the south-western floodplain
• New track parallel to the Sturt Highway as far as the Olympic Highway intersection with the Sturt
• A bridge over the Sturt Highway, the line then traversing land close to the Olympic Highway on its east side until the track merges with the current Main South north of the new Kapooka Bridge
The current track alignment could be preserved for passenger and local rail traffic, and as an alternative route in an emergency. This would keep the passenger hub as it is and avoid the building of a new railway station. The new alignment would be exclusively for fast through freight use.
I can see a major difficulty in this proposal apart from cost, and that is how to cross the Olympic Highway on the northern side of the Murrumbidgee River and then cross the river itself. This problem brings into play another parallel and pressing problem – duplication of the Gobbagombalin Bridge. This duplication will have to take place very soon to allow traffic flow to the expanding northern suburbs to travel uninterrupted, and indeed to cope with the expected increase in Olympic Highway through traffic.
Here we have a combined problem facing the city of Wagga Wagga, as well as Planning New South Wales and the Australian Rail Track Corporation, a problem that must be solved without delay. We must find and implement the best solution as soon as possible. Most importantly, it must satisfy the needs of we, the citizens of Wagga Wagga, with regard to the continued liveability of our city.

Ian Stewart OAM
24 August 2022

I object to the project because of the following:
1) It will affect emergency services from reaching their intended destinations in the shortest time / distance as the railway track runs through the middle of the Wagga city.
2) The noise generated by frequent freight train travels with heavier cargo loads will affect not only residential areas but also various schools and pre-schools
3) Disruptions to travel to work, school or any urgent requirements due to frequent and long waiting time at the railway crossings while the freight train passing through the city.
4) Greater vibrations caused by heavier load of cargo being carried by freight train will cause major cracks on buildings which might require compensations from the relevant rail authority.
5) Freight train should not travel through the city to avoid the above problems, instead freight train railway track should be diverted to go round the city.

Although I support the concept of inland rail for Australia, the current proposed inland rail route through Wagga is both potentially dangerous and detrimental to the liveability of Wagga and requires further investigation into an alternative route.
1.The current viaduct rail is approximately 120 years old with only minimal upgrades to the concrete reinforcing. How can this current viaduct be considered safe for the potential loads being proposed in the future beyond 2040. Where are the engineering studies to ensure that this viaduct is suitable? Assuming extensive upgrades to this viaduct are required, then constructing a safer bypass around Wagga CBD would be a sensible option as well as future proofing this rail route.
2.Rail Crossings. The current plan to leave the Bourke St and Fernleigh Rd rail crossings basically unchanged is dangerous and detrimental to the Wagga community. With the increased number and length of trains passing, there will be extended delays at these crossings, tempting some motorists to try and race across an impending rail closure. There is also the fact that the emergency services and hospital are on different sides of the rail, so ambulances, fire trucks etc may potentially have extended delays in travelling to an emergency and risking residents lives. (What is the price of a human life?)
3. The Edmondson St bridge replacement. This bridge already has a steep incline, so the proposal to make this bridge higher and steeper will potentially make the nearby intersection more dangerous. Also during the prolonged construction phase, there would be extensive delays and detours for residents who rely on this route to gain access to the local schools nearby as well as general traffic.
4.Risks from possible accidents. A large number of these trains will be double stacked and potentially carrying toxic substances. Accidents, de-railings etc although infrequent, do occur. There would be catastrophic consequences if this occurred when passing through the highly populated area of Wagga. Again another reason to change to the bypass option.
5. Noise and potential damage to neighbouring properties and schools. Both during construction and then after completion there will be increased noise and possible damage to nearby structures. The EIS has stated that noise " may result in exceedances of operational rail noise criteria set by the NSW Rail Infrastructure Noise Guidelines". How can this be acceptable in NSW's largest inland city, let alone close to several large schools?
Also who would be responsible for any on going damage to nearby buildings from vibration, etc?
6. Wagga has been slated by the NSW Government to have a population of 100,000 by 2038. The positioning of this rail line effectively divides Wagga in half. The inland rail development with increased train movement and consequently causing more traffic congestion and reduced liveability of this city is detrimental to the NSW Government Planning aims for this city. Yet another reason to direct the rail line around the city.
7. Lack of transparency to the local population. Although this project may have been in the pipeline for some years, the ARTC has failed to communicate with the residents the exact nature of what the inland rail would entail and the effects on our community until very recently. Even then there are a considerable number of residents who have no idea of what the inland rail entails. It should be the ARTC's responsibility to be open and transparent, not communicate through limited poorly advertised sessions.
8. Bypass costings. The ARTC representatives have said that a bypass is not feasible , however to date they have been unwilling or unable to supply costings or studies that have considered a bypass to Wagga. Where are these studies to substantiate their claims?

For the above reasons I strongly object to the inland rail passing through the Wagga Wagga city and believe that a rail bypass is a viable option. Build the project right the first time!

My concern is the rail through Wagga Wagga will not improve the lives of the residents of Wagga. It will cause frustration over increased noise and traffic interruptions.