Inland Rail - Albury to Illabo

I object to the project because the Inland Rail should bypass the city of Wagga Wagga. See attachment for details.

I believe in rail transport.
I therefore agree with the concept of an inland rail.
However, a different route around Wagga should be chosen. Already in other locations of the project, arrangements are being made for cattle to go under the rail line in tunnels. A route like that in the outskirts of Wagga would be preferable to one in the city centre where thousands of motorists will be impacted by delays in general day to day movements with the great concern being that of medical access at certain times.

See attachment

In reference to the new Edmondson Bridge in Wagga there is a lack of investigations on how the higher bridge may impact safety at the location for vehicles navigating up and down the steep incline and how this impact could impact the busy Edward Street intersection and pedestrian access.
The traffic investigations during the closure of the bridge do not properly address the impacts to pedestrian and vehicles during the peak morning and afternoon times. The intersection of Coleman and Macleay streets struggles at present with the amount of vehicles, buses and school children. It would not be able to perform safely with further motorists detoured from Kildare Catholic College and the preschool further down the road at such a peak period.
I would also like to note that the intersection at present has safety issues, including poor sight distance, with numerous near misses. There was a recorded car accident on Wednesday 4 October 2023, where a car failed to give way and flipped another car travelling through the intersection. To adequately carry out investigations into the detour, I would propose you consult with local residents and organisations on the detour route to better understand the traffic movements. It would be safer for all if the detour route was moved over to Collins Street from Wagga High as opposed to Macleay Street. Closing Macleay Street to local traffic would provide a safer pick up zone for Tafe, Wagga High and Kildare students, it is wide enough for buses to implement a turn around bay while also avoiding a large number of vehicles travelling through the Railway Street pedestrian crossing.

The development will cause significant distruptions to the traffic along Bourke Street which will increase the noise along Coleman Street. The noise from both traffic and rail will be incredibly difficult to deal with given I am a shift worker.

Hello Inland Rail Team,

Thankyou for the opportunity to comment on the Inland Rail. I live within the impact zone in Wagga, within about 150-200m from the railway.

1. It is noted the rail diverts tens of kilometres around Toowoomba, and Dubbo, yet for the largest inland city in NSW it runs straight through the middle. This is inequitable and unfair for Wagga residents in comparison to the other major centres like Toowoomba and Dubbo.
2. Dr Kerry Schott in the January 23 report stated an easement by-passing the town be created. Inland Rail has not abided by the Schott report and created this easement. This is a failure in its duty of care, inequitable and unacceptable. The railway should bypass Wagga, please make the easement an urgent priority. The longer its left the harder it gets.
3. Isn't there massive benefits by continuing the inland railway to reach a seaport at either end? Stopping the inland rail 20-40kms inland results in double-handling of freight, increases handling cost, and increases urban traffic congestion. Its the equivalent of catching the train to Sydney, but hopping off at Redfern to walk to Central Station. More importantly, freight within a days' turn around (say 4-5hrs from Brisbane or Melbourne) will continue to use road transport, especially if its bound for sea. At least in Queensland there's talk of an extension to Gladstone (some day). Doesn't seem logical or cost effective to stop short of a seaport at either end.
4. Up to 1.8 km trains will significantly impact traffic flows and emergency services in Wagga. Wagga is probably the highest number of dwellings directly impacted by the inland rail proposal. This alone should be enough reason to divert the rail around a major inland centre like Wagga. The number and length of trains will only increase over time, along with the risk of unforeseen impacts on Wagga residents, that's just what happens in the real world.
5. While the cost of diverting the rail around Wagga is significant on its own, as a proportion of the overall project this cost is minor. Cost should not be the only reason for not undertaking the diversion around Wagga. We get one chance to do this, so let's do it right and by-pass Wagga.
6. As we live in the impact Zone, can you please advise the process for us to be compensated for the loss of land value on our property.
7. In Wagga, the Erin - Railway St. link is a high LoS (level of service). It is inconceivable that this traffic will be diverted into the School Zones of three local schools and a TAFE college. This must not happen; it would not be seriously proposed anywhere else in Australia on student safety grounds. If the Railway is diverted around Wagga then a cheaper and quicker replacement for Edmondson Street bridge would be achievable, and save money.
8. Can you release plans for the Edmondson St Bridge please? Without having seen the plans, it is suggested the ramp on the southern side of the new bridge could be constructed at the same grade as the ramp on the northern side and this would both save construction cost and keep the Erin - Railway Street Link open. In addition, a partial lowering of the track (1-1.5m say) with the spoil used in the approach ramps, would save money. Erin Street could reach the Edmondson Street level and stay open. Further, it could be possible to use the space in the railway yard immediately to the south of the main line in front of the railway station which would allow freight trains to pass a passenger train parked at the station. This is because relatively large radius curves are achievable.
9. Either an eastern or western diversion around Wagga would impact less residents and motorists, have considerable social and environmental benefits, and set Wagga up for significant growth.
10. Inland Rail Stakeholder Engagement Advisor A2I/S2P, has told us our issues in this submission will be addressed one by one by inland rail and we will have the opportunity to discuss these with an Inland Rail representative. May we ask it be a decision maker and occur prior to decisions being made that directly affect us, please, so we are not only heard but potentially have the opportunity to influence the outcome if we can provide reasonable alternatives and constructive suggestions.
11. It would be wise to plan for high-speed trains.
12. Attached is our last submission which forms part of this submission. We have not yet received a response to our last submission, despite previous assurances this would happen. We would like it to be considered and for us to receive a meaningful response, along with responses to the comments above. Thankyou.

Thanks again for allowing us to make this submission.

Yours sincerely,

Resident in the three School Zones and TAFE precinct, Wagga

Please refer to the attached file

We see the biggest threat of Inland Rail as that of Climate Risk and feel the government is sending the wrong future our children's children's way if they do not recognise the imperative for track electrification the entire length of whatever route is chosen, preferably outside all major towns and cities and certainly not bisecting them as outdated planning for Wagga Wagga indicates.

Climate Risk and the need for track electrification.
As Australia recently signed to increase renewables and has many solar farms dotted along the route it is inconceivable that our government is progressing with an outmoded transport plan for the entire inland rail route from Melbourne to Brisbane when electrification of the entire track would:
* reduce:
# pollution, particularly from diesel fuels,
# fossil fuel use,
# noise,
# vibration,
* eliminate the need for the continued use of freight trains pulled by dirty, old diesel engines which no longer pass the EPA pollution test but get around the rules due to their age.

Wagga City's Net Zero Emissions by 2050 is in line with Building the Foundations "National Supergrid that outlines a five-year grid investment program to deliver sovereign energy, secure supply chains, good quality jobs and lowest-cost competitive energy. It requires a unifying vision from the federal government to set the context for private investment in renewable generation, energy storage and cleantech manufacturing. This will allow Australia to capitalise on opportunities, accelerate emissions reductions and secure industries that will deliver our zero-emissions future. "Source: https://www.bze.org.au/research/report/national-supergrid Accessed 5/12/23

Dr Saul Griffith's Rewiring Australia, which knows that "Australia has the opportunity to lead the world. We are the first nation where using all electric zero emission appliances and vehicles will save every home money. We have access to the cheapest delivered electricity in the world - our rooftop solar - and this abundant energy can electrify our industries and generate an abundant future. "Source: https://www.rewiringaustralia.org Accessed 4/12/23, has chosen Wagga Wagga's community group Electrify Wagga Wagga as just one of two NSW cities in the ten chosen right across the whole nation (from 70 applicants) to be a case study in electrification. Source: https://m.facebook.com/groups/852394486190989/ Accessed 5/12/23

Wagga's community group Electrify Wagga Wagga, Climate Rescue of Wagga and Solar Citizens group have more positive actions and responses than to perpetuate the use of diesel for freight transport as
"Clean energy is already creating a better, healthier life for all Aussies – bringing down cost of living, creating new employment opportunities, growing regional industries and investment, and slashing emissions. That's why we're working hard to secure a cleaner future for all." Source: email 1/12/23 [email protected]

Passenger trains
As a resident of Wagga Wagga (Milena for all the past 70 years & David for the past 46 years) we believe the government has not looked after the majority of regional constituents in regards to train travel between Melbourne and Sydney, let alone Brisbane.
We believe many residents thought the greater need was for fast rail development, promoted by late Deputy PM, Tim Fischer, reducing travel times and Carbon dioxide generated by flights. afr.com/companies/tourism/fischer-s-fillip-for-fast-train-fanatics-20111125-iz23l
The development of fast rail, electrified, would help Australia meet its climate targets as currently the slow XPT is the only choice of pensioners and low income people with few alternatives.

Like Thomas Lemerle
"I write to you today as a concerned resident of Wagga Wagga. I have called Wagga my home for my entire life and want to see the best outcome for our city, and particularly the Central Business District protected. "Source:https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/inland-rail-albury-illabo Accessed 4 /12/23
We add our voices to:
* Councillor Foley's Objection in his General Operational statement 4
"4. I greatly dispute the suggestion by ARTC that “the proposal would not result in any change in operation of the existing rail network” and believe[s] that the priority allocated to Inland Rail Express and Super-freighter services would result in detrimental impacts on regional passenger train scheduling and operations."

* Cynthia Lawler and like her
"From where I live we can already hear the noise of the freight trains in the night ... The increase in pollution will cause a rise in asthma-related illness.....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."

* Geoff Breust
"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 ...will involve more cost in initial construction, but will alleviate likely major rectification and congestion costs later on."

* Jennifer McKinnon
"-this line will have to last 100-200 years, so let’s get it right. Putting a major freight line through the middle of NSW largest inland city is ridiculous, which begs the question: why does this EIS not consider any alternative route?"

* George Benedyka
"Building an infrastructure project such as the inland rail[,] consideration should be given to bypass all towns along the corridor. As an example The Hume And Princes[s] Highways have been up graded and bypass all settlements along their routes. The Railway corridor proposed will be in place for many decades.
The same should apply to rail infrastructure. Removing heavy, noisy, polluting and vibrating Freight trains from going through the middle of Wagga Wagga would be advantageous to both the amenity of the urban area and rail freight transport."

* Margo Angel
"This project is large, it is nation-building and is potentially transformative for many communities. It is, however, imperative that any transformation should not be to the detriment of the liveability within any community. There is in fact, no advantage to the people of Wagga in this project being planned to come through the centre of the city"

* Gary Roberts
"The failure to include a cost comparison for a By-pass or other alternatives such as lowering the line to avoid rebuilding the Edmondson Street bridge render the report inadequate. The failure to consider the cost of overpasses at Fernleigh Road and Docker Streets make it unacceptable.
I request the Department of Planning reject this report and seek an alternate solution allowing this nation building project to proceed without the devastating impacts projected for the city."
Source: https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/inland-rail-albury-illabo
Accessed 4 /12/23

We find the Response to Noise abatement and vibration mitigation unacceptable
"Until a construction contractor is engaged and the construction methodology finalised, confirmation of applicable noise and vibration mitigation is not possible. Development of the construction methodology will seek to further reduce noise and vibration impacts from the proposal."Source: p2, Detailed Response to Noise and Vibration (Non-Rail) Matters
It will do little to alleviate the problem we already have with current freight trains' noise disturbing our nighttime rest and we are just more than 2km from the Tarcutta St overpass but the noise already travels straight over Rocky Hill and into our bedroom! We require noise mitigation and are not convinced that the noise predictions are accurate.

We were told at Wagga's information meeting 29 Nov that that there would be 18-20 trains per day. Do you expect us to believe that if there was more demand this limit would remain? Of course the train companies are out to make a profit.

We note that of the 7 Inland rail sections, only the Albury to Illabo section, which bisects Wagga is still under exhibition for submissions and that:
* Illabo to Stockinbingal is under assessment after receiving 20 submissions including:
# 7 objecting, including McClintock Daughters submission with which we agree
"Route Selection.
Much has been said about the current route of the Melbourne to Brisbane Inland Rail Project. The priorities chosen by ARTC for the route selection, with high emphasis on traversing Melbourne to Brisbane in under 24 hours (whether, in practice, that will ever be achieved), have resulted in a route that does not provide the greatest economic, social and environmental benefits to regional NSW."
# 8 commenting, including:
^ Junee Shire,
concerns we concur with in that "..based on the information made available, the following objectives of the Inland rail program and proposal have not been met:
* improve road safety, ease congestion and reduce environmental impacts by moving freight from road to rail
* minimise the environmental and community impacts..."
^ Goldenfields Water County Council, whose concerns relate to the security of water supply for Stockinbingal
# 5 supporting, including Cootamundra Gundagai Shire Council, though its submission included many reservations.
Source: https://www.planningportal.nsw.gov.au/major-projects/projects/inland-rail-illabo-stockinbingal Accessed 5/12/23

If you would like any further information please contact us directly. Thank you for your time.
Regards, Milena and David Dunn

I objected to the EIS in relation to railway crossing LX 605.
I have since been connected by the Inland Rail team on a modified proposal for the configuration of this crossing. Whilst I'm in flavor of the proposed alterations to crossing LX605 i still haven't seen anything to confirm, officially, that the latest proposal by Inland Rail will in fact go ahead. i would have considered that at this stage of the project the concept of any proposal would be more firmly formulated than an idea put forward in any revised EIS statement.

Inland rail continues to ignore resident's feedback regarding the disruption and reduced liveability that will occur if IR runs through the centre of Wagga Wagga. There has been a failure to recognise that Wagga is NSW's largest inland city targeted to be 100,000 population by 2040 and as such should have been given more consideration as to the route ( not just the cheapest!).
The unresolved issues include:
- why a bypass had not been considered or costed (although likely more costly than the proposed upgrades to current track,considering the poor state of the viaduct and costs involved in repairing/replacing that as well as other bridges, a bypass would be more beneficial long term than the patch up job currently planned. It is about future proofing both IR and Wagga.
- not included in the IR costs/responsibility are upgrades to existing rail crossings eg Docker/Bourke st crossing is a main arterial road to the southern growth areas of Wagga and as such should have been earmarked for grade separation , so as to prevent major traffic delays and ensure the southern suburbs have 24hr access to ambulance and police services which are located on the opposite side of the railway.
- health considerations around the worsening of the air quality and increased risk of allergic airway conditions which are already over represented in the Wagga region.
- consultation. Although IR claim that residents were consulted over many years , the early consultations regarding design of the route were basically between beaurocrats or departments and virtually no information given to residents. As you should now realise, when the residents have finally been informed on what the IR is planning regarding the Wagga route, there is massive opposition from the community. We suspect the delay in informing the residents to be affected was deliberate so as to have the planning finalised before we had a genuine opportunity to have input. To date the consultation with residents has been lip service only.
The community are not against the concept of IR, it just needs to be done correctly the first time around.
We still have the opportunity to ensure the long term inland rail route and the future of Wagga as a growing centre to mutually occur by planning a bypass of the centre of Wagga.

The level of consultation that has been had so far has been deplorable. I receive something in the mail about 12 months ago, and that is it. I just found out this weekend at a Street Christmas party that they had an event at the local Wagga Showgrounds where people could visit and find out the impacts on their homes. I had no idea it was on. There was no communication or mailing of residence near the railway to say the event was on. I spoke to a person about 12 months ago after I got the flyer and they told me that I would be consulted on everything in particular noise. I specifically asked them to be consulted about noise levels of the current train and the proposed future ones. I have never had any correspondence or contact from anyone regarding this project since the initial mail out. The event at the showgrounds recently apparently gave residence and ability to see what the noise levels currently are and what they will be with a new track. But obviously it was poorly advertised and residence on. The actual railway weren’t even notified so I wasn’t aware that it was on.
The level of engagement of resident in Wagga that are near the railway Street, I am on McLeay Street, Has been appalling.
I am not against the project, but I think the way the company has engaged with residence that are going to be affected has been shocking.
I would like to Receive a phone call and some correspondence with up-to-date information about how my home is going to be impacted.

Maintenance of ARTC railway line perway.
Will ARTC be employing more staff for the maintenance of the railway line (perway)? ARTC are very slow to react to maintenance problems on the line now, with the increase in trains and axle load tonnage the railway perway will need better and faster reaction time for maintenance. At Yerong Creek there are mud holes on the main line with bigger tonnage the perway will deteriorate quicker and maybe cause accidents. At The Rock a set of points are only being repaired today 5/12/2023 they have been closed off with a rail block for months. ARTC need staff on the ground now to run the railway line for maintenance problems. Look at all the train derailments that happened with the flooding this and last year. Derailments with a double stack container train could do more damage to infrastructure and environmental impact.

Railway road crossing wait times.
Train length are now 1,200m long with the ILR they will be moving up to 1,800m and then to 3000m long, I believe. At Yerong Creek the road crossing is roughly in the middle of the railway crossing loop, so Yerong Creek at times gets slower low speed train crossing that take longer to travel through the road crossing. Yerong Creek only has the one road crossing, in an emergency the longer time maybe an issue for resident safety. My thoughts on this is that the cross loop may need to be made longer in the future for the longer trains and changes to the signal arrangements. At the moment trains on the DOWN stop at the signal just before the road crossing and wait for the UP train to clear the points before getting the clearance to start to move on. Trains on the UP run through the road crossing and stop at the signal before the points to rejoin the main line. So if the loop was made longer the time at the crossing can be broken up allowing vehicles in a emergency time to get across the road crossing before the next train.

I oppose the traversing of Wagga Wagga CBD by Inland because it cuts our city in half.
This would not be acceptable in our major capitals.
The EIS & PIR have dodged the issues the residents of Wagga Wagga want addressed.
The ignoring of citizens requests for information relating to alternate proposals, costings, actual studies of engineering and costs have been ignored.
Community consultation has been poor to negligible despite requests for open hearings.
The relevant authorities are not complying with the government's own guidelines for community consultation.
The need to remove dangerous rail crossings, as in Victoria, is evident but ignored in NSW.
No costings have been made for noise and vibration abatement once the Inland rail is active so one can only assume this will create future problems and denial of applicants.
Wagga Wagga is already recognized as the Asthma capital of the state, adding further impurities to the air can only worsen this health record.
The internal disruption of traffic in Wagga Wagga during construction and post completion of modifications has been grossly misleading and does not reflect he actual chaos this will cause. We have an opportunity to make our city a desirable place to live and work and this project takes the cheap option and denies a vibrant growing city the ability to retain its attractiveness as we grow to a population of 100,000.

I do not support that freight trains travelling through the centre of the city of Wagga Wagga for a number of major concerns. The 2 reports and information session have not addressed the issues raised by majority of community members as expressed over a period of time. The integrity of current infrastructure needs to be assessed by appropriate qualified independent person. A bypass is a must along the river flood plain so not causing issues with the local community in many areas of concerns.

The federal governments priority is the line from Beveridge to Parkes. The Inland Rail vision is 24hr rail freight from Brisbane to Melbourne. The inland Rail business model is to run double stack trains at 1.8km long on the entire route, all 1700km of it. Not just the bit from Parkes to Beveridge of which the Albury to Illabo section is an even shorter length of track at 185km.
The original cost estimate of $4.5 billion barely made the whole project financially viable, at $12 billion it was a dud. The ultimate revised cost of $31 billion, which may rise, surely makes the whole project unviable. Let alone a small section that even when completed does not create an efficient rail network inline with the projects objectives.
The three ends-Brisbane/Sydney/Melbourne have not been sorted out and the respective levels of government at these ends will not allow 1.8km trains through to the ports, let alone double stacked trains of any description.
It then surely indicates that the whole concept is fatally flawed, financially and operationally, and will never achieve the objectives of the original and later revised business models however well intentioned it may have been.
So on these grounds I object to not only the Albury to Illabo section but the whole Inland Rail double stack project and instead offer an alternative-one that many people more knowledgeable than me have already flagged:
Inland Rail should run single stack trains up to 1.8kms long at the proposed frequency commencing as soon as the intermodal hubs are ready to receive the freight. In doing so the business model can be better tested, communities on the route do not need to have substantial disruptive infrastructure construction works carried out, the benefits of intermodal hubs remain and truck traffic on our major highways will be lessoned. This requires minimal federal funding, gets Inland Rail operational sooner, defers the double stack 'issues' until the need is proven, and provides time to fully explore by-pass routes and how to 'connect' the ends to the ports.

The residents of Wagga request The Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) to divert the intend route of the Inland Rail from going through the Wagga CBD to going around the Wagga CBD, creating a Wagga ARTC Bypass.
The intended route for the Inland Rail is to use the existing railway line from Bomen, through the Wagga CBD, then to the new Kapooka Bridge.
Our suggested route is to connect the Wagga ARTC Bypass to the current railway at or near Bomen’s TEYS Abattoir to the north of Wagga, and near the new Kapooka Bridge to the south of Wagga (see “Inland Rail Alternate Route around Wagga CBD” below).
By 2040, ARTC estimates that the trains will be up to 3.6kms long and the number of trains will also increase to over 20 trains a day (A2I EIS – Chapter 1 Introduction (nsw.gov.au). Currently the trains travelling through Wagga are up to 1.7kms long and up to 12 trains per day.
There are four main reasons for requesting an alternate route:
1. Edmondson Bridge Upgrade:
As part of the construction of the ARTC Inland rail, the current Edmondson Bridge will need to be replaced with a larger bridge that can accommodate the trains having double-stacked shipping containers on them.
The construction of the new bridge will take 9 months, meaning that all cars that use the Edmondson Bridge will have to find a detour, which will lead to an increase in the traffic on the other roads that also cross the railway line. Also in the construction phase, the ARTC Environment Impact Statement (ARTC EIS) acknowledges that “construction at the enhancement site would result in low-to-high impacts at up to 1,758 residential receivers during standard and OOH periods” (A2I EIS – Chapter 15 Noise and vibration (nsw.gov.au) page 26), ensuring there will be loud construction noise during the day and some nights for the residents living near the bridge. This includes the staff and students at South Wagga Public School, Kildare Catholic School and Wagga Wagga High School.
Also, when the new bridge is built, it will be up to 2.8 metres taller than the current bridge. This means that:
- The ramp from the Edward Street intersection to the peak of the bridge will be steeper, potentially leading to increase accidents for traffic driving north and coming to a steep stop at the Edward Street intersection
- The pedestrians, mostly school children, will have a steeper walk to and from the bridge
2. Bourke Street Crossing Blockages:
With the ARTC Inland Rail trains being longer than the current trains and an increase in the number of trains, this will lead to longer and more often wait times whilst the trains are passing through the Bourke & Fernleigh Road crossings. This should be considered considering the city’s main ambulance station in on Fernleigh Road and the main Hospital is on Edward Street, on the opposite sides of the Bourke Street crossing. The question is if an ambulance has to transport a critical patient from the southern suburbs of Wagga (which are growth areas), how will they get directly to the hospital when a 3.6km long freight train is crossing the Bourke St crossing? These traffic stoppages will negatively affect the flow of traffic from the central Wagga district to the southern suburbs of Wagga (Lloyd, Bourkelands, etc).
3. Noise & Vibration Effects throughout the Construction Phase and Ongoing Inland Rail Trains:
“When Inland Rail is operational it will have the potential to generate noise for residents in locations including their own homes, schools and in hospitals” (Inland Rail Managing noise and vibration fact sheet - Inland Rail (artc.com.au)). This extra noise may be exacerbated because the number, length and weight of trains will be increasing.
“We acknowledge the operation and maintenance of Inland Rail will have noise impacts for local communities. The draft noise and vibration modelling during construction and operation for areas around the project’s enhancement work sites has been completed” (Noise and vibration modelling - Inland Rail (artc.com.au)).
“The locations where predicted rail noise levels exceed the RING airborne noise criteria consist of: Scots School Albury, seven dwellings in Henty, the Headlie Taylor Header Museum, Yerong Creek Public School, Kildare Catholic College in Wagga Wagga, South Wagga Public School, Junee Baptist Church, Junee North Public School and the Illabo Public School. These exceedances are driven by an increase in daytime LAeq rail noise levels due to increased rail volumes forecast for the day period (7am to 10pm)” (Technical Paper 7 – Operational noise and vibration (rail) (nsw.gov.au)).
The concern here is what about the increase in night-time noise due to the increase in the occurrence, weight and length of the trains, noting the existing surrounding noise is reduced in the evening. This will have a detrimental effect on the surrounding residents’ sleeping habits. Also the effect of the resulting vibrations on the surrounding residents along the rail line will be increased due to the heavier, longer and increased occurrence of the freight trains.
4. Safety Concerns at Bourke St & Fernleigh Road crossing due to an increase in rail traffic, and extended weight and length of the trains. These extended delays are going to cause extended traffic wait times and force traffic to find alternative detours that will go through residents’ roads, creating “rat runs” in these surrounding alternative routes.
The ARTC Inland Rail Environment Impact Statement acknowledges there needs to be a lot of construction and mitigation works to enable the route to commence through Wagga. I suggest it would be more beneficial financially to consider and develop a bypass, as compared to the impacts of the suggested construction and mitigation works needed for the route to continue through the Wagga CBD centre.
Yet a solution that leads to less disruption to the surrounding affected residents is to amend the rail route to bypass Wagga’s CBD District. Whilst there would be an upfront cost of building the bypass over flood plains and crossing major roadways, the long-term impacts on the residents of the Wagga would be greater if the rail was allowed to go through the center of Wagga.
Whilst the Inland Rail will have a large financial boost for the Australian and local community, the potential impacts on the surrounding affected residents need to also be considered and potentially mitigated by utilizing a bypass.
Cassidy Bridge Wagga : The new pedestrian Bridge proposed poses a particular problem that impacts my property and those properties surrounding it. One way to minimize impacts on the neighborhood would be to change the site of the bridge, from Brookong Ave to Fox St. The western side of Fox St is made up of commercial properties, and the road currently reaches close to the railway corridor. No private properties would be affected. As well, construction could take place while keeping the current bridge in operation, thus eliminating one issue for the community. The current pathway between the Telstra block and 22 and 24 Brookong Ave could become a small wildlife corridor with the planting of native species, helping to mitigate the carbon footprint of the proposed construction.

The recent so called re scheduled drop in session was noisy, not planned and a proper Forum would now be a better option to give better understanding of the project.
The Ring Rail alternative should be considered not ignored as is as present and costed against current proposal of running thru the middle of our city.
All railway road crossings on the proposed line be costed into the project and upgraded if project goes ahead as planned. Towns like Culcairn , Henty, Yerong Creek , The Rock and Uranquinty are all going to be impacted in noise, vibration and traffic banking up danger wise on Olympic highway. The crossings in Wagga Wagga a City are going to have major impacts on traffic and emergency vehicles.
The current via aduct in Wagga Wagga has speed reduction for many Klms yet no infostructure upgrades required or costings are being made available.
Community feed back and consultation continues to be poor.
The impact this current use of rail could have impacts on the running of the XPT, Great Southern, current goods rains and vice versa? BREAKDOWNS AND CRASHES DO OCCUR OF ALL THESE SERVICES.
If the project goes ahead It should be dual line the entire length of line.
Why were some other towns given Ring Rail changes yet a City of Wagga not?
What about the sharp turn in the line near the farmers home hotel in Wagga Wagga?

My concerns about inland rail passing through the middle of Wagga are as follows:
-The potential construction of a noise mitigating wall behind my home obstructing view and shading my backyard. This potential rail upgrade is beyond my control and I would not have chosen to purchase my current property if I'd have known that an unsightly tall wall would likely be built at the back of the property vs alternate noise mitigating infrastructure required due to increase in train noise
-I am seriously concerned about the likely devaluing of my property if the project goes ahead, due to it being an otherwise sought after central Wagga property that happens to be located on what would become a busy and loud train line. This is unfair.
-The noise pollution caused by heavier trains passing through Wagga is detrimental to property value and will cause issues with people health.
-The emergency service delays caused by increased waiting times at crucial intersections near Wagga Base Hospital
-Having a busy train line that cuts Wagga in half isn't a sustainable plan for Wagga's future. Wagga must be bypassed. A busier train line passing through Wagga will decrease the flow of traffic through the city.

I OBJECT TO THE PROJECT PASSING THROUGH THE MIDDLE OF WAGGA.

I object to the project passing through the middle of Wagga. I do not object to an alternate route bypassing Wagga.

My concerns about inland rail passing through the middle of Wagga are as follows:
-The potential construction of a noise mitigating wall behind my home obstructing view and shading my backyard. This potential rail upgrade is beyond my control and I would not have chosen to purchase my current property if I'd have known that an unsightly tall wall would likely be built at the back of the property vs alternate noise mitigating infrastructure required due to increase in train noise
-I am seriously concerned about the likely devaluing of my property if the project goes ahead, due to it being an otherwise sought after central Wagga property that happens to be located on what would become a busy and loud train line. This is unfair
-The noise pollution caused by heavier trains passing through Wagga
-The emergency service delays caused by increased waiting times at crucial intersections near Wagga Base Hospital
-Having a busy train line that cuts Wagga in half isn't a sustainable plan for Wagga's future. Wagga must be bypassed. A busier train line passing through Wagga will stunt the city's potential in terms of city planning and traffic efficiency

My home has been recommended for at-property treatment as per the PIR.
In addition to the proposed at-property treatment, I would like to suggest that extending the noise barriers recommended for the Coleman st side (southern side) of the tracks to the Docker st level crossing would benefit all residents of the western end of Coleman st by reducing the noise affects on our outdoor living spaces.
I am also concerned that by having noise barriers on only one side of the tracks, noise will be reflected off the walls to the homes without the noise barrier, making the noise of the trains even louder.