MOD 1 - Design Modifications

This submission is in response to the Sydney CBD and South East Light Rail Project design modifications currently on exhibition.

I support the minor change that would ensure the preservation of trees in Tay Reserve, Randwick. I however hold some strong objections to other suggested modifications:

- I object to the overall increase in the number of trees to be removed as a result of design modifications such as the realignment at Alison Road and at the Alison Road/Anzac Parade intersection, and changes to the construction method for the Anzac Parade tunnel

As a home-owner in Randwick I am deeply concerned about the proposed tree loss for this project. These majestic trees add unquantifiable value to our homes. The figure of around 435 trees to be removed in Randwick city is completely unacceptable. I cannot imagine Randwick without its trees, and the heritage as well as the environmental benefits that these trees provide. It is extremely important that all of Randwick's trees are preserved for the community and for the future. I truly hope that the project's engineers, designers and planners can finally recognise this. These unnecessarily destructive designs proposed are not good enough. Replacement trees are insufficient.

- I object to the realignment of light rail along Alison Road and flood mitigation changes at Centennial Park (as described in Section 3.7) which would allow for an additional 50 trees along Alison Road within Centennial Parklands to be removed

- I object to the realignment of light rail at the Anzac Pde/Alison Rd intersection which would remove an additional four fig trees without reason

- I object to the new retaining wall proposed for Alison Road since it is unnecessary if the trees along this section of Centennial Parklands are retained and the tracks are re-aligned into the centre of Alison Road.

Please truly consider my concerns. As a home-owner in Randwick and along the route, I wish to see this project's design improved in alignment with the community's concerns. Please preserve our trees.

i would like all avenues exhausted to reduce the amount of significant trees being cut down, I believe by being smarter and making more of an effort this can be significantly reduced. I walk home from CBD every other day and spend my walk under the shade of an admiring the very trees that we will lose. I would be devastated to see them cut down!

Light Rail South East /CBD Modification SSI 6042 1

Objection 15/12/14

As a resident of Martin Rd Centennial Park I object to the Light Rail as the vision is not delivering on its promises.

1 The transport time will be no quicker to get to the city but the overall travel time will be greater because of the extra time to get to the train stop and the reduced frequency of trains vs current buses

2 The distances between stops will mean an extra 400m walk

3 The expenditure is not justified by any promised or demonstrated benefit to the community

4 The destruction of trees, habitat, cycle paths and access to city, running tracks and the ponds in Centennial Park the loss of the historic gates and access to Centennial Park are not justified by any detailed benefit disclosed.

5 The loss of access to Anzac Parade as a result of safety fencing.

6 Loss of pedestrian crossing across the bus lane at Martin Rd

7 Loss of flexibility on a daily basis and in the long term.

8 Transport hubs at Randwick and Kingsford could be done with Buses if benefits could be demonstrated for a hub. A light rail is not a prerequisite for a hub.

9 Having the longest light rail carriages in the world , which might be a Legacy/Albatross of the Government and its Ministers, is not a substitute for a flexible, suitable, efficient transport system which meets the needs and has the consent of the residents it passes and the customers it serves.

10 Modification announced 3/12/14
[1] The branch of the rail line up Alison Rd should be cancelled. The race course doesn't want it because the falling number of racegoers doesn't justify their input. If the crowds do justify the rail then there's too many racegoers to be allowed to cross the road and disrupt and slow down traffic. The rail line should either be on the South side of Alison Rd or not at all.
[2] The moving of the rail line to the north of Alison Rd into Centennial Park
a] Will destroy the cycle track
b] Will destroy the walking track
c] Will destroy the running track
d] Will destroy the historic sandstone gates
e] Will remove the access to the Park at this point
f] will interfere with the extensive and expensive recent sandstone drainage works
g] Will destroy part of southern bank of the Centennial Park pond
[3]Where the train line branches to go up Alison Rd it comes within 5 paces of Martin Rd .Ancient trees and bush will be replaced by railway lines .The existing homes will be exposed to not only the proposed trains its noise, wires, poles and rail lines but also to the noise and dust of existing traffic which is very significant at the intersection of Alison St and Anzac Pde. A significant loss of Amenity for each of the 100 homes in the Martin Rd and Robertson Rd area {"the area"}.
[4] The amenity of the homes in "the area" are protected by registered covenants on their titles signed by the Premier Sir Charles Wade 25/6/1908 and confirmed by the Supreme Court NSW 15/12/1932.
[5] Damages for a breach of these covenants by way of a class action could well be in excess of $100 Million plus costs plus Exemplary Damages .

11 Wrong Priority.
The funds for the Light Rail would be better used to solve the real and growing problem of traffic chaos on the western side of South Dowling St near Green Square and Danks St. Over 10,000 apartments are being built in the next 4 years none of whom will access the light rail.

12 Existing infrastructure.
The existing rail tunnels from Bondi Junction and an extension of these could move customers to Randwick and UNSW and at the same free up existing roads

Peter Colquhoun

- I support the saving of open space and trees at Tay Reserve - this space acts as the gateway to Randwick and is important for showcasing the garden aspect of the city. The park is also well used, as the very close Centennial park is difficult to access from that side of the road.
- The change of design to move the Racecourse stop to the opposite side of Alison Rd has terrible consequences in terms of tree loss, which will take away from the visual amenity of the streetscape, as well as the utility of the trees for pedestrians and cyclists, with new vegetation unlikely to compensate for decades. The trees here are synonymous with Randwick and the lifestyle of people who live in the area.
- Further loss of mature fig trees in Moore park due to the tunnel construction method will take from the visual amenity of the area and the utility for pedestrians and cyclists.
- Four extra trees could be removed at the branching of the Randwick and Kingsford lines, but no justification was provided as to why there was a need, as the plans that have been approved already do not require that these trees be removed.
- The proposed "compensation" of replacement trees does not replace 'like for like' (similar trees of similar maturity in similar location), which undermines the value of such a gesture. A replacement scheme should be created with replacement sites identified in advance (there seems currently to be too much flexibility of replacement location in particular, as new trees could be planted on the other side of the LGA).

I make this submission objecting to the proposed modification to the CBD & South East Light Rail Project posted this month, removing access to Little Riley Street from Devonshire Street.
If this proposed modification goes ahead, legal vehicular rear access to my driveway will be removed. In the Modification Report, I would be required to enter Little Riley Street from Steel Lane, something which is physically impossible in even a small car. The width of Steel Lane and Little Riley street as well as the sharpness of the corner make this a totally unrealistic alternative to entry from Devonshire Street. It is not just tight - it is impossible. You need only to look at the intersection to realise this. I doubt anyone has ever gone around that corner in a car, no matter the size.
If this modification proceeds, access my driveway will only be possible by reversing the wrong way down a narrow one way laneway - a clearly unsatisfactory and dangerous alternative.
I urge you in the strongest terms to reconsider this proposal, and physically inspect the corner of Steel Lane and Little Riley Street - it is not possible to turn a car around that corner. If this modification proceeds, it will cause property owners to drive illegally on Little Riley Street, which is likely to increase the risk of injury to children who play in the laneway, pedestrians who frequently use the laneway and vehicles and their drivers attempting to enter and leave their properties.
I am deeply concerned about this possibility and believe the proposed modification needs to be reassessed.

I am strongly opposed to the planned removal of many of the very large fig trees and numerous olive trees from the S-W end of Martin Rd. near the Anzac Pde/Alison Rd. intersection. The trees are on the 200-metre acoustic mound that separates the end of Robertson and Martin roads from the present bus roadway. They are a precious natural asset and provide visual, pollution and sound protection for nearby residents and the overall Martin/Robertson Rd precinct . Once the acoustic mound is cut back and numerous existing trees removed, the mound will no longer support comparable trees. In addition the proposed modification/straightening of the rail track route at the Alison Rd corner and along Alison Rd itself will bring the rail closer to the residential area as well as degrading the S-W corner and the Southern boundary of Centennial Park.
Overall, the Randwick branch line routing is unsatisfactory, causing as many problems as it solves. It could be argued for example that we do not need the Alison/Wansey Rd line at all. The bus road services would remain as is, and the light rail could be routed to Randwick via High St. The point is, there are feasible alternatives that make more practical sense than the current proposal.
The project should be put on hold and reviewed once again before contracts are signed.
Additionally, it is of note that the amenity of the homes in the Martin/Robertson Rd area is protected by registered covenants on their titles signed on 25/6/1908 by the NSW Premier Sir Charles Wade and confirmed by the Supreme Court NSW 15/12/1932.
I am advised that damages for a breach of these covenants by way of class action could well be in excess of $100 million plus costs, plus Exemplary Damages.

I respectfully request that issues raised be re-assessed.

Robert Dick
0418 166 520

The proposal to put the light rail stop on the other side of Alison Road, instead of within the grounds, or on the edge of, Randwick racecourse is totally inappropriate because:
1. It would alienate a part of Centennial Parkland which is under growing pressure as a place of recreation, especially from Green Square apartment dwellers;
2. The original tramline delivered passengers directly to the racecourse a century ago, and some of the rail lines may even still be there. It was a totally logical disembarkation point. There is sufficient space within the racecourse grounds for the station, whose patrons will be mostly race goers anyway.
3. It is absurdly dangerous for race goers to have to cross busy Alison Road from the proposed new station.
4. The Crown still owns the Racecourse. It was never part of the Greater Sydney Common established in 1811. As owner of the land, the State Government has the power to insist the racecourse station be located within the grounds.
5. Don't let special lobbying of the Turf Club prevail over the needs of the broader public, who do not enter Centennial Park from along Alison Road, and would not use a light rail station there to alight for park use.

I am very concerned about proposed changes to the South East Light Rail project which would move the Alison Road track and stop from the road adjacent to Randwick racecourse over into Centennial Park. I strongly oppose any encroachment into Centennial Park (or Moore Park) as these parklands are already bursting at the seams with people and animals seeking open space. This change would result in loss of more trees, open space and park access and high fencing of the park, which is unsightly and unnacceptable. I oppose this change and think the track and stop should stay on the other side of the road.

I wish to submit an objection to the proposed 67m LRVs on the basis of the greater number of noise exceedances from 9 to 15. This is 30% more than was originally approved and will impose more noise upon residents of Parkham St and Nobbs St in Surry Hills. TfNSW is imposing too much on the residents of this area. The LRVs will be one of the longest in the world and unnecessary. It demonstrates that the original proposal was flawed in terms of future usage projections.
My objection is also based on the fact that 67m LRVs are too large to be travelling in a residential area which is filled with pedestrians. There are so many children that use the area as they go to school or walk with their parents. The area will also be a park and children will be playing nearby the track. The approved speed of the LRVs is 45km per hour and this is too fast for such a large LRV.
I think it would be a terrible safety issue and one that will cause me a lot of anxiety for my children's safety. The government departments involved with this project will be liable for any injuries or deaths caused by such large LRVs in this area.

I do not accept this light rail plan.

I have serious concerns concerning the Light Rail passing through Randwick and Kingsford.

This area is already at a break point and to install a LR will exacerbate the already severe traffic conditions.

Reduction to traffic and pedestrian flow along High Street added to which is the enormous disruption to medical practices in that area. I really believe that no proper thought about vehicular and pedestrian activity in this has been made.

Anzac Parade has many streets branching off it and the LR will cause increased traffic flow in streets that are totally ill equipped to manage this.

The closing date for consultation is too soon with the Christmas Festival preparations taking much of the public's time. Please consider an extension to this close.

Wherever the LR travels there will be increased injury potential to pedestrians. The roads on which the LR travels are NOT designed for LR and vehicular traffic even though ANZAC Parade once carried trams the increase of suburban housing, population and the intense traffic intersections rules out such a development.

Levy Banks in Kensington concern me greatly and I would like more time to understand the potential impact that the LR will have as there has already been disruption to the protection without the addition of 100 tonne plus LR carriages.

Please listen to the community and do not rush ahead with this poorly conceived project. The project requires far more consultation with the community than has so far been afforded.

Sincerely,
Val Young

In my view, the proposed modifications to both light rail vehicles and platform size will severely impact access to my residence.

The proposed modification to remove access to Lt Riley Street from Devonshire St will severely impact rear lane vehicle access to Riley St properties with rear lane access bound by Steel Lane and Adelaide Street.The suggested access from Steel Lane to Little Riley Street may look feasible on paper, but I can assure you, is not physically possible for even a compact sized vehicle. The left hand turn required from Steel Lane into Little Riley St is impossible to make. Under the proposed amendment to traffic management and removal of access to Little Riley St via Devonshire, access to the rear of my residence would not be possible. I note that the only way that access could therefore be possible would be by illegally reversing down Little Riley Street (currently one-way traffic). I further note that rear lane vehicle access and garage door alignment for Riley St properties with rear lane access between Steel Lane and Adelaide Street, is structurally aligned to access to Riley Street from Devonshire Street only.

I encourage planners to get in contact with me to discuss the severe restrictions to vehicle access to the rear of certain Riley Street properties that the proposed traffic amendments actually imply.

I strongly object to your proposed plans for the Light Rail project in regards to the planned route and especially to the intended length of the tram itself. This project has always had its faults, but it has now turned into a transport nightmare of a global scale. It is simply wrong in all aspects and should be shelved until an intelligent alternative is considered. I don't know what you people are thinking!

I wish to object to the larger LRVs in the amended proposal. These larger trams will have significantly larger noise impacts on residents. I want the project to return to the original sized LRVs. Thank you.

Firstly, I am amazed that such a significant modification has not been more widely publicized. It isn't even included on the CSELR website resources. You have to search for a link to it on NSW Planning's major projects web site. Considering the amount of money being spent on communications, it's appalling.
Now to the modifications proposed:
1 - I do not support extending the length of the trams. It means less frequent service; longer platforms; increased risk of causing traffic jams - imagine the chaos accompanying an accident of breakdown while crossing a major intersection;
2 - Re-alignment on Anzac Pde crossing Alison Rd is a big change. Reading the proposal makes it sound like there will be 6 lanes of traffic heading south, 2 turning left onto Alison Rd, 2 heading straight down Anzac Pde & 2 turning right into Dacey Ave, 2 sets of tram tracks & 2 lanes heading north on Anzac Pde. It sounds like a nightmare to build & negotiate. I fear more parkland will be consumed to make it fit.
3 - I object to the proposal to raise the levy on Kensington Ponds. This will put Centennial Parklands at risk of major flooding and be a highly visible barrier for communities south of Alison Rd to Centennial Park & is not supported.
4 - Siting the Racecourse stop in Centennial Park is a terrible proposal. It will totally change the character of that section of Alison Rd with a large loss of trees & replacement of park vistas with platform & wires. Patrons would have to cross Alison Rd to & from the racecourse - a ridiculous & inappropriate development. This can't be acceptable to the travelling public surely - certainly not racegoers or motorists. It's another appalling development.
Overall, this CSELR project appears to be going from bad to worse. A light rail tram system is not appropriate to retro-fit to a congested road system and building more of it on parkland is not the solution. All modern cities utilize subways for mass transit in similar environments - a tram just doesn't offer the same convenience & efficiency.

I AGREE WITH IMPROVING PUBLIC TRANSPORT EITHER LIGHT RAIL,BUSES OR HEAVY RAIL.
THIS LIGHT RAIL PROJECT IS NOT WHAT WE WANT
-CARRIAGES 67M LONG(16 AVERAGE CAR LENGTHS)
CROSSING CROWN,BOURKE & SOUTH DOWLING WONT IT CAUSE TRAFFIC SLOWDOWN/CHAOS. THIS ISNT THE WAY TO INCREASE CAPACITIES OR KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING.
-CHANGING ROUTE ALREADY AT RANDWICK AND ENCROACHING AND KNOCKING DOWN CENTENNIAL PARKLANDS TREES.
-COST 1.6 BILLION TO 2.2BILLION TODATE AND IT HASNT STARTED NOTED FROM MEETING LAST WEEK A PREFERRED CONTRACTOR IS ENGAGED CONTRACT COULDNT BE OR HASNT BEEN SIGNED TODATE.
WHY BECAUSE CONTRACTORS DONT KNOW HOW MUCH ITS GOING TO COST.
PLEASE RECONSIDER AS WE WANT A TRANSPORT SYSTEM THAT IS GOING TO TAKE US INTO THE 21ST CENTURY AND BEYOUND. ITS A HUGE INVESTMENT LETS MAKE IT THE BEST.
CONSIDER THE POPULATION INCREASE IN VICTORIA PARK,WATERLOO & BEYOUND.

LOOK AT HEAVY RAIL, BUSES OR AN ALTERNATE ROUTE FOR LIGHT RAIL.

REGARDS
22 YEAR SURRY HILLS RESIDENT.

The size of this railway line proposed to run up Devonshire street is of a scale that will destroy this area of surry hills. I understand that we will lose all the trees on Devonshire street and lose a large part of Ward park and it's mature planting. After talking to a council planner I understand that a route further along Elizabeth St and up Phillip St has never been considered. This road is wide and would get to the entertainment quarter and Randwick through the hi density More park developments. Why has this route not be considered and why does the process seem to move on without any true community dialogue.

I do not accept this light rail plan.

The trams are an excessive length.

The trams will cause disruption to the flow of vehicle traffic.

The trams will be a danger for pedestrians.

There will be an unacceptable loss of trees.

The trams will be too loud during the night.

The previously forecast peak capacity has been diminished.

The trams will result in decreased peak capacity compared to existing bus services from the south East.

The trams should be underground.

The trams should travel down Oxford street instead of cutting through Surry hills.

The government has not disclosed the cost benefit analysis to justify this project.

This submission is in response to the Sydney CBD and South East Light Rail Project design modifications currently on exhibition.

The following information, which has been carefully compiled by some concerned citizens in order to assist others in formulating a coherent response, comprehensively expresses my own concerns about the issue, and I therefore wish for you to regard this submission as an individual response.

I support the minor change that would ensure the preservation of trees in Tay Reserve, Randwick. However, in recognition that one of the project's principle aims is to improve the overall amenity of areas along the alignment, I hold some strong objections to other suggested modifications:

I object to the overall increase in the number of trees to be removed as a result of design modifications such as the realignment at Alison Road and at the Alison Road/Anzac Parade intersection, and changes to the construction method for the Anzac Parade tunnel
The loss of over 700 trees in the approved project is already unacceptable. This additional tree loss is completely unacceptable.

The suggested replacement trees are insufficient. There are no commitments to replace trees of the same quality, nor in the same location. That is because replacing these trees is in fact impossible. Many of these trees are of significant heritage and biodiversity value.

I am deeply concerned that there have been no modifications proposed with regards to retaining trees and parklands in Randwick despite the community and council support that has been voiced for the preservation of our trees.

Citizens recently submitted a petition of over 500 signatures to the NSW Parliament asking that there be no loss of trees in Randwick city, and that the Randwick interchange be relocated from High Cross Park. I signed this petition.

I object to the realignment of light rail along Alison Road and flood mitigation changes at Centennial Park (as described in Section 3.7)
This realignment would allow for an additional 50 trees along Alison Road within Centennial Parklands to be removed. I am deeply concerned about any loss of trees due to this project. Such loss of trees will result in harmful impacts to the wildlife and to the amenity of the area.

I am also concerned about the loss of the entire new and popular bike and pedestrian tracks.

The loss of both the trees and paths can be avoided here with track and stop re-alignment into the middle of Alison Road.

I object to the realignment of light rail at the Anzac Pde/Alison Rd intersection
I am concerned that no satisfactory reason has been provided as to why an additional four fig trees before the corner of Alison Road need to be removed when they have not been flagged for removal in the approved plans.

I am deeply concerned about this extra tree removal. The alignment should be adjusted to avoid the removal of all trees.

I object to the new retaining wall, approximately 200 metres long and up to approximately three metres in height that would extend along the eastern side of the tracks within the central section of the proposed alignment, between Doncaster Avenue and Darley Road next to Alison Road, Randwick
Such a wall would adversely affect the character of the area. This wall is unnecessary if the trees along this section of Centennial Parklands are retained and the tracks are re-aligned into the centre of Alison Road.

Avoiding the construction of such a wall would also result in a cost reduction for the project.


Finally, I object to the fact that the report claims that these modifications will result in an overall improvement, yet no improvements have been proposed with regards to tree loss, nor to socio-economic, biodiversity, air quality, utilities and services, or greenhouse gases `environmental issues'.

Please truly consider my concerns as they are equal to the concerns of any stakeholder.

I do not approve this submission for longer trams.

I also do not accept the new 45 degree car parking behind our property on Nobbs Lane. The original plans that I saw indicated that there would be parkland next to Nobbs Lane and this is now a significant change.

I have two children and the placement of the additional parking will create a danger due to increased traffic for my family trying to access the new park.