MOD 1 - Design Modifications

Many of my neighbours are older and don't access the internet so they do not know about the proposed modifications which in turn means they can't make an informed submission about the EIS. As far as I can see there hasn't been any meaningful communication about it outside of the the internet which isn't fair on them. As modifications such as the increase size of the LRVs effects residents of Parkham St I think that there should have been greater effort to let them know that this modification is being proposed by mail.
The submissions are closing today and people like this haven't had a chance to make one. The overall communication strategy needs to include everyone not just those who are computer literate.

I object to the latest Light Rail design modifications for the following reasons:
* Trying to push through changes at a busy time of the year is unfair to all affected, especially as these changes seem to be favouring influential interests such as the SCG/SSG Trust, ATC and Randwick racecourse to the detriment of ordinary ratepayers/citizens.
* Moving the stop from in front of Randwick Racecourse onto park land will create safety issues and increased traffic delays on race days, as racegoers stream across Alison Road.
* How will the longer 66 metre train navigate through the narrow streets and around the corners of Surry Hills?
* How will one driver ensure the safety of passengers on a 66 metre long train?
* I strongly object to the lack of detail regarding ease of access for mobility impaired individuals, parents with prams and/or toddlers, the elderly with canes, walkers and trolleys. The distance between stops is a concern, as is getting to/from a footpath to a platform.

The following motion was passed at Randwick Precinct meeting held on 3 December 2014:
Meeting expressed concern about the proposed changes to the Alison Road elevation, particularly on Centennial Park. The revised tram stop location is undesirable and the negative impacts on traffic on Alison Road and Darley Road are of particular concern.
MOTION Agreed to forward these concerns to the Department of Planning & Environment. . UNANIMOUS

I have read all the so-called benefits of the "light rail" from George Street in the City to the South East to Kingsford and Randwick.

I have yet to agree there are any benefits whatsoever to the business owners, residents, ratepayers, users of public transport, patients at PoW Hospital, people travelling from outer suburbs to the two interchanges. There will be chaos while the "light rail" is being constructed and even worse chaos, afterwards.

I have attended Forums which have added to my concerns. Questions haven't been answered and the needs of the community have not been noted.

We have an excellent bus system at the moment and the ONLY way it could be upgraded properly is by installing underground rail.

As far as I can see, the ONLY people who benefit from this extremely costly exercise are the developers.

CBD and South East Light Rail EIS Modifications Submission 17 December 2014
Stella Calpis, West Kingsford resident - please withhold name from publication.

As a resident of West Kingsford I object to this light rail plan to the SE and its modifications.

My concerns about the EIS Modifications for the CBD and South East Light Rail project as exhibited in December 2014 include the encroachment of and restricted access to Centennial Park, the large size of the vehicles and the restricted access to POW Hospital, the medical services on High St, St Vincent's Clinic and general restricted access around our neighbourhood.

I object to:-
* The increase in light rail vehicles from 45m to 67m length, the resultant increased noise impacts in residential areas and the increased time for LRVs to travel across intersections.
* The acquisition of land at Table 5.1 - pg 103 of the modifications document. Also of concern is that the Project Team could not tell me the precise location of one of the land parcels.
* The loss of substantially more established and significant trees in Centennial Park.
* The significant encroachment of Centennial Parklands through the construction of a 3 metre + high/ 300 metre long retaining wall along Allison Rd together with a light rail stop in the park, and the removal of the wonderful dual walkway/cycleway along the Allison Rd side.
* The increased risk of water issues through the raising of existing storm banks (dam walls) with no study on overflow and impacts.
* Disruption and re-location of the existing cycle ways connecting Randwick, POW Hospital and UNSW to Centennial Parklands, the CBD and greater metropolitan Sydney.
* Removal of access to Centennial Park from Allison Rd to the Main Gate in Darley Rd. Likewise Darley Rd access to Allison heading south and west is unworkable. Being asked to use Avoca St is just ludicrous for local residents in West Kingsford that use Anzac then Doncaster then Allison then Darley Rd to access to and from Centennial Park. From my residence rarely ever need to go to Avoca St for any reason let alone going east to go north or east to go south under the modification. Totally unacceptable denial of access to our neighbourhood and the parklands. Suspect the reason is to limit traffic on Allison Rd caused by removal of lanes for light rail.
* The removal of High Cross Park space and the possibility of 2 light rail vehicles at the site at numerous times, in addition to the fact that I don't believe the space will accommodate the huge number of people that will be forced to use that light rail stop.
* The impact of the loss of High Cross Park on visual amenity and the loss of open parkland for the many people who use the park at various times of the day, including local workers for lunch.
* The fact that many of the critical concerns of businesses and the local community documented to Transport NSW and Dept. of Planning with regard to the design and impact of this project are not being heard and not part of the modifications. Yet the Project team has accommodated city traffic, Randwick Racecourse, the UNSW, Randwick TAFE, Sydney High, Moore Park events and other transients but not local residents.
* The replacement of a great bus service to the SE with excessively large vehicles and without exploration of alternatives that would give better access to surrounding suburbs.
* The significant reduction in peak hour public transport capacity to and from the South East
compared to the existing bus services.
* The significant reduction in peak hour public transport capacity to and from the South East
compared to the existing bus services.

Cont'd Stella Calpis EIS MODIFICATIONS SUBMISSION

* The modifications still making no mention of how suburbs such as Darlinghurst via Taylors Square for St Vincent's Clinic will be accessed. Many of the Specialists used by SE residents are in that clinic. The fear is that a rumour of having to go east via Paddington to go north to St Vincent's would be totally ludicrous. I can go door to door at the moment by bus/walk in 20 mins.
* The effect of the light rail modifications on the amenity of the south east, particularly the increased loss of trees and parkland, the project's adverse impact on businesses along its route as well as the medical facilities and the effect on residents restricted access to suburbs or by longer out of the way routes, increasing traffic by the extra time on the roads.

Other general objections not addressed by the modifications include:-
* The significant removal of traffic lanes, approx. 1000 trees and 1000 car spots is unacceptable to me as a resident.
* The significant reduction in access to neighbouring suburbs, health services and businesses.
* Reduced capacity of public transport in the SE and increased travel times through removal of, or
changes to, bus services/routes such as the 372; 373; 374; 375; 376; 377; 395/396; 343; 397;
M10; M50; 391;392; 393; 394; 399; L94, 400; 302/303.
* Much longer distances between stops, very few seats, the danger of very many school bags and UNI bags in the aisles and many travellers having to change between light rail and a bus one or more times in inclement weather.
* The obstruction of the ONLY arterial road, Anzac Parade, connecting southeastern
suburbs with each other and the CBD.
* Right-of-way across intersections and the limited right hand turns restricting resident access to homes by the most direct route-again increasing traffic on the road by being on the road longer.
* Rat running through local streets particularly from Gardeners Rd travelling west to avoid the possible gridlock at Gardeners and Anzac.
* Accommodating the UNSW by a possible pedestrian closure on High St on our main access road to Randwick is unacceptable.
* Other modes of transport for a fully integrated system have not been examined.
* There has been no wide community consultation with open discussion of issues and genuine community concerns have been ignored. Community forums do not provide opportunity for open discussion as a group and are limited to 1 question per person. There has been no listing by category of concerns from these forums with continuing update of the list on how those concerns have been considered or addressed.


West Kingsford resident

I object to the proposed realignment of the light rail on Alison Road Randwick. I consider the existing approved alignment adjacent to the Racecourse should continue.

The reason for my objection is that the proposed realignment will have a detrimental impact on traffic on Alison Road and Darley Road. I note that a new traffic signalisation is proposed on Alison Road to provide for patron access from the Racecourse and also to permit the light rail cars access the stabling facility. Additional adjustments to the traffic signals at the intersection of Alison Road and Darley Road will also adversely impact traffic flows in this vicinity.

It seems absurd that all Racecourse attendees utilising the light rail will need to cross Alison Road for ingress and egress. One of the major drivers for the light rail was to provide access to the Racecourse. If this ridiculous proposal proceeds then underground event day access as proposed at Moore Park should be required.

I note that one of the reasons given is to keep free the 'bus plaza' at Randwick Racecourse. Why is this required? The Racecourse 'bus plaza' provides the ideal location for the light rail stop to safely move the largest number of people. Any need for a bus stop (TfNSW mentioned private bus coaches at its' briefing on 10 Dec), then surely the Centennial Park side of Alison Road is best suited for this?

Re: Access to Little Riley St from Devonshire St. Surry Hills

The proposal to access Little Riley St via Steel Lane is impracticable. Whoever came up with the plan only needs to get into a car and attempt the manoeuvre to understand the problem.
There are only two solutions:
(1) shove the Light Rail stop a few metres to the east or,
(2) make Little Riley St two-way. Only 12 properties have rear access in that section and it is no big problem to look and see whether the street (it's really a lane) is clear before entering from Adelaide St.

Our concerns are:

The flooding that may happen throughout Centennial Park when the levee wall is raised. This will have wide reaching impacts on the thousands of people that use the park every day. We object to the raising of this wall simply to protect " rolling stock"

With the light rail now running on the northern side of Alison Road we are concerned at the loss of trees and the cycle path that currently runs along Alison Road between Anzac Parade and Darley Road. We urge the Dept to reconsider moving the light rail back to the southern side of Alison Road.

With the Racecourse station now being on the northern side of Alison Road this will require the drunk patrons to cross busy Alison Road to get to the station. This presents a dangerous situation and should be avoided at all costs.

Residents of Alison Road would object to another set of lights being installed on Alison Road to facilitate the passage of patrons across Alison Road.

These modifications still do not address the lack of parking on Alison Road that will result when the light rail is installed. There will be no parking on Alison Road so where will the 62 vehicles that currently park on a Alison Road find a park?

Please address this issue ASAP

CBD and Light Rail Modification Submission

As a resident that relies on public transport to travel into the city for work, I am concerned that the financial justification of this project has been withheld. It is vital to allow independent scrutiny of this expensive use of public funds.

It is my understanding that independent transport analysts have opined that the peak capacity of the light rail will be less than existing bus services. It currently takes me less than 30 minutes to travel between Kingsford and Martin Place, the Light Rail will not deliver the same service times.

The only real transport option is an investment in heavy rail, which although more expensive in the short term, offers a longer term solution to the transport needs for this area.

I am most concerned by the proposed size of the light rail vehicles. I call upon the relevant Minister to provide detailed reports by independent experts that have analysed the appropriateness of those vehicles using the proposed route and which identify potential risks to people (pedestrians/cars/cyclists), and how those risks ought to be mitigated. Are vehicles of this size used in comparable situations in other countries (through the CBD)? If not, an explanation is needed as to why it is appropriate that they be used in Sydney and what factors were considered in forming such a view.

It is difficult to understand why a proposal that offers a lower quality service, introduces significant noise disruptions (particularly the higher range of acceptable background noise levels), affects access to vital health services is being promoted as a "positive" option/alternative.

Although this project appears to be a "done deal", I respectfully urge Premier Baird to intervene to ensure that NSW taxpayers are not funding a transport solution that does not deliver for NSW residents.

we should have under groung metro like every where elese in the world. this is not future planning.

I object to the relocation of the Randwick Racecourse stop from its original proposed position (south of Allison Road) to Centennial Park. The new stop will result in the removal of far too many mature trees, will needlessly endanger the racecourse attendees by forcing them to cross 6 lanes of traffic and impact drivers in the area with increase pedestrian activities.

Dear Karen,
I am writing to support BikeSydney's submission to the CBD and South East Light Rail Modification Report - State Significant Infrastructure Approval (SSI 6042)
I cycle to work every day between Maroubra and Moore Park and am following the Light Rail plans with much interest.
The Light Rail plans excite me as I think they're the perfect opportunity to improve transport options in this area as well as match the public transport infrastructure to the growing bicycle infrastructure.
I would like to emphasise how important bicycle crossings on both sides of Alison Rd are.
Alison Road is a heavy thoroughfare to cyclists getting from the Eastern Suburbs to Centennial Park.
My concern is that if bicycle infrastructure is not carefully constructed and crossings put into place, there will be a great deal of confusion and conflict between road and footpath users.
Thank you for taking the time to read my email.
Kind regards,
Yvonne.

Hello Karen
I am a cyclist - and I am concerned that the current plans for the light rail do not include a bicycle crossing at Alison Road.
Also - I hope the proposed light rail will not reduced the current cycleways in that area in any way.
Thank you for considering this.
Regards,
David Noble

Dear Sir/Madam,

Please find attached a PDF copy of my submission to the Modifications Assessment Report Process.

Kind Regards,

Victor P Taffa

See attached.

Per Attached

As attached

see uploaded document

Please see attached letter

Submission from the School Council for Sydney Boys High School, Moore Park, Surry Hills NSW 2010.

Subject of submission: Application No SSI 6042 MOD 1 - CSELR Modifications Assessment Report 3rd Dec 2014
_______________________________________________

i. Modification of concern to the SBHS School Council: Amended Design of the Moore Park Stop

With the change in the Moore Park (MP) LR station from double storey to single storey, there will be no direct connection with the overhead bridge crossing Anzac Pde and joining the MP LR station to Sydney Boys High School (SBHS) and the adjacent Sydney Girls High School (SGHS).

This will mean school children in the afternoon peak period at around 3.15 PM will cross Anzac Pde on the overhead bridge and will then leave the bridge to reach the MP tram stop but in doing so will need to cross by foot one set of tram tracks. At this time (and it will be repeated in the morning rush hour at around 8.45 AM), up to approximately 1,500 children from SBHS and SGHS who take the LR from the MP station to Central railway station will be crossing tracks while trams will be leaving the MP station (see 4. Under Suggested changes below).

This surge of school children cannot be compared to what will happen at other LR stops as suggested in the modification justification p18 3.5.2 para 3 "Under normal operation, the MP stop would be accessed via pedestrian crossings over the LR tracks, and access ramps similar to all other stops". It is inconceivable that at "all other stops" there will be at least two occasions per school day when this large number of children will need to cross tram tracks unsupervised.

As far as can be ascertained from the modifications document there will be no additional safeguards in place for school children to cross tram tracks compared to the additional safeguards to deal with crowds emerging from sporting events i.e. for these special events there will be: (1) Underground subways opened to the public to avoid the crossing of tram tracks and, (2) Additional LR staff will supervise the public's access to the MP station.

Teachers at SBHS and SGHS presently supervise all students who are transferred by bus to Central railway station in the peak afternoon period. The staff do so on the footpath adjacent to these schools on Anzac Pde. However, the advice given to the school Council is that school staff will not be crossing over to the MP station to undertake supervision, and so the duty of care will be the sole responsibility of the LR operator. If, as is thought presently, the main / only supervision will come from the tram driver, then the school Council foresees the potential for serious accidents as school children: (1) Cross (in some cases with children this will inevitably be more a rush) tram tracks when they see their tram arriving - the tram driver in this circumstances cannot supervise as well as drive the tram, (2) Take the second of the two 33 metre long coupled LR trams - it would be difficult for the driver located in the first tram to control a large number of students from his/her position.

The justification for changing the MP LR station to single storey is to allow it to blend in with the environment, yet this comes at a cost to the safety of school children particularly at those two peak rush times when a large number will want to utilise the LR. The SBHS School Council does not accept that the proposed benefit outweighs the increased risk.

ii. Potential serious risks from MP stop modification

Injury even death are real possibilities that will result from the inability to access the MP LR station directly by the students. Two obvious scenarios are illustrated above - crossing tram tracks, and accessing LR trams particularly the second of the two carriages. If accidents were to occur, the additional safeguards taken with patrons from sporting events will contrast sharply with the lack of care / supervision provided for school children.

iii. Unknown that might exacerbate risk for school children crossing tram tracks

It is proposed in the modification document that trams will run every 4 minutes during the 7 AM to 7 PM time slot. Two 33m trams coupled together can move around 450 passengers. However, what is not known in terms of the MP stop and the transfer of school children from SBHS and SGHS is whether trams will arrive at the MP stop having already picked up passengers (particularly University of NSW where it is expected many will want to take the LR). If so, trams will arrive crowded making it more likely that school children will take shortcuts or additional risks to access the limited seats remaining rather than follow an orderly crossing from the schools to the LR station. An orderly crossing is more likely to happen if students know that they will be able to access empty trams and so be efficiently transferred to Central as happens at present with the bus arrangement.

iv. Suggested changes that would address part or all of the school Council's concern

1. Stairs should be built from the overpass to allow the students to access directly the MP LR stop rather than requiring the students to walk the length of the overpass and then walk back to the MP LR stop by crossing tram tracks.

2. Provision is made to open one of the subway crossings closest to the overpass to allow students to use the underpass at peak school times (in the AM and PM). At non-peak school times, the risk for much smaller numbers of students crossing via the tram lines will be significantly reduced although not excluded.

3. Additional LR staff are provided to supervise students in the AM and PM peak times. Many of these school children live in distant parts of Sydney so failing to connect with their trains at Central station will encourage them to take risks to catch the LR tram.

4. Clarification is needed on the logistics for student transfer e.g. whether the same effort made at sporting events to move large numbers by starting with empty trams at the MP station will be made to ensure an effective and rapid transfer of students during the morning and afternoon peak times. For the former, the additional trams will need to start from Central railway station.