North West Rail Link - Civil Works

My wife and I own a house at 2 Brisbane Road, Castle Hill.
This property is just off Old Northern Road and adjacent to the site where the Castle Hill station is to be located.
We are retired and this house is is rented out, providing us with income.
We are very concerned that we will experience great difficulty in finding and keeping tenants once the construction activities of the station and tunneling commences, due to -
- the noise,
- the vibrations,
- the dust, and
- the increased level of traffic from those activities.
We have read that measures will be taken around the construction site to address these issues, but we request particularly that further noise mitigation materials be supplied for inside and around our house.
It is likely that it will become quite difficult to drive out of Brisbane Road into Old Northern Road with the extra traffic. Hence we request that traffic lights be installed at that corner to alleviate that problem.

Further to my brief feedback on North West Rail Link-Submission Report of January 2011,I am making this Submission about the North West Rail Link-EIS Major Civil Construction Work.
1) Of the total 23 Kms Rail alignment proposed which passes through three different Local Government areas,the first 15 Kms between Epping and Bella Vista (6 Stations) is to be in two underground rail tunnels,followed by 4Kms of above ground Skytrain viaduct and a combination of construction methods from Rouse Hill to a Stabling facility.
I wish to commend your decision to include my request in my January 2011 Submission to safeguard future Parramatta to Epping Rail link through the now proposed two additional new tunnel stubs re. 1.2 (Page 10) and a Cavern to allow trains to crossfrom one track to another at the Epping Service Facility at Beecroft Road.In a similar way,I would suggest that the section of the Third Track (Freight Corridor) from Epping be safeguarded and linked at Pennant Hills Road via a Tunnel link near the intersection of the proposed twin Tunnel with Pennant Hills Road terminating at Thornleigh.Noise pollution and Vibration nuisence could be minimised through such a proposed short tunnel link.The Three Railway Stations can be by- passed by the Freight Trains at no inconvenience but with significant savings.
2)Construction traffic MANAGEMENT.The tunnel boring machines working from Cherrybrook along Epping Decline
(6Kms)can be engaged on Saturday (whole day)as Hornsby Council permits construction work on Saturdays as well and by a judicious choise of Operations,dust could be reduced as well as construction traffic using the Road Network.
3)Construction Noise and Vibrations.The Acoustic shed-tunnelling and concrete plants are a welcome measure throughout the period of operations.Noise barriers,noise attenuation measures and Ground-borne vibration reduction measures should be installed and maintained - before during and after site operations,to minimise the environmental impacts on a continuing basis,with Information to amoeliorate being made available anytime to the Residents and Public. Air borne noise arising from construction and material haulage/transport should be managed as appropriate to the weather.
4)Environment ,Ecology &Sustainability- Reuse of salvaged construction materials,the adoptation of Renewable resources technology such as Solar panels and Wind Turbines mounted on Rail Station buildings proposed west from Norwest and along the Skytrain route cannot be over emphasised and adopted for the benefit of the Future generations.The need to protect flaura and fauna along the route and Heritage conservation of significant and Historic buildings should be inbuilt. and integrated in EIS 2.
5)Climate Change-Due to the expected long duration of construction and operation of this project,the climate variables,emission changes the assesment of climate change and Risks are difficult, but nevertheless needs to be accounted for under Legislative requirements.
6) Cumulative Impacts-The assessment of potential cumulative impacts viz.External,Internal and Additional Impact Areas will need to be managed and mitigated through an Environmental Management Framework and for clarity I have included the proposed Freight Rail Link for consideration.
Please keep me informed of the outcome and EIS 2.

Dear Sir,


This submission is formally in response to NWRL Environmental Impact Statement 1 and our earnest request that NWRL EIS2:

1. will not incorporate the utilisation of Robert Rd as access / feeder road into the new station; and

2. will incorporate a structure that utilises the Additional Construction Zone so as to shield the Robert Road residents from visual, acoustic and congestion impacts resulting from the Cherrybrook Railway Station - both during construction and when it is operational.

We are disappointed in the adverse impact and the detrimental effect this change will have on our quiet neighbourhood (we live in Louise Way, off Robert Road). None of this was anticipated when the NWRL was announced.

I would respectfully direct you to seriously read and consider the submissions from the Robert Road Action Group and also the objections and detailed study of the surrounding area, with his alternative suggestions for improvement, from Mr Mal Bargh and Linda Casey (#2 Louise Way). These are well written and considered.

Robert Road contains several community `ways' with very limited parking - this has caused congestion on Robert Road (which is only wide enough for 3 cars) and many near accidents as cars are forced to the wrong side of the road. There is poor visibility of on-coming traffic especially at the turns each end of Robert Road (off Castle Hill Road and off John Road). I take great care on our road as I find it almost one of the most dangerous to drive on (my near misses in recent weeks - someone doing a U-turn at the top of Robert Road less than 5 metres from the corner of Castle Hill Road and a P-Plater cutting the corner diagonally coming from John Road into Robert Road when I had been forced to the right side of the road due to 2 parked cars) . It would be ludicrous to heavily increase use of Robert Road as a feeder road when there are better ways available.

Both submissions have proposed effective and efficient alternatives. Please consider these carefully to avoid destroying the very nice neighbourhood that we have enjoyed for more than 20 years.

The Cherrybrook `Station in the Forest' should be something we look forward to as a benefit.

Regards,

Chris & Michael Briggs

SUBMISSION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE PROPOSED NORTH WEST RAIL LINK


Name: John Glasson
Address: 67C Boronia Place Cheltenham NSW 2119

Application Number: SSI-5100


I am writing to present my views on the proposal to utilise the bushland around the Conservation Reserve for roadworks and access to the NWRL tunnel on a temporary or permanent basis. As a local resident of some 30 years using this area on a very frequent basis I believe it is important to express my view before the matter is finalised.


This area has been used for generations of local residents for recreation and bushwalking in a natural environment that is home to many wildlife species. It also carries a lot of foot traffic from school children, young families, dog walkers, elderly people and other community members for a variety of purposes.


C


The general area around Cheltenham Oval has already endured the reclaiming of land for the M2, its recent widening (still in progress) and the accompanying intrusion of the road system into Devlins Creek and the bushland. To further reduce the area of natural bush and recreation space will permanently damage the area and its tranquillity.


The loss of the netball courts for local and nearby youth and as a family gathering place is a further intrusion into sporting facilities in a locality that does not have alternatives close by. As a resident I often pass through this land and see the pleasure so many derive from the wonderful bushland setting for their recreation and relaxation. This would be lost forever if the proposal goes ahead as proposed, just as has already been experienced since the M2 was built and recently with the widening.


I have reviewed the need for the NWRL and am a strong supporter of the project if it can be funded. However, if access to the tunnel is required in the general vicinity of Cheltenham Oval I think a better solution would be to have the access from a superior road such as the M2 leaving the local traffic to the already overworked and narrow Castle Howard/Murray Farm/ Kirkham Streets. These streets are already taking a large volume of peak hour traffic coming from other suburbs as commuters try to avoid various routes to get across Epping to or from Eastwood & Pennant Hills areas. Putting large dump trucks and other heavy vehicles into the mix is going to exacerbate the dangers caused to the large number of children walking to the local schools such as Cheltenham Girls High, Epping Heights Primary and the stations & bus stops to other destinations. This solution leaves the bushland intact and may avoid the loss of the netball courts.


I would appreciate it if my concerns are considered before a decision is finalised in this aspect of the project.


Yours sincerely

John Glasson
67C Boronia Place
Cheltenham NSW 2119

Mob: 0434 947 190

I am writing with concern regarding the proposed construction of roads through the bushland of Castle Howard Conservation Reserve to Kirkham Street (for purpose of emergency access).

I feel that not only constructing access through here would disrupt the peaceful and rich bushland, with its unique flora and fauna, but using access on a local street such as Kirkham Street would cause many disruption to our local traffic should emergency vehicles and heavy trucks need to access this road.

Kirkham street is already a busy thoroughfare for people wanting to access Beecroft Road, and on peak hour, it is already becoming congested without the help of the slow Beecroft Road traffic.

I feel other option should be investigated where minimal disruption to local residents as well as minimal harm to nature should be considered.

I support the project, however I do not support the proposed access to the Cheltenham work site from Kirkham Road.

The bushland strip along the M2 corridor provides a continuous green belt between the M2 and the residential areas of Cheltenham and Beecroft. Utilising the belt for a two lane permanent access road would significantly reduce its amenity.

In this case, there is an identified alternative available through access ramps from the M2. The M2 is also preferable as it would remove heavy truck movements from Kirkham and Beecroft roads. Returning to Beecroft road along Kirkham road necessitates a steep incline that would increase the impact on local residents from heavy trucks movements.

Whilst the M2 access will also necessitate some impact on the bushland, this will be relatively minor - particularly in light of the current roadworks that have already impacted the M2 verge.

I urge the project to consider utilising the M2 on the basis of it maintaining the bushland amenity and also providing heavy vehicle access to the site through non-residential streets.

Attention: Director Infracture Projects R J Doyle

Re: NSW Transport North West Rail Link 5 Louise Way

Environmental Impact Statement 1 Cherrybrook NSW

Application No SS1 5100 2126


NWRL

CHERRYBROOK POST CONSTRUCTION WORKS


I refer to the above referenced project and in particular to the Suggestion by NWRL for Robert Road to become a feeder road into the new Cherrybrook Railway Station during the next stage of the planning

Following a meeting with NWRL on Thursday 19th April 2012 at the Public Exhibition Centre at Castle Hill, it was suggested by representatives of the NWRL, that post construction of the Cherrybrook Railway Station that the Additional Construction Zone would be utilised to increase the footprint of the Cherrybrook Railway Station precinct. They further suggested that Robert Road could then be used as a "Feeder Road" for buses and general traffic to access the new train station.

It would appear that the people who made this proposal have not carried out a due diligence regarding the referenced utilisation of Robert Road. If they had done so they would have questioned the width of the road which is reduced to one lane when parking takes up some considerable space. I myself have on many occasions had to stop and let oncoming traffic pass to enable me to carry on as the road is just too narrow. In addition to this, there is a children's playground further down Robert Road there is also a dog leg in the road opposite the children's playground. The dogleg has been positioned that way due to the creek which runs beneath the road. Hornsby Council have been approached previously to have this dogleg straightened but found it to be impractical as to rectify the situation would also necessitate major construction works as the drains beneath would also have to be rerouted. As the current situation exists at the dogleg in the road, the road at this point is marked with a double line in the centre of the road. Small cars have difficulty navigating this section of the road without crossing the marked lines. The use of buses on this road would have no chance of navigating the dogleg without crossing over the double lines and would thus cause accidents. We are also deeply concerned that the existing children's playground opposite Louise Way having heavy buses routed along Robert Road could eventually cause injury or even death to the children in the area. This has been amply demonstrated only this week when a bus ran over a mother and child at Beecroft causing the death of the mother. The problem is that buses are very big, the roads are very small and thus these problems contribute to the fatal accidents.

The use of County Drive which was originally a four lane road and then later reduced to a two lane road should be used for the buses instead of Robert Road. It should be noted that County Drive is already in use for that purpose. There are numerous other reasons that Robert Road should not be considered such as pollution, additional traffic to a minor road and the rerouting of overhead electrical wiring and poles, to cater for the widening of the road and the amount of work required to kerbs and guttering and services beneath the road.

It is suggested that the organisers and designers go back to the drawing board and delete Robert Road and its usage for consideration as a feeder road to the proposed Cherrybrook NWRL



Yours Faithfully

R. J. Doyle

A concerned resident.

Hello,

I support this project, because it will improve the transport option within the Sydney basis and helps ameliorate Sydney's dependence upon
road-based transport.

Specific comments in relation to this project:

1) Operational integration:
a) As proposed, this project is poorly linked to the existing suburban
rail network. This is a significant design flaw as this line will not
exist in isolation. Linking directly into the Epping-Chatswood line is
logical, however, the capacity constrains between Chatswood and Sydney
CBD will seriously compromise the effectiveness of the north-west line.
I believe this line must be linked to the Main North line to allow
through traffic between the new line and Strathfield, this will provide
necessary flexibility to provide a good service to the city, in spite of
what other changes are/are not made to the remainder of the network.
This connection can be made south of Epping station (the poorer option)
or as a direct result of joining the Main North line near Beecroft (see
my point 2.

b) The end of the new line is so close to the Richmond line that a
connection appears imperative; integration is the key. History strongly
suggests that the failure to build and link now will make it far less
likely that an link will be built in future; and if it is, the loss of
cost synergies result in a far poorer outcome.

2) Alignment
a) The decision to underground the new line directly from Epping is a
poor option:
- More tunnelling equals far greater expense
- Longer heavy grades result
- It compromises Sydney-bound links to the Main North line
- Longer stretches of tunnel compromise operation because of safety
considerations
- Passengers really like daylight, they will appreciate the break from
tunnels
The time saving of the direct tunnel does not offset the costs above,
especially in regard to tunnelling. No doubt there is a long list of
projects in NSW from which there would be a far better return from the
cheaper alternative; not least an extension of this new line to the
Richmond line.
The objections of people adjacent the Main North line are not the
dominant consideration; quadruplication of the line between Epping and
Hornsby has long been an aspirational goal - consider the newer road
overbridges at Cheltenham and Thornleigh - and the extra freight line
about to be constructed will see change on the Epping-Beecroft stretch,
regardless of the NWRL choice.

3) Station access
a) Build stations as close to the surface as possible (that appears to
be the case from designs)
b) Make pedestrian access from street to platform as direct and quick as
possible
c) If and where possible, can you use underground/above ground bus
access roads to bring transferring bus passengers as close as possible
to platforms? Convoluted and long transfers are nuisance and should be
avoided to the greatest extent possible. Bus stops immediately
above/below platforms with a flow of step of bus, almost straight
through barriers and a short stair/escalator trip to the platform would
be ideal.

4) Operation
a) Build a fast railway. the Epping-Chatswood line was spruiked as
115km/h, but is an 80km/h railway. Train speed and overall speed are
important in making the railway competitive.

5) Ambiance
a) Where possible, admit natural light to underground stations
b) Use natural vegetation if possible within stations. A lost
opportunity were hanging gardens in the Epping-Chatswood station entry
shafts. At least worth trialling.
c) Artwork, especially sculpture, should be incorporated where possible
to improve the ambiance of the line. Mosaics are attractive. Provide
ownership through the work of local residents. Significant items are
good, but it's the small works too - the 'little working men' on some
New York City Subway stations are a good example:

http://mta.info/mta/aft/permanentart/permart.html?agency=nyct&line=A&station=4&xdev=198

See:
A Line, 14th Street station
A Line, Canal Street station
...and many other wonderful examples on this webpage.


Thankyou for considering my comments; all the best for the process.

Regards

Chris Downs
0409 543 126

Attention: Director, Infrastructure Projects,

I wish to make a submission on the EIS for the Northwest Rail Link.

1. The proposed Hill Centre station is situated in the wrong location because it will not benefit the Industrial area between Cattai Creek and Windsor road. The heavy traffic in the area is due to people accessing and leaving their place of work located within these boundaries.Local residents will have access to the Castle Hill station located approx. one kilometre away.
Relocation of the Hills Centre station to within the Industrial area would see the rail link utilised more.

2. The proposed access/egress road , from the Hills Centre Station site, intersection with Showground Road at the MacDonald Bridge is ill thought out when you look at the structure of Showground road. Traveling West from Gilbert road, Showground road curves to the left and
is down hill. Traffic will have just left the lights at the intersection of Gilbert and Showgrond Roads to be confronted with a set of lights and heavy
trucks at the end of a blind curve. It is a similar situation when traveling east from Victoria Ave towards Gilbert Road , a down hill slope with a right curve.
Traffic along Shownground Road is congested enough at any time let alone with another proposed intersection.
It would be far better to have the access/egress road intersect with Gilbert and Showground Roads. This would provide access/egress for heavy vehicles, would create less congestion, would allow truck East or West egress/access and would alleviate the need for bridge works.

In the long term, it would provide a permanent access for commuters to/from the proposed Rail station. With careful planning there is ample room in the Showground complex to provide this facility without causing disruption to organisation currently within the area.

regards,
Chris Stanley
Ph: 02 9634 7642

The suburb of Cheltenham has taken more than its share of the burden of the North West Rail Link (and the M2 and freight line). Taking our bushland as well is too tragic. As a family we often walk through these bushland tracks and enjoy the environment.

Thank you.

S. McAlister
2/202 Beecroft Road
Cheltenham. 2119

To whom it may concern.

Whilst we appreciate the need for progress, we strongly object to precious & scarce areas of bushland being destroyed, & moving heavy vehicles onto local roads, which will cause unnecessary overload .

Heather & Jack Smallbone

( Cheltenham)

I wish to strongly oppose the option proposing to have heavy vehicles moving from Cheltenham Oval to Kirkham St and Castle Howard Rd.These roads are narrow and are heavilly used by local and through traffic.The proposal to build a connecting road through the adjacent bushland is strongly opposed by the local community.You might recall the demonstrations that took place when the M2 was planned through the same bushland.
It makes far greater sense to use the alternative route via the M2 and I strongly support this option just as I strongly support the priority given to the Norwest Rail Link.

Trevor Clark
92 Lamorna Ave Beecroft 2119

I object strongly to the planned access road planned for nwrl
Sent from my HTC Incredible S on Yes Optus network.

Attention: Director, Infrastructure Projects



Re: North West Rail Link - Environmental Impact Statement 1



SSI-5100



We have our concerns about some of the proposal.



We live next to where Cherrybrook station will be built. We are concerned about:



The height of the wall to be built next to our fence - how seemly it will be and will the concrete fence be removed after the project has finished
The volume of noise coming from the site
The level of dust coming from the site
Effects of building the rail station on the foundations and the fabric of our home
The level of truck movements - especially going down Franklin Road
The initial two week 24/7 operations that will occur
The effects it will have upon our sleep and rest and provisions made for this
Street safety for our children, who attend a school within walking distance, children in Kayla Way and those attending local schools
Home price values - we have just purchased our home
Behind the Kayla Way fence line, will there be extensive landscaping between us and the car park for the railway station? We desire this
Is it possible for the site office to remain far enough away from the back of Kayla Way to leave established trees there?




We are very concerned about the village and semi rural look and feel of the area remaining at the completion of the project

We have a music teaching practice at home and we are concerned about the effects this will have





Gerard and Andrea Calilhanna

2 Kayla Way

Cherrybrook NSW 2137

M (Gerard) 0417 487 844

There must be NO PAVED ROAD through our bushland reserve.

Use the M2 for access. The NSW Government owns the roadspace.
Transurban has a tolling concession only.

We are not prepared to tolerate any more attacks on the environmental
integrity of this district. You have done enough damage to us already
with your M2 Upgrade and it is bitterly resented.This comment includes
your rail freight track.

Dr John L Goldberg
Former Honorary Associate
The University of Sydney


----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Application No.: SSI-5100

Dear Sir/Madam

I would prefer the option for access of heavy construction vehicles to the site to be via the M2. By widening the breakdown lane of the M2 from 2 metres to 3 metres for 150 metres it would allow trucks to enter and 150 metres to leave the site safely. The M2 is designed to accommodate heavy trucks whereas our local roads around Cheltenham are not. It would keep the noise and pollution from heavy trucks further away from residences. It would preserve the Blackbutt Gully Forest in Castle Howard Conservation Reserve from being ruined.

Yours faithfully
Miriam Bakker
30B Castle Howard Road
Cheltenham. NSW. 2119

I have recently become aware that there are two options proposed to provide access for heavy construction vehicles for the North West Rail Link.

I strongly support the option of providing this access by building ramps from the M2 motorway.

I strongly oppose the alternate option, whereby a road would be built through bushland reserve, to emerge at Kirkham Street (a local road system, unsuitable for heavy vehicle traffic).

As a long-time resident of Beecroft/Cheltenham, I have over the years watched the gradual removal and degradation of precious local bushland and native forests. The bushland reserve under consideration was seriously affected by a section being sacrificed for part of the M2 construction in the mid 1990's, much to the detriment of the local and wider community, and to wildlife and plant species. The remaining area is greatly valued by the local community, and we have a duty to protect it.

This location also includes sporting facilities (netball courts in particular) which are heavily used. These two suburbs have very few local sports fields (and these were also adversely affected by the M2 construction works). If these facilities are to be affected or lost by the provision of NWRI heavy vehicle access, then there should be a guarantee that they will be replaced

Yours sincerely

Kerrin Parry
25A Beecroft Road
BEECROFT NSW 2119

Attention: Director, Infrastructure Projects
Application Number: SSI-5100



We wish to state our very strong objection to the siting of the proposed Cheltenham Intermediate Services Facility for the North West Rail Link.

The initial notification by letter, dated 21st December 2011, stated that the facility was to be sited "next to the netball courts at Cheltenham Oval, Castle Howard Road." On reviewing the Environmental Impact Statement, the proposed facility has expanded considerably to destroy both community amenity and a significant amount of bushland. The original notification then went on to say "the netball courts are an important community facility. Upgraded netball courts will be available for the community's use when construction is complete." There is no indication of this in the EIS provided by your community liaison officer. The North West Rail Link Services Facility site includes the only major sports facility and children's play ground used by numerous schools, sporting groups, local residents and young families. It is reprehensible to remove such a significant community amenity in an area largely lacking in quality accessible facilities.

We are very proud of our remaining local bushland area. The area in question consists of Blackbutt Gully Forest and is in good condition; it was gazetted a reserve over 100 years ago. The bushland should not be destroyed nor access created via any section of Castle Howard Road to the proposed facility. We have already seen the destruction of bushland in this area caused by the initial construction and recent extension of the M2.

We are also concerned about the visual pollution and noise pollution. To even consider a 24/7 air ventilation system in a residential area and immediately adjacent to houses, is beyond belief. In addition no mention is made of the extent to which night time lighting will impact upon residents. We also feel that excessive noise will be created by vehicles and people working at the facility. Our local road system is completely unsuitable for heavy vehicles and we also feel that noise created by such vehicles would be intolerable.

Considering the difference between the wording of the letter of 21st December 2011, which indicated the facility's temporary nature, and the EIS of April-May 2012, what other changes are likely to be notified which will further impact on residents?
THIS FACILITY SHOULD NOT BE BUILT HERE!



Margaret Findlay
Ailsa Relf
Elizabeth Relf

40 Castle Howard Rd, Cheltenham NSW 2119

There are two options under consideration in the EIS for the access of heavy construction vehicles to the NWRL site. One is to build on and off ramps from the M2 Motorway which is next to the site. This is my strongly preferred option.


Lee Owens
106 Chapman Ave
Beecroft

Cheltenham Services facility. Objection.
>
> Application no. SS1-51000
>
> I oppose the construction of a service facility west of Cheltenham Oval

Reasons

1. I am deeply saddened that it is proposed to demolish (destroy) the recreational facilities west of Cheltenham Oval.
The EIS mentions the netball courts (with a comment that they will be partially restored) but that area is much more than netball courts. It is an area used by a very large number of people, not just locals. As an elderly person I often walk there and see families with small children, using the courts to practice netball, but also lots of ball games, little children on small bikes, practising tennis on the practise wall , young children in the play area ( swings, climbing frame,) young people in the cricket nets. Families just playing together. It is such a safe area with great facilities for everyone. Weekends are busy with sports, I also often see school groups using Cheltenham Oval and around.

I have been told that It is not intended that Cheltenham Oval is impacted. I find that hard to believe, it will be a large construction site, looking at the diagrams it seems that all public parking will be removed. Often when one member of a family is training on the oval, parents can take smaller children to the other area. I,do not understand why such a good facility is to be destroyed when there are alternatives.

2 I wish to question the location also from its geographical position, so close to Epping, and certainly not midpoint between Epping and Cherrybrook which, it seems to me, would be far more sensible. I understand that a site around the Beecroft Scout Hut, west of Murray Farm road is mid point.

3 Castle Howard Rd is very narrow, especially from OaKlands Rd to the oval. I am concerned for safety reasons that any addition traffic should use that road. Boronia rd which would have to be used for access is also narrow and busy as it is used as a way from Murray Farm Rd to join Beecroft rd where there are traffic lights.

I assume no trees will be lost down Castle Howard Rd (if so then i would strongly object to that) and removal of trees on Murray rd is an enormous loss to an area that has already lost so much bush for the M2. ( I have lived at my address for 25years,)

Both options to get heavy traffic to the site would cause more destruction to the bush. This Saddens me greatly. If the site is chosen (and I really hope that more consideration is given before a final decision is made) then I believe it would be wrong to build a new rd through the bush and that entry and exit using the M2 is the lesser of 2 evils.

4 Impact on local residents.
The impact on the 4 homes adjacent to the proposed site is incalculable. Whilst all the homes around the area will be adversely affected these 4 homes will suffer most. I am particularly sad for them. It is worrying that the whole area will be devalued by this proposal. The monetary implications are worrying . There is no doubt that homes will loose value. Also there will be a change in the character of the location. Many of us lived through the building of the M2 and again now, as it is widened there is much more noise.
I feel extremely depressed that this may be about to start again.

5 Noise. This will be a major problem. I object to any plan to working hours which will impact on residents sleep. Eg before 7am. I object to weekend construction work, everyone deserves some peace.


Conclusion.
I urge you to reassess the plan to demolish excellent recreational facilities and consider a more appropriate site closer to midpoint, with less homes impacted and considerably less people,sports groups,families individuals loosing a place for healthy outdoor activities.

Sent from my iPad