Sydney CBD Light Rail

The Eastern suburbs had a light rail before and it was removed. Why make the mistake twice? The area is conjested now, why add to it. We don't need more high rise buildings and we don't need the light rail and more pollution. We need a healthy clean and green environment to live in. They brought in the M30 bus and Coogee beach is now off limits to local residents. We can't get a parking in the weekends. When they bring in the light rail we won't be able to use the parks too. Just improve the buses for the local residents i.e. more frequent buses.

I am a resident in the area and am concerned over three principal aspects:

My first concern is regarding safety and support to access the Light rail vehicles for anyone with mobility difficulties such as persons in wheelchairs, parents with prams, aged persons with slow gait.

My second concern is
the loss of visual amenity through the removal of trees and the impact on the environment through the higher temperatures experienced through the loss of the shade and protectrion provided by these trees. Although there is the commitment to plant trees to compensate for the loss of the current mature trees, the location for the plantings is not stated and the time until such trees reach maturity is not stated. Nor is there a suitable way for providing for the view and protection.

My third concern is the disruption to traffic flow throughout the construction period as the roads are already congested and, as I understand it, on-going increases throughout the time period caused by the population growth, construction projects etc.

I am happy with having light rail but have major concerns with the proposed CESRL as set out in the EIS. In particular:
1. Loss of transport options for Surry Hills residents
2. The speed/frequency of light rail vehicles proposed for transit through SH.
The EIS for the Eastern suburbs light rail claims that it will be good for businesses, for transport to and from UNSW the Entertainment Quarter and adjoining sports facilities. What it fails to do is make a case that it will be of significant benefit to the community of Surry Hills. Mention is made of consultation with some residents/community groups in SH, though not with the City of Sydney for Surry Hills, nor of the considerable resident opposition to the route chosen through SH, and gives unsubstantiated reasons for dismissing the possible alternative option of a cut and cover tunnel up Foveaux Street. My particular objections and proposals are as follows:
1. In section EIS 4.20 the Ward Park stop location is identified as good for Crown Street and surrounding business. But Ward Park is too far away for many residents of SH living in the area of SH bounded by Crown, Bourke, Devonshire and Oxford Streets. Combined with proposed bus cancellations 374, 343 etc on Flinders and Fitzroy Streets transport options will be severely curtailed leaving no net benefit at all for transport to the city and out to Randwick, Kingsford and the beaches.
A second light rail stop must be established, preferably near or at the intersection with South Dowling street.

This is an area that according to EIS Section 4.3.2 re the alignment from Bourke St to Moore Park, is proposed as the route for SH that '.. [will pass] through the centre of Wimbo park and Olivia Gardens complex directly affecting all infrastructure in the complex and southern part of the Langton car park.' In this position a second stop would open up the option to use the CESLR to access Central/ CBD, and to Moore Park and further afield for residents living at a distance from Ward Park.
2. The speed and frequency proposed for the CESLR as it travels through SH is unacceptable. Already SH is bounded by the traffic sewer (Cleveland Street) on the south and by the Eastern Distributor on the eastern side. Now what is proposed is an industrial scale conveyor belt through the heart of SH. EIS Section 5.1 states trams will be travelling through every 2-3 mins at peak periods from the CBD to Moore Park, and other sections of the EIS state they will travel at greater speed through SH than elsewhere on its route. This proposal is incompatible with an area that is mainly residential and heavily trafficked by pedestrians and cyclists.
To mitigate this effect it is essential that speed and frequency are compatible with the mostly residential environment.
To ensure this:
* Light rail vehicles must be no longer than 29m if travelling through residential areas at the surface level.
* Speed must be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street.
* The frequency of the vehicles must be limited to a minimum of a 5 minutes gap in both directions.

Greg Lenthen
15 Robertson Rd
Centennial Park 2021
[email protected]
02 9663 4858

13 December 2013

The Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Submission Regarding CBD and South East Light Rail

The question is: why?
Why spend hundreds of millions of dollars on light rail in an area of Sydney's south east already well served by buses when the city's south west and north west are crying out for better public transport?
Why go to the expense of an entirely new mode of transport without investigating what can be achieved by upgrading those existing bus services?
What is the expected improvement in service - in speed and/or passengers carried - that would justify not only the financial cost, but the loss of parkland and the disruption (even demolition) in established residential areas?
Finally, who or what is the driving force behind the south eastern stretch of the light rail? (Certainly not public demand.) The answer seems implicit in the planned route which shows the light rail running without a stop from the SFS/SCG complex to the Randwick Racecourse - a distance of no less than three kilometres. So, the light rail is proposed to serve two large sporting complexes while ignoring demand from everything in between, including Centennial Park, Moore Park, the Entertainment Quarter, and last - and apparently least - local residents.
It says a great deal about the level of thought - or lack of it - given this project that it could reach the stage of an EIS while completely bypassing the demand from so many interests along its route.
Back to drawing board, please, or, better still, straight into the bin.
Yours Sincerely,
Greg Lenthen

Date: 13/12/2013

Ms Ingrid Ilias
Department of Planning and Infrastructure
23-33 Bridge Street
Sydney NSW 2000

Dear Ms Ilias,

Re: Submission on CBD and South East Light Project

Thank you for inviting submissions on the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the CBD and South East Light Rail Project.

As Student Association Officer and representative of students at Randwick TAFE we are very excited about the project and the improved access to the college that it will provide. A large majority of the 8000 students that attend Randwick TAFE use the public transport system and with this number expected to increase over the next few years it is expected that many of our students will benefit from the light rail project.

Randwick TAFE has reviewed the EIS and would like to offer the following recommendations for your consideration:

Alison Road Light Rail Stop
Randwick TAFE recommends that the light rail stop at Alison Rd incorporate the names Royal Randwick Racecourse and Randwick TAFE. This would clearly indicate the two major destinations that the stop services which would benefit both the students at Randwick TAFE as well as the broader community.

General Transport Management and Impacts
In order to improve access as well as safety Randwick TAFE recommends constructing a footbridge across Alison Rd from the stop to the College. The road is a six lane thoroughfare and such infrastructure would not only benefit students at Randwick TAFE but also those people attending large events at the racecourse, particularly events like the Melbourne Cup when crowd movement becomes chaotic and hazardous.

Yours sincerely

Rachel Crooks
Student Association Officer
Sydney TAFE, Randwick College

I do not agree with the CSELR as per the CSELR EIS because the community concerns not genuinely engaged. Information from Transport NSW confusing and inconsistent. At the least times should be limited to 5.30 to 2330. Continuous rail along Devonshire to eliminate sound of wheels. No overhead cables in Devonshire, base constructed to eliminate vibration. Significant screening in residential areas must take place. Frequency of LVR to be limited to 5 min gap to allow pedestrians and cycles to pass safely. All power lines to be underground to allow for trees. Visitor, commercial and special access parking permits.

Hi there,

I am writing to support option 1b for the light rail project, together with option 1a. They have the straightest run, there for resulting in less noise and impacts.

In my opinion the road traffic through Kingsford to the CBD already requires a light rail so I do not support an insistence on the light rail being accompanied by an Urban Activation Precenct.

I don't support the submission asking for the rail project to be heavy rail. Instead I say upgrade the underground line to the airport from the city so it can carry heavy freight - after that the airport line could be extended to the sea port.

Hi there,

I am writing to support option 1b for the light rail project, together with option 1a. They have the straightest run, there for resulting in less noise and impacts.

Subject
Issue
EIS Coverage/Response

Worthiness
It is incredible to all Melbournians (whose central universities and sports grounds are well provided for) that access to such important public locations as Moore Park, the SCG, UNSW and Randwick Racecourse are only now being addressed.
The integration with heavy rail stations and ferries should help Kensington and Randwick residents. However, I couldn't find any references to improvements to city wide public transport other than fewer peak hour buses in George St

The construction timetable shows that it won't be available till 2020. Why isn't it being fast tracked? I hope I live long enough to use it.

The "average Melbournian" was always meant to be a man on the Prahran tram. Perhaps we will create an average Sydneysider?

Size of EIS
Asking people to comment on a document of over 500 pages is a joke.

There should be a comprehensive index to help the keen reader.
Hopefully the extensive community consultation already carried out on a neighbourhood basis will have alerted local residents.

Light Rail Stops
Always a difficult problem with maintaining through traffic, providing a safety refuge, pedestrians crossing from pavement to stop. The stops will reduce parking spaces and the line will reduce traffic lanes significantly.
The EIS provides good details of each stop particularly access from the street system. I remain to be convinced about impacts from passing traffic. I can but assume ticketing will be easy at the station or even Opal tickets could be in place.

Right of Way
Trams delay all other traffic particularly on shared roadways with their immovable location, lack of signalling, priority cross access required for all passengers and their slow transit speeds.
The EIS blandly says "that traffic impacts will be local and not even regional".

The system only two section with a separate right of way. Through Moore Park (using the existing bus bypass routes) and by excluding traffic from George Street.

Will motorists be banned from driving on the tracks in the other streets?

Again not mentioned, I assume the trams will be given right of way at all traffic lights and other intersections.

Breakdowns
Rescuing broken down trams is important as they only ever break down during peak hours.
All breakdowns must get back to the Randwick depot and I assume they have provided the necessary cross-overs as well as either towing trams or tow trucks to move the trams.

Benefit Cost analysis
Most public transport projects need taxpayer help. The project proponent should be upfront about this.
The so-called economic analysis contains only motherhood judgements. There are no costings, planned expenditure and although beneficiaries are identified, no monetary benefits are presented. Likewise, the level of cross subsidiary is not shown nor are likely fares indicated.

These are serious omissions as alternatives (such as improved bus routes) haven't been evaluated.

Donald J Macleod
59A Beaconsfield Road
Chatswood, NSW, 2067
Phone 02 94117052
Email [email protected]

Message protected by CleanMail: e-mail anti-virus, anti-spam and content filtering.
http://www.pacific.net.au/security/cleanmail/

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:
Objections:

Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:



Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking


If the project is to proceed we request that:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
The route of the light rail through Wimbo Park / Olivia Gardens is along the Central route
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
The speed must be restricted to a maximum of 20kmph through this section
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

This has the potential to ruin my business. - I have a client base of 75 % that come from surrounding suburbs and use cars. Its ridiculous to remove that number of parking spots. Surry hills doesn't have enough as it is now.

Also 150 trees? how can any serious human approve the removal of that many beautiful trees. Its on of the things that make surry hills such a beautiful suburb. There a million things Sydney needs before this. a million things the money could be better spent, this rail is a short term solution to a long term problem, also as a side note - there is nothing wrong with people walking to Randwick. God knows they all need it.

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:


Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking


If the project is to proceed then at a minimum the following should be applied:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

My serious concerns for family living along the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:

Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking

If the project is to proceed then at a minimum the following should be adhered to:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:


Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking

If the project is to proceed then at a minimum the following should be adhered to:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:


Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking


If the project is to proceed then at a minimum the following should be adhered to:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:


Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Acquisition of 69 homes
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Loss of large historic trees
Impact on parklands
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking

If the project is to proceed then at a minimum the following should be adhered to:

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's

First, I note that there are plans to cancel the 377 and 376 service along Oberon st.. Whilst there may be a light rail option at the randwick interchange this does not negate the need for a bus service that runs along oberon st and goes to the city and vice versa. You cannot expect people to walk to the interchange if they do not live close enough to walk

Secondly, a service to and from the city CBD (not referring to the central area) must be better than the current service. So not having to get off and change at the new randwick light rail terminal on the way to and from work at circular quay is a necessity.

By placing the light rail terminal at high cross park what are the impacts on coogee bay rd traffic. Specifcally I would not want to see the current high volume of coogee bay rd traffic forced onto quiet streets such as Rainbow St.

I wish to voice my opposition for the proposed design of the CBD and South East Light Rail project (CSELR) as described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) dated November 2013. I do not agree with the proposal as stated in the EIS document.

My concerns in relation to the CSELR project and the EIS, with particular interest with the Surry Hills to Moore Park West route, are summarised below:

Lack of business case for overall project and cost benefit of possible routes through Surry Hills
Devonshire street is not capable of being the spine of the SE Network / not sustainable
Vastly superior alternative routes has been identified - Foveaux and Devonshire sub-surface
No genuine community consultation has been engaged in.
Unacceptable noise levels, and times through a densely populated suburb
Size, speed and frequency of the light rail vehicles (LRV's)
Construction impact on small businesses and residents
Road closures during and post construction
Dislocation of Surry Hills
Loss of Amenity
Traffic congestion
Access to properties along the route - businesses, residents, elderly and disabled
Significant devalue on properties along the route with no compensation from the Government
Loss of car parking

Should the project be given the go ahead, then I would request :

The LRV's are no longer than 29m long if traveling through residential areas at the surface level. If the LRV"s are longer than 29m, then they are only to travel along specifically tailored routes (such as a sub-surface or tunnel) and or dedicated rights of way (not on residential streets).
Speed to be reduced to 20km from South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Street
Operational times through Surry Hills must limited to 05:30 to 23:30
No light rail movement between 23.30 and 5.30
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap of both LRV's
Noise and vibration levels delivered well within the EPA guidelines
Continuous rail to reduce noise at expansion joints to be used between South Dowling Street to Elizabeth Streets
Maximum noise reducing beds to be installed below the tracks
Base to be constructed in a way that limits vibration
Significant screening in residential areas must take place
All parklands should be replaced 1:1 with improvements on facilities
The Government has suggested they will replace trees 1:7 - this should be enforced with a at least 1:10 in the Surry Hills area
Light rail and electrical cables to be placed underground to reduce the visual clutter and enable trees to be planted to replace those being cut down
All substations must be below ground
Those residents financially impacted by the development of the light rail should be compensated for the loss of value; including acquisition and properties along the route affected.
Genuine consultation with business owners and operators about the construction of the light rail, with immediate support in the event of an incident.
Compensation to business for loss of income due to the construction and long-term impact of the light rail.
Compensation for all those residents living on Devonshire Street or on street level where the route passes in front of their residence
The frequency of LRV's should be limited to a minimum of 5 minutes to ensure a suitable gap to allow pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles to cross in safety
Resident/Commercial Only spaces in selected areas and temporary parking permits for the occasional visitors of residents and also for tradespeople. This allows those that have a genuine need to park in the area - residents and businesses - greater access to dedicated parking.
The safety issues need to be fully reviewed by independent consultants and the full reports made available
Frequency limited to a minimum of 5 minutes gap between both LRV's