Sydney CBD Light Rail

The light rail project is not going to be an effective solution to congestion issues. First, the tramway wastes lanes of traffic; there are already traffic issues, and the tramway will not adequately make up for the driving space lost. Further, the rigid nature of the tram's route and stops makes it much less pragmatic and usable for locals.

Most importantly, High Cross Park, a Heritage Conservation area and the one spot of greenery in Randwick Junction, will be completely destroyed. Hospital patients will no longer have access to a close park, the Anzac Memorial will lose all gravitas, and trees over 100 years old will be cut down. This is unacceptable. There are much better options for a train termination ground, which have been raised by the Council itself.

I do not agree with the current High Cross Park must not be turned into a termination area. Don't pave paradise and put up a parking lot.

We do need better public transport but at the cost of High Cross Park the only public green space in this part of Randwick, the loss of the beautiful tree's, its a well used area lovely to look at.
With all the high rise buildings, no outside space for must people, we need to hang on to all the green space we can for the sake of peoples mental health, not turn them into concreted areas, There must be another area the lightrail /bus terminal can be situated.

High Cross park could be left untouched if a single track turned north out of High St and terminated against the eastern kerb of Belmore Rd . All car parking would be removed from the kerbs of the triangle Avoca, St , Short St and Belmore Rd.

Terminating buses would drop in Short St, be allocated their next destination and immediately turn left into Belmore to pick up at the north end of the tram terminus. Any bus which needed to have a short layover would rotate around the block and park in Avoca St or on the north side of Short St..

I would like to Strongly Disagree with the Light Rail Scheme for the following reasons:

1) Trees and Randwick Park will be destroyed
2) The destruction of Nature and Mature trees
3) The Light Rail starting from the Royal Hotel will cause
congestion
4) Closing of Lanes will make more traffic congestion
5) Destruction of homes at Surry Hills
6) Less CarParking spots
7) The city Express bus goes faster than the Light Rail

I suggest the following:

Underground train system connecting from Bondi Junction down to La Perouse.

Thank you

I would like to firmly disagree with the Light Rail scheme for the following reasons:

* Destruction of Trees and Park Land along the entire route especially the park at Randwick and Mature trees along Anzac Parade
* Closing of Lanes will increase traffic
* Loss of Car Parking

Would rather a underground train system be implemented that way it does not visually affect our beautiful Sydney.

Thanks a lot

We live directly across High Cross Park, which is like an oasis in the middle of Randwick Junction. Workers from all around enjoy this park over lunch time, and mothers with their prams and young kids enjoy it for picnics and play.

To turn this beautiful, tranquil piece of nature into a tram stop and turn around for trams would be not only shameful, but outright criminal.

We strongly object to the current proposal, and request the planners to come up with an alternative design that does not involve the sacrifice of precious green space and removal of so many trees.

I object to the proposed alignment. In particular the use of Devonshire Street. My concerns about Devonshire between Elizabeth and Marlborough streets is aesthetic. This is one of the more appealing streets in Surry hills that truly feels like a
Village street, given the emphasis of the local council on a city of villages it is disappointing that the destruction of this street is being considered. The removal of 20+ meter trees and replacing them with "advanced growth saplings" where possible is a fairly extreme inequality. The tree canopy through that section is what makes it an attractive street.

My concerns about the proposed route between Marlborough and Bourke Streets is the further division of Surry Hills. The last thing Crown Street needs is further division, there is already a lesser area between Cleveland and Devonshire, putting light rail up Devonshire further cordons that area off.

Furthermore I am concerned about the utility of this mode of transport in the light of the existing Sydney light rail. This was an expensive slow form of transport. While I appreciate that it may be attractive from a planners point of view in terms of moving a high number of people in a given time. It does not appeal to me as a commuter as it will represent an increase in journey time compared to bus, car or bike on the routes I use (Surry Hills to UNSW) at the times I tend to travel (before 8AM and before 4:30PM so outside peak traffic).

I favor the alignment of Foveaux or Albion to Flinders then Anzac parade. These streets do not have the same aesthetic appeal and thus less beauty is lost, furthermore these streets would have less residential impact and are already major bisections of Crown street/Surry Hills. I understand that these routes would be more expensive to construct , however I would be prepared to pay a levy in rates over the next 20 years to offset the cost difference. I reject claims of traffic disruption during construction as irrelevant. This is a project that is supposed to be improving transport in Sydney for 30+ years I would hope that the projects benefits would offset 6-12 months of traffic disruption.

Finally if the alignment must go up Devonshire then I request that green track and overhead wire-free be added as a condition of approval for Devonshire street as a means of minimising the aesthetic impact of this damaging alignment.

I understand there are some concerns with "...green track becoming brown track..." which was expanded to mean watering and feeding concerns for the grass. Surely we have the means to drive a water truck with some liquid fertilizer along the track once a week, or even install some irrigation. This track not uncommon in Europe and it is used in Barcelona, a city that has higher summer average temperatures and half the rainfall of Sydney.

Whilst I appreciate the need for improved infrastructure and transport to many parts of Sydney, the South East Light Rail will not deliver an improved service to many of the current residents. It is a misnomer as it will not address the needs of residents living in the East or the Southern Suburbs.
This project clearly services institutions such as the University of NSW, Royal Randwick Racecourse, the Sydney Cricket Ground and the Sydney Football Stadium. It will deliver large volumes of passengers to these destinations whilst concurrently disadvantaging residents living east of High Cross Park, Randwick and South of " South's Juniors" in Kingsford.
Unless the light rail stops at either the Prince of Wales or Sydney Children's Hospital or alternatively, the Randwick terminus is moved to High St, the light rail will not even service the "Health Precinct" as was promised.
As the EIS does not deal with the realignment of the eastern suburbs bus services, residents and users of these services are left completely in the dark as to how their future journey's will be effected.
One can make assumptions however that their travel and waiting times will be increased greatly.
For example, as per the NSW Transport timetable, the current 373 Coogee to Circular Quay service has passengers completing this journey in 36 minutes. With the light rail, this journey time will be interrupted and lengthened by almost 15 minutes. The new travel time from Randwick to Circular Quay will be 34 minutes (not included in this is the time taken to get from Coogee to Randwick-at least 7 minutes plus a 6 minute wait at the interchange). Passengers will spend more time travelling each day and will have to wait at the interchanges instead of having one continuous journey. This interruption will be detrimental to the elderly, the disabled and those travelling with small children. It is already very awkward travelling on public transport with prams.
It will be very difficult to have to swap modes of transport at the very busy interchange and once again find a place for the pram whilst taking care of vulnerable children.
Has provision been made for adequate seating and toilets for passengers who will be forced to wait.?
Will there be adequate room for prams and wheelchairs?
Will there be safety fences erected to prevent small children wandering into the path of buses and the light rail?
Will there be bike racks provided?

Residents who use the 373 to travel to work at the other major health campus in the east- St Vincent's and Mater Health will also be disadvantaged.
These residents and visitors use the highly patronised 373 service from Coogee and stop at Taylor Square in Darlinghurst. This involves one travel leg. This journey will now involve 3 changes of transport. A bus from Coogee to Randwick, light rail from Randwick to somewhere in Surry Hills/Moore Park and then another bus (if one is provided) to get to Darlinghurst.

Other issues that concern me is the impact on traffic around High Cross Park- already this triangle of traffic is at a standstill particularly in the morning peak hour. This is one of a only a handful of major routes to the city from Randwick.
Cars will need to traverse this area each day- this includes carers taking their children to the many local schools. As most schools do not have a school bus for this purpose, the need for cars will not be diminished by the light rail (or the existing buses) and will need to be taken into consideration.

The obliteration of High Cross Park for the interchange will be a loss for Randwick. It is one of only two parks in the main Randwick shopping district.

Another concern is that passengers have still not been advised whether they will be penalised for having to swap modes of transport. Passengers are being forced to change from a bus to the light rail and then may have to pay for the privilege of doing so.

The current buses that service our community of the south east stop at many locations along their journey. Whilst I appreciate that this may slow the journey somewhat I am concerned that the light rail has so few stops along it's corridor and that Transport for NSW expects the elderly, disabled and young children to traverse these comparatively large distances.

Also, what provisions have been made for when the light rail breaks down-as occurred twice this year?

Finally, the loss of parking along Anzac Parade will be detrimental to the many businesses and their patrons in this busy district. It will result in a desolate and broken landscape simliar to Parramatta Road in Stanmore and Camperdown.

The manner in which the South East Light Rail project has been thrust upon our community has been extremely disappointing. Residents of the south and the east are not solely responsible for the traffic congestion in the CBD yet we will be forced to endure years of disruption, loss of parks, loss of parking and loss of our wonderful bus routes. Representatives of Transport for NSW have not been equipped with the information to deal with the many concerns that I have had stating that such issues will be addressed in the years to come. I find this highly unsatisfactory as once this brief consultation period is over the community will not have a voice.
Thankyou for the opportunity to comment.
Maria Moran

Dear Sir or Madam,

Whilst I support the extension of public transport in general, I strongly object to the current light rail plans through Surry Hills for the following reasons:

1. Choosing a route along a very narrow street, i.e. Devonshire St, defies any logic. I hear the government argue that a tunnel is more expensive; I would like to encourage you to re-check that argument taking into account the likely payment of tens of millions of Dollars for cracked houses on Devonshire St - some houses' front doors will be a mere few metres away from the tram! What will traffic look like on Devonshire St after two tram tracks are added? No parking, a nightmare scenario for residents gaining access to their properties, etc. There is too much traffic on the roads already, so adding traffic to a tiny street will achieve nothing! The government argues that there will be less buses - fine, but how many buses go down Devonshire St today? Only a hand full every day.

2. The required demolition of 69 apartments in Olivia Garden is a nightmare for the 69 families, some at that address for 20 years since the building was constructed. AND THE WORST in all of this is the in my view CRIMINAL CONDUCT of offering TOTALLY RIDICULOUS compensation amounts for the owners and forcing them to go to Court or to accept the pittance offered and moving into much inferior accommodation far away from Surry Hills. The compensation offered is NO WAY NEAR enough to buy something even remotely comparable in Surry Hills. All this in the light of public "servants" making insulting and derogative statements to numerous owners such as "you are a drain on the public purse" when we are talking about people who are forced to make huge sacrifices for the common good (a general principal that I support unless governments abuse this right!). Whoever, if anyone, is reading this PLEASE have a look at the following link: http://youtu.be/FBsrivlojw8 I do hope that Gladys Berejiklian has seen this! We are talking about VOTERS here too!
Maybe common sense does prevail and the government realises that much better routes with no demolition OF LIVES is possible and much preferred by the community.

Kind regards

The current proposal should be modified so that the interchange is located at the top of High Street, Randwick and not adjacent or on High Cross Park which is an invaluable heritage site and should not be developed for this purpose.

Express commuter buses from Coogee to the City should remain regardless of the light rail network.

Further information about the type and location of tree species to replace those removed for the light rail construction process should also be provided prior to commencement.

Of great benefit to all residents in the Eastern Suburbs would be further information about the longer term plans for the extension of the the heavy rail network from Bondi Junction to Randwick, UNSW at Kensington, and its connection with the airport line.

Dear NSW Department of Planning & Infrastructure,

Re the Sydney CBD and South East Light Rail Project design EIS currently on exhibition.

I have been a frequent visitor to Randwick for over 30 years due to family members and friends living in the area. Randwick is like my second home and I am just as concerned for its welfare as family and residents who live there.

Reliable public transport is a good idea for commuters and event attendees if it can help to reduce the number of cars on the road and carbon dioxide emissions.

However with the current design, I have concerns over the impact on the environment, psychological ramifications of both locals and visitors to these areas & the loss of significant historical Indigenous areas.

I would support a review that shows that this Light Rail Project is the most effective solution for managing the projected passenger demands. Especially with the negative impact it will have on the area.

I object to the removal of a large number of mature, healthy trees, in areas such as High Cross Park, Alison Road/Randwick Racecourse, Anzac Parade/Alison Road, and Wansey Road/ Randwick Racecourse.

I object to these trees being removed as they are significant to the aesthetics of these affected suburbs and the well-being of the local and greater communities. The current plan shows a complete lack of empathy with the community at large and a very narrow focus for the future. Mature trees take a long time to grow, and they are not only beautiful to look at, they absorb carbon dioxide and other dangerous gases. The added bonus is that they release oxygen.

I object to removing healthy mature trees that will affect native wild life like the protected and endangered grey-headed flying foxes.

I object to an above ground substation at High Cross Park. Visually it would be ugly and out of place in this highly valued public space. Leave it for the community to enjoy. All parks need to be protected not destroyed. Place the interchange on High Street for easier access to the hospital. Make light rail convenient but not an eye sore.

I object to the light rail on Wansey Road. The trees on Wansey Road are very special and enhance the street and give it character. Why can't the light rail plan utilise some of the Royal Randwick Racecourse? It has been used for the Pope's visit to Sydney, by music festivals, special events. Why can't the people of Randwick and surrounding suburbs have access to it, on a more permanent basis? That way it is helping to support a service that truly benefits the whole community. And saves trees, wildlife and keeps residents happy. Plus the surrounding trees will enhance the visual appeal of the light rail journey for commuters.

I object to the light rail vehicle stabling facility at 66A Doncaster Avenue. It would be better located at the south-eastern corner of Randwick Racecourse.

I object to the loss of 704 on-street parking spaces along Alison Road, Wansey Road, High Street and the broader Kensington-Kingsford precinct. It is already difficult to find a car park in these areas on weekends if you are a non-resident.

I support investigating other alternatives to minimise the loss of parking.

I strongly support more consultations with the community (residents, business and councils) to improve the overall designs and try to work on a solution that significantly reduces the negative impact on the environment and enhances and enriches the communities involved.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely
Marie Antonievich

I am writing to oppose the Central Business and South East Light Rail (CBDSELR) proposal as described in the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) November 2013.

My major concerns are the Surry Hills/Moore Park section.

My concerns are as follows

the lack of consultation with the community before the announcement of the project and the now, the active process of keeping information from the community. This has now reached a level where the public has become suspicious and distrustful of the actions of the parties involved. This is especially relevant to why Devonshire St. was chosen.
this will change the character and destroy the community of this unique inner city suburb.
it will bisect the suburb in two
noise levels will increase in a quiet but populous inner city suburb
create yet another inappropriate above ground transport corridor
loss of 69 homes in the inner city where housing is scarce
demolishing the homes is also unsustainable. Building rubble accounts for 30% of landfill in Australian capital cities
loss of hundreds of trees, many of which are on the historic trees register and will also denude the suburb for years while new ones grow
loss of parklands
impact on businesses during construction
impact on homes and people during construction due to noise, access, dust, traffic and parking chaos and loss of the suburb as they know it. Also many people had to live with the construction of Olivia Gardens which lasted 2 years and now they are to live with demolition of the building. People have also had to live with construction of the Eastern Distributer and the Bourke St cycleway and are now to be subjected to further disruption
traffic congestion during and post construction which does not seem to have been addressed properly in the EIS. When questioned no definite answers could be given to many queries on street access and traffic plans
the `passing of the buck' of departments involved when asked questions
loss of parking
no consideration to loss of value of properties along the route
the repossession deal for the people in Olivia Gardens which is below market value and does not include moving and buying costs
the emotional stress and damage this causes to individuals and families due to huge upheaval in their lives due to the project. This especially true of the old, those with English as second language and lower socio economic section of the community
the loss of Ward Park which is the only green space for many Northcotte residents whose world does not go beyond the that complex
the apparent lack of consideration for alternate routes and more 21st century forms of transport underground
lack of information on why the Foveaux St plan was not given due consideration and feedback
the lack of information on the viability of the project long term
safety especially during construction,


I do request
that there be genuine consultation with the community and businesses
consideration during construction of hours of operation, noise levels, traffic changes
train speeds through Surry Hills below 20 kms
noise reducing beds for rails
limited noise and vibration
significant screening for residents
limited hours of operation
area around Olivia Gardens to be all parklands
the residents of Parkham St have park between their back doors and the lane way and rail to shield the huge change to their environment that this rail will cause. Screening of the rail along this area would help reduce noise

I request that all alternative routes be examined and the information be made available to the public.
I request genuine and respectful consultation and communication with the community
I support the Foveaux St sub surface route and would like to see it genuinely considered.

Yours sincerely

Angela Nichols

Hi there

I am a bit concerned about talk about reducing the number of buses from further south like Maroubra and that those that do come from their will terminate at Kingsford. This is a double whammy for those that want to take the bus to the CBD in the morning as first have catch the less frequent bus and then have to wait for tram (assuming one can get on to one during peak hours). For that matter anyone in places like Kensington will probably have no chance of getting onto a tram because all the suburbs from the south will be getting on at Kingsford.

I propose that at least for rush hour in the mornings that it is imperative that the express bus service remains in the morning and evening so that will not have to rely on changing to the tram at Kingsford. On related note, last express bus to the CBD is at 8:22AM so one can make it into the CBD by 9. Problem is that if you miss the last one or can't get onto it due to overcrowding then you land up losing 20 minutes in the morning and are late for work (assuming a 9AM start). Would help if last express buses were at 8:30 in Maroubra.

Thanks

The EIS proposal for High Cross Park in Randwick is devastating. Two sides to become large bus bays serving passengers as they transfer to and from buses and the tram? The rest of the Park will be concreted?. The majority of trees will go as will the lawn? For the Randwick and Coogee community this is an important albeit small park. For a number of reasons, I believe the current proposal should be strenuously reviewed and altered.

Historically and aesthetically High Cross park is important to our area and adds to the beauty of the historic buildings around the park. The trees are on our significant tree register and it is a heritage area classified in the Randwick LEP as well as by the National Trust of NSW.

I also believe that it is disrespectful and insulting to surround and use our war memorial as a tram terminus. The memorial deserves it's pride of place in the middle of the park, with the surrounding space and trees adding to and highlighting the respect and importance it deserves. High Cross Park is also a focal point for the local community Anzac Day and Remembrance Day services.

The park also provides some lawn and trees to sit beneath as respite for both workers and patients from the hospital.

High Cross Park is an important junction between Randwick and Coogee. It is literally at the heart of our community both physically but also culturally and emotionally. To remove the trees, concrete half of it over and to use it as a tram terminus would be treating not only past residents who have served for Australia with disrespect, but also go against the wishes of many locals. We are passionate about our community and the preservation of those aspects regarded as integral to it. This was demonstrated in the fight against the development of the Coogee Bay Hotel and it is with this same spirit that I ask the state government to consider other options for the light rail in our area.

I understand that our local council has suggested relocating the tram terminus closer to the hospital (thus providing a stop for the hospital which the EIS does not) and leave High Cross Park for the people to enjoy. I think this is an excellent plan.

I believe that more thought is required when looking at the impact the South Eastern Light Rail will have on local communities. Apart from my concerns relating to High Cross Park, I am horrified that the government believes that removing the fig trees along Alison Road is a viable option as part of this development.There has to be a way to save the trees and keep Randwick green.

To whom it may concern,

I wish to convey my strong support for this project. This project has the potential to transform transport within the CBD and between the south east suburbs.

I see the key benefits being improving the reliability of our currently bus-reliant public transport, reducing congestion, ultimately leading to the more sustainable development of our city.

I have the following suggestions/re-iteration of initiatives to enhance the sustainability credentials of the project:
- Use of an independent sustainability certification program to measure and promote the success of the project (eg. ISCA) and to raise the standard of other infrastructure projects
- Use of renewable energy as part of the switch from liquid fuel-use by buses, to electrical power for rail. Where not possible to provide for own needs directly (eg. PV solar panels on depot roof) I support that consideration be given to renewable energy procurement over and above the mandatory requirement under the Renewable Energy Target. As opposed to carbon offsets, such renewable energy procurement promotes the development of Australia's renewable energy industry in addition to reducing or avoiding emissions.
- Promotion of other sustainable transport forms: consideration of enabling the transport of bicycles on the light rail carriages.


Yours faithfully,

Neil Raffan

I feel there is too much mis informed information.
I'm currently led to believe there will be no on street parking in front of my property.
This concerns me greatly;
I have 2 teenage kids who when driving next yr will not be able to park there car.
There is already not enough parking for residents. Even worse on TAFE days and race days! We do not have off road parking space.
Also visitors to us can't park!
Not to mention safety!!
As it is ,despite a cycle lane across the road at the moment, I am often almost knocked over as I walk out my gate by bikes! Without a cycle way on the other side this would be worse!
All, with no parking lane we would have cars speeding at close proximity to the curb! As an owner of dogs this concerns me greatly.
Not to mention in periods of heavy rain , the parking lane is flooded and the middle lane causes great waves of water which would be worse and threaten our properties and our pedestrian access to our gates, I have videos of a time where this occurred!
The curb side lane must be kept for parking for residents!

Also, king st. Is there going to be a terminus there? If so. How will parking be affected?
Will pedestrian access from the caltex to centennial park be affected?? I hope not! Again, dogs, children, prams, families all access the park on foot this way.

I am very concerned about the loss of so many parking spaces in such a high density housing area. As a resident of Alison rd , I have particular concern re loss off on street parking.
Also, I'm concerned re the damage to the war memorial site at High Cross Park.
Many ex soldiers will feel for this significant loss.
Why can't the rail line be put on race course land along Alison rd to boost our ability to park.
I would like more clarity re the terminus near the caltex, king st area.

I am concerned at distance between tram stops. Only 2 between University NSW and junction Allison Road and Anzac Pde. Also 2 stops betweem junction Allison road and Anzac Pde and Central Railway. The distance between stops will entail a lot of extra walking and this will cause problems for elderly and disabled travellers

I am concerned at distance between tram stops. Only 2 between University NSW and junction Allison Road and Anzac Pde. Also 2 stops betweem junction Allison road and Anzac Pde and Central Railway. The distance between stops will entail a lot of extra walking and this will cause problems for elderly and disabled travellers

I am concerned that we may lose some cross city buses
We use 50,10,370, Wolli Creek and of course 400
Cross city buses are a great innovation

Some comments
1The tram stop at Randwick needs to be very close to Prince of Wales Hospital as lot of patients are not very mobile
2 General concern at loss of parking at Kingsford Randwick Kensington. Loss of parking would make a big problem even worse.
3people living further out than Kingsford or Randwick will need to take 2 forms of transport. Is there an argument to extend the tramway

I object to the proposed light rail route through Devonshire St Surry Hills. This proposed light rail route by-passes the main Surry Hills shopping and restaurant precinct. It will bring major transport hub to a relatively quiet corner of Surry Hills, and displace all of the residents living in the Olivia Gardens apartment complex. Further it will cut-across Moore Park parkland. The Foveaux St light rail route should be further explored by the government.

I would like these things addresses before even thinking about Light Rail.
1. Detach higher densities and UAP (Remove please)
2. Parking not taken away from Anzac Pde (please remove this condition)
3. Buses not taken away (please keep our buses)
4. Removal of making people elderly , mothers with prams and small children get off a bus at Kingsford and the general public and then try and get on a tram. (buses should run along side of light rail)
5. Less stops with light rail than buses making elderly and parents and public walk bigger distance to stops)
6. Increase risk to pedestrians as the light rail is centre of Anzac Pde I believe more chance for pedestrian accidents. With Buses they stop and pick up from curb which is much more safer.
These issues must be addressed before light rail goes ahead. I rather see money spent on more buses bring back the double decker bus. At this stage I rejected unless these concerns are fully addressed.

To whom it may concern,

As a local resident of Surry HIlls, I strongly object to the proposed CBD and East Light Rail Project. The suggested transport infrastructure has three critical oversights.

1. The cost of this project to the community, and taxpayer, is extraordinarily high when weighed up against the benefits that it will provide, primarily for viewers of sport at the SCG and Randwick raceway.

2. There is already an existing Rail connection from the CBD to Central: why build another one and waist the taxpayers money? If you really want to do something for the community, start the service at Central and continue the proposed line all the way to Coogee.

3. The impact on small business in Surry HIlls, especially Devonshire St, will be major inconvenience, and cost impact, for these business-owners who already are battling with the high costs of running a small business in this state.

Sincerely,
David Barker