I strongly object to the Northwest Rail Link proposal.
I am a resident of Castle Howard Rd, Beecroft. The rail tunnel is proposed to run under Castle Howard Rd. The Intermediate Services Facility is proposed to be constructed nearby at Cheltenham netball courts. My major concerns include:

* impact of vibration on my property during construction and railway operations.
* decline in property value due to railway operation
* decline in property value due to proximity to Service Facility
* destruction of bushland for Service Facility access roads, constructed through Beecroft Bushland Reserve
* additional degradation of bushland reserve on top of destruction already inflicted by widening of M2.
* loss of amenities due to construction of Service Facility, removal of netball courts and children's playground.
* 960 truck movements on a local road, which in some areas are only one lane, for a two year period during construction of the Service Facility.
* no direct access to the rail line for Beecroft / Cheltenham residents.

I support the plan for a rail link to the Northwest of Sydney.
There is an existing transport corridor to the northwest - the M2. The Northwest Rail link should be built under the M2 to minimise the impact of this project on residents and property owners.

Residents of Castle Howard Rd Beecroft are being impacted by three major projects - the M2 upgrade, the Epping to Thornleigh Freight Track and now a Service Facility for Northwest Rail. The impact upon existing residential areas must be considered in infrastructure planning. The existing transport corridor under the M2 should be used for this project.

Build Parramatta to Epping First!

I have lived in the hills for many years and agree with the rail link going ahead but am concerned about the level of noise from the sky train effecting the houses in the close proximity between Bella Vista & Rouse Hill, also the pillars under the sky train will become covered in graffiti and it will become an eye soar in year to come, I suggest the Government spend some extra money and provide the tunnel all the way to Rouse Hill therefore avoiding the negative impact on local residence, why only do half the job, lets make sure this project is state of the art and not a patch work quilt.

Why didn't you link Parramatta to Epping first before starting North West Rail Link? Why didn't you prove your real integrety by building much easier link than NWRL before starting a MultiBillion biggest one?

Dear Sirs,

I am living at the above property and per the EIS 1 it appears that my property is being directly impacted by the construction phase from 2013-onward. This would mean that I will to suffer because of Traffic movements, Noise, Dust/ Pollution, Potential Rezoning, and overall drop in land value as the property will be adjoining the car park / station facilities. It is unclear if you are going to be acquiring my property either during EIS 1 or EIS 2. I require that an officer from NWRL Project team discuss this with me. Our property is Lot No 7 in Plan DP270405 Folio Identifier 7/270405

Can you tell me which document contains the detailed route map. The only route/map I can find is a high level, it does not capture which streets will be affected by the tunnelling.

An absolutely splendid proposal. Now lets get on with it and complete it.

If you do not mind me suggesting though, why don't you consider extending the existing Epping to Chatswood line by way of quadruplicating line to North Sydney, and then across the bridge by way of utilising the 2 eastern lanes, and then extending the lines into the old Wynyard tram tunnel, thus providing a city terminus at Wynyard.

Or better still extend the two lines under Town Hall station, making an addition station at Hymarket, and then ascending into the unused "ghost platforms" at Central on platforms 26 & 27. Voila, there is your Central Railway Terminus.

To gain access to the eastern lanes would require a bridge from the old tram line structure already located south of North Sydney Station, across the freeway approaches to the bridge. I realise that such a proposal would lose two south bound city road lanes, but the loss would be worthwhile as access would then be given to the old Wynyard tram tunnels.

I do not deny that such a programme would be cheap, but the overall benefit to the people of Sydney would be enormous.

I support the project fully, although I have to make the suggestion to extend the line to connect / cross with Schofields station, for the following reasons:

- There is physical space there currently
- Future growth in the area
- Access to and from Richmond and Blacktown as well as Penrith and the south west region
- Avoid being another Carlingford "dead end" line that is very ineffective
- Enable for a future outer Sydney loop
- It is going 23km's, might as well add a few extra km's to join the lines.
- Future proofing the network

If you are going to do something, do it right. Connect the lines.

Could I please have 1) an aerial view of the path of the line under what streets in beecroft 2) an explanation why there is no station at Beecroft. I work at Norwest as do others in b/chelt area and no one is going to travel to Epping or Cheerybrook to catch the train to norwest. I have seen the depths of the tunnel and my recollection is that there were some areas in beecroft which were of the same depth as some of the other stations. Thanks

Attention Director: Director, Infrastructure Projects
Subject:
Major Projects Assessment, Department of Planning and Infrastructure
Epping to Thornleigh Third Track proposal - SS1 5132

I would like to make the following comments about the above projects.

1. Concourse at Cheltenham station
The proposed overhead concourse at Cheltenham, may be better located further north, as shown on attachment A. My reasons for suggesting this move are:
The ground surrounding is higher, resulting in fewer steps being required.
These steps can be more easily screened in this position, taking advantage of existing vegetation.
This assists in reconciling the station with the character of the surrounding built environment (see point number two)
The stairs on the northwestern side would be closer to the pedestrian crossing at the intersection of The Crescent and Cheltenham Rd, the major pedestrian route to and from the station.
Larger amounts of grass would be able to be retained in this area.


2. Building Architecture at Cheltenham

The overall architecture does not reflect the surrounding federation and mid twentieth century buildings. The use of large areas of glass, apart from being out of keeping with the surrounding buildings, will be expensive to maintain, i.e. cleaning.

This structure over the railway is inevitably high, and consequently must be in sympathy with the surrounding environment.
More suitable materials could be used in places.


3.Pennant Hills concourse extension
The design of the proposed concourse extension could be improved by the following changes, to maintain the aesthetics and balance in the architecture. (See attachment C)
Building the extension with the floor at the level of the western end of the existing concourse. (Lower than proposed.)
Replacement of stairs within the concourse with ramps to improve access to this section.
Not extending the clerestory windows further than the existing concourse.
My reason for this is to preserve the balance of the station, and to have its shape continue to resemble the balconies found on many historic Australian buildings.

Use of the existing triangle motif on the new stairs, as shown in attachment C.
My reason for this, is that motif is featured in many local buildings, (particularly bus shelters), and adds to the local character of the station.
In addition, new sections would better fit in with the existing station if this motif is included.

4. Stairs and lift at Pennant hills station
The proposed lift tower may compromise views towards the clock tower from the street.
It may be beneficial to make this tower as small as engineering requirements allow.
The proposed third track and relief platform remove much of the garden space along Yarrarra Rd.
It may be better to build only a single staircase, facing north. (see attachment D)
My reasons for this are:
The foot path along Yarrara Rd does not go anywhere to the north, no pedestrian traffic will be interfered with.
Access to both sets of pedestrian crossings is adequate with the current foot path.
More space for plants along footpath.
Station won't dominate street too much, despite being closer than before.
Potential to preserve the veranda like aesthetic, (see point three)

Spaces under platform stairs currently featuring garden beds, are worth retaining. They add to the attractiveness of the station. New plants and landscaping could be added between and under new stairs, which may provide similar benefits.
If possible, the existing stairs could be retained, and renovated, rather than demolished.
This could reduce the waste, resources needed, and cost.

5. Yarrara Road Streetscape
The proposed replacement streetscape between the station stairs and Pennant hills Rd, may be better with more of a bushland aesthetic.
My reasons: Fitting in better with the landscape on the opposite side (of the tracks)
Fitting in better with Hornsby shire's "Bushland shire" ideal.
Opportunity to recycle exiting landscape material, such as wood and stones.


6. Retaining wall/embankment at pennant hills station
The proposed path of the third track though pennant hills will require a high embankment or retaining wall. For aesthetic reasons, this should be at least partially covered by plants, or grasses, similar to the existing embankment, and the one along the platform opposite. (See attachment D) Also beneficial, would be making this as steep, and as near to the line as possible, to maximise the streetscape above. (see point five)


7. Barrier walls and fences at stations

Where possible, existing fences at stations could be recycled. My reasons for this suggestion are:
Minimising waste, resource use and also cost.
Simple way to be sympathetic to existing design.


8. Bridge over sectioning hut near Epping.

The proposed bridge presents an opportunity to screen the unattractive concrete wall left by the construction of the Epping to Chatswood link. It may benefit from a coloured finish on the support structures, and or screening plants.


Thomas Walder