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

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

Here is my submission

I object to the realignment of the light rail and stops along Alison Road and flood mitigation changes at Centennial Park

Rationale: This proposal creates much greater impact than the alternatives of the racecourse side of alison road.
- easier for racecourse patrons
- the impacts of the proposal are excessive - loss of 50 trees, impacts on levees, impacts on the current cycle way. These impacts are too great.
- Moving the stop from in front of Randwick Racecourse to occupy park land creates enormous safety issues and increases traffic delays on Alison Rd due to need for racecourse users to stream across the six lane roadway.
The proposed changes to the flood levy banks increases the risk of severe inundation throughout Kensington especially with the vibration impact of LRVs with metal wheels on metal tracks

I object to loss of right hand turn from Alison into Darley Rd forcing large numbers of vehicles to detour up to through local roads to access Centennial park- object.

* Closing date for submissions should be extended as not enough time to allow adequate scrutiny during one of the busiest times of year.
* Amount of time required to analyse 'noise exceedance' fully not permitted with such a short public exhibition period.
* I work full time and only can address these changes, which appeared with no prior warning, late at night or weekends which are fully occupied at this time of year.
* Insufficient information provided and inaccurate information provided on many of the changes.
* No substantiation made of most claims made in the Modifications Report.
* Repeated claims of 'minimal impact' from changes yet no substantiation provided, and highly untrustworthy.
* Why do the SCG/SSG Trust and ATC get their wish list fulfilled but Randwick gets totally ignored +/or punished by the proposed changes?.
* Object to loss of right hand turn from Alison into Darley Rd forcing large numbers of vehicles to detour up to 2.5km through local roads to access Centennial Park.
* Why does the ATC have the LR moved from in front of the proposed 8 story hotel at the expense of over 50 significant trees in Centennial Park as well as the cycle ways and pedestrian pathways?
* Moving the stop from in front of Randwick Racecourse to occupy park land creates enormous safety issues and increases traffic delays on Alison Rd due to need for racecourse users to stream across the six lane roadway.
* The proposed changes to the flood levy banks increases the risk of severe inundation throughout Kensington especially with the vibration impact of 120+ tonne LRVs with metal wheels on metal tracks rocketing alongside within one or two metres of the levy. In May 2003 all transport was stopped due to fears of levy collapse and now the proposal is to increase the flood water held back by between 30,000 cubic metres or more. Where are the detailed geological and engineering surveys substantiating the claims made within this report?
* Placing much of Kensington at risk for the sake of saving the winning consortium a few million dollars is an insult to the community.
* Who will indemnify residents if the levy banks fail?.
* Given the significant increase in length of the trains from 45 to 66m, an increase of over 45% why have the traffic modelling, traffic intersection phase modelling, journey times, capacity modelling and LATM plans not been redone?
* How can the community be expected to examine this report when crucial substantiation is missing since previously the community was repeatedly told that many of these issues 'addressed' by the report - were not issues at all?
* How can one driver observe all the door openings for the 66m train length when the normal operating model assumes 5 people standing per square metre - so direct line of sight will be impossible? It is totally inadequate and inappropriate to simply say the PPP will sort that out. TfNSW is completely responsible for this and needs to answer these questions.
* If the driver is forced to use cameras to check every exit/entry before closing the doors then journey times will blow out. Otherwise the community safety is put at risk. How is this supposed to be different to the situation with trains where a platform attendant ensure public safety?
* No information has been provided to satisfy the community that coupling two separae trains together with satisfy 'crashworthiness' or 'buff strength requirements'. Since the IWLR failed to meet Australian Standards of Independent Access for the mobility impaired - saying 'trust us' rings hollow.
* What different safety requirements are there for coupling two trains together? Why were they not provided to allow full consideration?
* What implications on speeds are there from coupling together two trains? Why were the safety impacts not covered?
* The proposed change to the entry/exit of the LR onto Anzac Parade heading to Kingsford destroys more trees and creates an adverse impact on the surrounding intersection operation - making it especially dangerous for cyclists. - object.
* Why have the safety impacts for cyclists not been covered?
* Increasing the ground level at the stabling facility will exacerbate flooding elsewhere as it currently serves as a retention basis that mitigates flooding in surrounding streets. It is not acceptable to improve the return to the winning consortium at the expense of Randwick residents.
* Declaring 'minor' increases in noise impacts at 86 sites is insulting since this project has been given twice the normal margin above existing background noise levels to any other project in NSW history. Please explain to the people of Sydney.
* Stating that there is no vibration impact from running 66m trains at speed alongside flood levy banks is insulting and cause for concern at its inaccuracy (pg 9).
* Forcing 2,000 or more students from Sydney Boys and Sydney Girls High Schools to cross the LR rails poses a safety risk.
* The platform is not big enough to fit the 2,000+ students from Sydney Boys and Sydney Girls High Schools safely.
* Closing the subway for the revised Moore park station creates public safety risks.
* Mobility impaired individuals, parents with prams, and elderly with canes are put at risk by the changes to the Moore Park stop.

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

17 December 2014

RE PLANNED MODIFICATIONS TO THE CBD AND SOUTH EAST LIGHT RAIL
It is clear that the NSW government committed itself to the CBD and South East light rail without adequate study. This is reflected in the reported cost blow-out from $1.6 billion to $2.2 billion as well as the many modifications to the project announced this month.
The project needs a complete rethink. It is plain the light rail was neither properly costed nor fully researched before it was put out for comment. The newly proposed changes to the project invalidate the community consultation to date because the plans shown to the community were not final.
The latest changes simply amplify the adverse effects of the light rail on the amenity of the south east. Of particular concern is the loss of additional trees and parkland.
My specific concerns about the modifications include:
* Moving the Randwick Racecourse stop to the northern side of Alison Rd will mean a net loss of some 25 trees, plus parkland, plus cycle ways.
* It creates significant safety issues, and will increase traffic delays on Alison Rd as thousands of racegoers attempt to cross a six-lane road to get to and from the light rail.
* The loss of the right-hand turn from Alison Rd into Darley Rd will force vehicles to make substantial detours through local roads to access Centennial Park.
* The proposed changes to the flood levy banks along Alison Rd must increase the risk of inundation throughout Kensington, especially with the vibration impact of LRVs within a few metres of the levy. (In May, 2003, traffic in Alison Rd was stopped for fear of a levy collapse. Yet now it is proposed to increase the flood water held back by 30,000 cubic metres or more.) Where are the detailed geological and engineering surveys? Who will indemnify residents if the levy banks fail?
* Given the significant increase in length of the trains from 45 to 66m, why haven't the traffic modelling, traffic intersection phase modelling, journey times, capacity modelling and LATM plans all been redone?
* How will safety requirements be affected by coupling two trains together? How can one driver observe all the door openings for the 66m train? If the driver is forced to use cameras to check every exit/entry before closing the doors, then journey times will blow out. Otherwise passenger safety is at risk.
* Declaring "minor" increases in noise impacts at 86 sites is insulting given this project has twice the normal margin above existing background noise levels.
* Forcing 2,000 or more students from Sydney Boys and Sydney Girls high schools to cross the LR rails would appear to pose a safety risk.
* As a resident of Robertson Rd I am particularly concerned at the planned removal of a number of established trees from the junction of Robertson and Martin roads and Anzac Parade. The trees are on the acoustic mound which separates the south western end of Robertson and Martin roads from the present bus roadway. The mound is to be largely removed to accommodate the revised route of the Randwick arm of the light rail. Once the mound is cut back and the existing trees are removed, it will no longer be able to support trees comparable to those being destroyed. The existing trees are a precious natural asset. They create an effective barrier between nearby houses and traffic on Anzac Parade and the bus roadway. Moreover, the trees make an irreplaceable aesthetic contribution to the intersection. The trees could be saved by shifting the proposed re-alignment of the light rail just a few metres to the west.

Common sense suggests that the whole project should now be put on hold, and that no contracts should be signed until an overall review has been carried out.
The best short-term public transport solution for the south eastern suburbs is an improved bus service.
The best long-term plan is underground heavy rail. It would carry more passengers, more quickly and be largely future-proof.

Yours Sincerely,
Greg Lenthen

It is my personal view that the proposed project will not provide the claimed benefits and will severely disrupt local businesses. Devonshire St. route is sheer lunacy

To whom it may concern
The prospect of even longer trams running on the "Light Rail" system through Sydney CBD and then through Devonshire St Surry Hills beggars belief. Have you really seriously considered the consequences of this?
The noise impacts on the tight knit community along this route through Surry Hills will bee devastating causing great stress to all living close by.
The increased length will take longer to pass across intersections thereby interrupting foot traffic/cyclists and other road traffic causing chaos.
There has been a huge volume of critical concern raised by the community and various stakeholders to this" Light Rail" project. It will not be laughable at the waste of tax payers money when it fails to meet the needs of the travelling public. Another White Elephant.

I have not had time to consider the entire modification report as the process seems to be really rushed. Everybody is very busy at this time of year with work and having Christmas celebrations, and affected communities have not had time to look at this. I think the consultation period should be extended.

My concerns are with the area along Alison road. I object to the moving of the light rail into Centennial park from the other side of the road. I object to: .
-taking part of the parkland
-loss of many trees and landscaping along Alison road
-appearance of the wall
-the area is quite beautiful and green with many trees and this will be lost
-effect on the cycleway and pedestrian area
-effect on the centennial park ponds
-effect on flora and fauna and native wildlife
-effect of heavy rain and flooding on the ponds and centennial park

I seems that the major beneficiaries of the South East Light Rail the commercial entities such as the football & cricket stadium, the racecourse & UNSW. While it appears that Centennial Parklands will lose a significant number of well-established trees that provide visual & acoustic protection from the impact of heavy traffic in Alison Road. Furthermore extensive tree removal and clearing of the grassed parkland which has protected the fields from the impact of traffic on Anzac Parade and westerly winds will also leave that area without a visual, acoustic & pollution barrier.

In this age of increasing temperatures due to Climate Change, we need our beautiful established fig trees which absorb carbon, improve the streetscape and provide shelter & bush figs for native wildlife such as birds & flying-foxes. Removing these magnificent trees on Centennial Parkland & adjacent land is downright vandalism and actually can only be a result of inferior government planning. I do not support the impact of the South East Light Rail project on Centennial Parklands and the adjacent land. I urge the Planning Department to rethink the proposed devastation of the parkland and alter the proposed route to protect it.

Yours sincerely,

Jillian Snell

I object to the lack of general Public display ; the time NOT given to make submissions at this time of the Xmas season0 I view this as a deliberate and unjustifiable to public interest manoeuver;
I object to the complete lack of proper studies and acquisition and availability of details in public forums and in fact on display- there are significant and unacceptable gaps that can not be left open to any consortium/contractor to just come in and change and adjust when the planning underpinning studies have not been done- THIS IS NEGLIGENCE ON THE GOVERNMENT and its DEPARTMENT side;
I object to the unsubstantiation of most of the claims made in the modifications report- particularly coming under the projection of insignificant changes- THEY ARE MASSIVE and again with NOT PROPER STUDIES nor public time for scrutiny.-This is completely transparent as a declaration that the government , through its department DONT care about community consultation; The community consultation so far has been a: hold a forum, don't fix anything, don't provide details BUT tick the box EXERCISE in NON Consultation. This plan STILL doesn't carry the numbers necessary;
DEGRADES our current roads ; ABUSES the expectation of the public that proper and thorough study has been done (BUT HAS NOT BEEN); DISADVANTAGES the public in SAFETY; DEMINISHES ACCESS TO HOSPITAL AND HEALTH SERVICES; ENDANGERS THE PUBLIC AND ENERGENCY SERVICE PERSONS; ENDANGERS our environment and ecology of this area and by implication the adding to the global warming with the depletion of our Carbon sink and cooling effect of the trees to be removed. the said replacement policy will not equal the 100+ years of the mature trees to be taken; diminishes the environmental aesthetics and cultural advantages of this area and the city.;
ENDANGERS the aquifers of the area and will lead to the stagnation of the Centennial Park ponds that will be dammed- this in GROSS IGNORANCE AND INCOMPETENCE - another degradation of this plan that is not about Good transport but greed at any cost. the initial cost benefit of any of this will be to raise unit prices (as seen in Melbourne already) that will be sold overseas- this does not help Australia in the long term only the developers who will be the 1st sellers any subsequent on selling will see price drops in profit and leave a glut of unoccupied overseas owned units who only wish to hide money offshore- THIS IS NOT GOOD ECONOMIC PRACTICE fro any government in Australia;
Will you be advising the insurance companies of the added risk due to flooding as a result of your undone studies on water dispersement in times of flood that the levy interference will produce?- We have already seen insurance companies raising costs in areas that have been developed where they should not have been due to inadequate and inappropriate action by authorities.
This plan does not work and can not be made to work. Something you would have realised if you have ticked all the pre study boxes. The negatives are toooooooo Many. Spend this money on other needy areas to improve.