Skip to main content

State Significant Infrastructure

Determination

Inland Rail - Narromine to Narrabri

Coonamble Shire

Current Status: Determination

Interact with the stages for their names

  1. SEARs
  2. Prepare EIS
  3. Exhibition
  4. Collate Submissions
  5. Response to Submissions
  6. Assessment
  7. Recommendation
  8. Determination

This section of the Inland Rail project consists of approximately 300 km of new single track rail line, through private and public property in a “greenfield” environment between Narromine and Narrabri.

Archive

Notice of Exhibition (2)

Early Consultation (1)

Application (1)

SEARs (2)

EIS (90)

Response to Submissions (4)

Agency Advice (13)

Amendments (87)

Additional Information (3)

Determination (6)

Approved Documents

Management Plans and Strategies (17)

Notifications (1)

Note: Only documents approved by the Department after November 2019 will be published above. Any documents approved before this time can be viewed on the Applicant's website.

Complaints

Want to lodge a compliance complaint about this project?

Make a Complaint

Enforcements

There are no enforcements for this project.

Inspections

There are no inspections for this project.

Note: Only enforcements and inspections undertaken by the Department from March 2020 will be shown above.

Submissions

Filters
Showing 61 - 80 of 176 submissions
Elizabeth Kelaher
Comment
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
I would like to state that I see the benefits of the Inland Rail project but cannot understand why the route is going through the town causing negative impacts such as flooding, noise, vibrations and access issues which are covered in my attached submission.
Attachments
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
It should be placed further out of town as an alternative route.
Name Withheld
Object
WEE WAA , New South Wales
Message
This will effect the locals so much. If this goes ahead it will not be good for either the property owners or the animals close by.
Name Withheld
Comment
EDGEROI , New South Wales
Message
Objecting to the project as an alternate route needs to be explored, it needs to be taken further out of town for a vast array of reasons - less impact on fewer number of land holders, it is currently in a flood Zone - poorly planned engineering, more people cross the line in current areas then route provided by council - children crossing to bus zones, elderly land owners and owners who lead busy life styles will cross this line several times a day- the risk of an accident occurring is high risk, more people are effected on this line- in case of emergency for people, pets and livestock, they will have to sit and wait for the train to go past which is a couple of minutes. Poorly planned out.
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
I object to the projects current route, when there is no reason for the railway to be so close to town when there are clear alternate routes.
The current route will impact many more land holders then what the alternate route could do, as well as the community of Narrabri as a whole, which I believe most are currently unaware of. Most people I talk to who aren’t being directly affected don’t realise the enormity of this project. One train every 90 minutes, 1.8km long, travelling at speed through peoples divided properties, and through town.
An alternate route would require less bridges, could avoid floodplanes, impact fewer people and hold a lower risk of accidents. The town of Narrabri has already undergone economic downturn and hardships throughout the drought, please reconsider the alternate route provided by some of the locals, and our very own council.
I am disappointed with the process of this project, as I have found it to be quiet secretive, with different members we have encountered at different stages of the process telling us different things.
Has the current proposed route been organised to help one or few people, rather then the whole community?
Please reconsider.
Thank you
Jennifer Knop
Object
NARROMINE , New South Wales
Message
Please see attached submission document
Attachments
Cindy Neil
Comment
Narrabri , New South Wales
Message
Whilst I don’t object to the project, I have concerns about local impact in regards to noise, vibration & flooding issues.
My property is less than 1 km from where rail line will cross over the Kamilaroi Hwy.
When ARTC rang & told me that the property was not in the focus area any more, I said did he want my historical information on flooding ? He said no, it was not required, I was disappointed with his response as the property has been in the family for over 110 years.
When the line is operational how can I be assured that any problems with noise, vibration & flooding will be addressed.
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
Narromine to Narrabri Project
Application No. SSI-9487
I am submitting an objection to the inland rail to be moved out of Narrabri town.
My house will be right beside the rail on Yarrie Lake Road. This will drop the value of my property and many more properties through the town. This rail will not benefit Narrabri when it doesn't even stop here. So why does it need to go through the town????
The noise will be a big factor, the whole of Narrabri will hear these trains echo through. Also the vibrations will be felt a great distance. The construction will be constant traffic, noise, dust, machinery etc.. We have small children catching school buses mornings and afternoons which is only meters away from all this.
Please consider a alternate route further out of town for us home owners.
Thank you
Name Withheld
Object
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
I do not agree with the proposed route of the inland rail. There has not been enough consultation with the affected landowners. Some of these affected land owners have been battling cancer and the stress of this proposal has affected their ability to function and heal and get well. Their land is now devalued due to the inland rail being on their property which makes it very difficult for them to sell in future. They have no choice in the property they own. Railway crossings are dangerous why add more to this area and put people at an increased risk of harm. Please reconsider the proposed route of the inland rail.
Name Withheld
Object
MARKS POINT , New South Wales
Message
There is currently an alternate proposed route made by Narrabri Shire Council for the Inland rail, which will have a far lesser impact on local land owners. I suggest that this alternate proposal be enacted instead of the current proposed route.
Michael Wilson
Comment
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
I have concerns about the following issues with the Rail Track crossing my property at The Island Road Narrabri.
The build up of debris around the pylons during a flood event and if there will be a deviation of flood waters due to the pylons.
The height of the track where it crosses my property and the ability to get vehicles under the track to access the back paddocks.
The view of the mountains which will now become a view of a large steel rail track.
The noise levels of the train, taking in consideration the elevation of the track and the proximity to my house.
The disruption, dust, noise and excess vehicle movements on my quiet road for 4 years .
And mostly the devaluation of my property due to the train track running through the middle of my property, taking into account the unique position and area that I live in.
In closing I would like you to take into consideration an alternative track route.
Thank you... Michael Wilson
Knitting Nannas New England North West
Object
ARMIDALE , New South Wales
Message
Inland Rail EIS Submission

Knitting Nannas New England North West object to The Inland Rail Project
We are a group of mainly grandmothers who has campaigned for the protection of the Pilliga against industrialisation for many years. We accept Climate Science, and seek to protect the environment for our grandchildren and generations to come. The Pilliga is environmentally unique and must be protected.
The Pilliga will be further fragmented by the rail line, adding to the fragmentation caused by Santos roads and well pads. Cumulative effects have not been taken into account. Both of these projects will require like for like offsets. It is not possible to offset the environmental damage as The Pilliga is unique, and no suitable offsets exist. There is no like for like. Should the project go ahead in The Pilliga there will be further fragmentation, and no possible way to mitigate or offset the damage.
There is an existing rail corridor through Gwabegar and other private land to Narrabri. It would be less expensive and environmentally sound to use this corridor, the rail corridor should not go through The Pilliga. There will be permanent damage should The Pilliga rail corridor be used.
The importance of The Pilliga cannot be overstated. It is the last remaining large example of temperate woodland in NSW. Birdlife Australia identify The Pilliga as a globally significant Bird Area. The Commonwealth Government identified it as one of only 15 National Biodiversity Hotspots.
The importance of The Pilliga Forests in maintaining biodiversity is crucial, the EIS and Technical Report 1 acknowledges this. Decline in numbers of all native species is recorded by ecologists Australia wide. Results of surveys that were carried out as part of the assessment process, similarly indicate the value of the Pilliga, not just for threatened species but also for more common species.
The Inland Rail Project does not make environmental or economic sense. A passenger/freight line Melbourne / Canberra / Sydney / Brisbane would likely be financially viable, and help mitigate climate change, removing many vehicles from the road.
Pat Schultz
Knitting Nannas New England North West
5 February 2021
Janet Peter Dampney
Support
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
Our family do not object to the Inland Rail, Melbourne to Brisbane project. As tax payers, as well as many other tax payers, we would like to see the investment carried out in the most appropriate and efficient way but have some objections that are relevant to Narrabri and our particular situation. We do hope the DPIE will use all their authority to achieve this.
Attachments
Rosemary Vass
Object
COONABARABRAN , New South Wales
Message
The Pilliga Forest begins just a few kilometres North of my home. It is indeed "my backyard", but it's significance in ecological and cultural terms is so much more. I strongly object to the Inland Rail - Narromine to Narrabri section which will be yet another blow to the integrity of this vast & vital cultural environmental resource. The reasons to object to this project are numerous but I will list some that for me are of the highest order.
* the integrity of the Pilliga is being destroyed in a "death by a thousand cuts" as the cumulative impacts pile up year on year. It's great value ecologically is that it has been the last inland INTACT dryland forest that provided a large refuge from the surrounding agricultural development. Disturbance and fragmentation by the Inland Rail, the Narrabri Gas project and even the Australian Wildlife Conservancy project will have destructive impacts on the threatened species, birds and other wildlife that depend on its integrity.
* The destruction of hollow trees alone by these projects will be of huge significance for all wildlife that depend on these for shelter and breeding.
* With such a large section of the unfenced rail line cutting directly across the Pilliga and a high frequency of proposed rail traffic, there will undoubtedly be many "road" kills of fauna.
* In an environment that has increasing intense temperatures and dryness due to climate change there will be increased fire risk from sparking wheels on steel rails. Yet another increased risk to flora and fauna and the communities of people who live around the Pilliga.
* As with so many of these types of major projects the risk is all for the environment, animals and people who live in the affected areas but the benefits are all for those who live far away and have no risk. This rail line could be built on alternative routes using largely existing lines and could avoid the Pilliga completely if there was any concern for the environmental values of the forest and its integrity. In any cost/benefit analysis all the cost falls on the local environment & people, while all the benefits are accrued elsewhere & by others.

My recommendation would be to reject this section of the inland rail being built across the Pilliga Forest and to revert to the initial proposal that used existing rail lines and roadway easements to the west and north of the Pilliga. However in actual fact I believe that the whole project will be a type of "stranded asset" which will not be able to compete with truck freight in economic terms especially as Australia moves to electric vehicles and new technologies in transport. The time for the Inland Rail was probably 50 years ago but excusing the pun, "it's missed the train".
In conclusion I restate my strong objection to this part of the Inland Rail project.
Fletcher Baker
Object
WINGHAM , New South Wales
Message
There is a alternative route out of town that less affects properties
Name Withheld
Object
ARMATREE , New South Wales
Message
My name is Andrew Peart and I live on a property near Curban which lies within the Narromine to Narrabri alignment (see attached map).
My wife and I have been living at "Karoona/Cremyll" for the past 12 years, and subsequently my four children aged 5-9 years. We farm this property ourselves but have other family properties which are located close by (one other farm which is owned by my father is on the alignment also).
We are a mixed farming enterprise growing wheat, canola and lupins and also running sheep and cattle when the opportunity arises. The rail alignment cuts our 1027ha property in half with the only access being via the shire road adjoining the north of the property which will obviously cause interruptions to our farming practices.
The following subheadings are areas in which we have concerns:

Flooding & Hydrology-
*Culvert pipe size and locations is my biggest concern. Reviewing the maps from ARTC, it appears to me that they have little understanding of the volume and depth of water that can flow through our property after a reasonable fall of rain. This is going to change the movement of water substantially post Inland Rail.
* Movement of water after the rail line is erected.
* The impacts on farming and grazing land when water direction changes will also have a significant effect on water ponding and erosion.

Noise & Vibration-
* Proposed passing lane on neighbours property.
* Visual impacts from house. The line will be approximately 650 metres from the main house.

Access Issues and the Need for Crossing Points-
* Another major concern is the lack of consultation on crossing points. Currently there are no plans for a crossing on our property. The only access we will have will be on a major road adjacent to the property. The big issues will be:
* Movement of heavy and wide machinery day and night
* Movement of young children around rail line and through property
* Non-registered vehicles access to other side of property
* Stock crossings/movement from one side of the line to the other
* Infrastructure will mostly be on one side of the line including water for spraying, stock yards woolshed, silos and secondary housing

In summary ARTC have been lacking in community consultation and I feel they have not taken the concerns of the property owners seriously. The severance to our property is going to greatly effect the way we run our business now and in the future. If this line isn't designed and constructed properly, it shouldn't be done at all!

*Attached are photos taken from a drone after a rain event in April 2020
Attachments
Joanne Hamilton
Object
WEE WAA , New South Wales
Message
I object to the project as it stands at this time
Lynn Benn
Object
MULBRING , New South Wales
Message
This project further threatens the irreplaceable Pilliga forest and heathlands. The clearing of vegetation and draw down of water will endanger many precious species including the iconic Koala. The further drying out and fragmentation will lead to increased fire danger and weed infestation. There are better routes to consider without destroying this precious are which sits over the GAB recharge zone. In the context of runaway species extinctions and deforestation this further attack on our environmental heritage cannot be allowed.
alan CHANNELL
Comment
NARROMINE , New South Wales
Message
My property was in the N2N study area. I am a member of the N2N Narromine CCC. I am also a retired plant mechanic. I completed my apprenticeship with the New South Wales Government Railways and have worked with all the NSW rail track maintenance gangs including ARTC.
I struggle to comprehend how a Government authority (ARTC) can submit an official document (EIS) knowing that their own historical documentation proves that a great deal of the facts in that report are false or misleading.
At a large community meeting held at Narromine, and recorded by a TV crew from Prime TV, ARTC informed the community that they were now going to build the Inland Rail that was originally surveyed in 2010. It will eventually carry 3 Km. long, double stacked trains and travel in excess of 110 kph. A major requirement was to move freight from Melbourne to Brisbane in 24 Hours. They identified that the quickest and shortest time between 2 points was a straight line. The track was going to be “future proofed” and have no level crossings over major roads. It was going to pass around Narromine on the Western side and then travel 300 km through farmland to Narrabri.
This Western route was again positively verified in late 2018 by ARTC to a group of concerned residents outside the local supermarket.
A short time later in December 2018, at my home visit, ARTC informed me that my property was now (suddenly) in a new study area for the line to pass Narromine on the Eastern side.
This new alignment has 2 right angle bends. One, to change direction from North to East off the Tomingley – Narromine line and then a short way along another to turn back North again to bypass Narromine. It also requires 2 additional road over rail crossings. One to cross over the Tomingley -Narromine road and a 2nd to cross back over the Narromine- Eumungerie road, to get back onto the correct side. Both roads form the Newell Highway’s heavy vehicle Dubbo bypass and carry a large volume of trucks. This alignment must negotiate over the Backwater Cowal. Plus, a large flood plain caused by water shedding off the Sappa Bulga Range, and the Macquarie River breakout point at Webbs Siding. It must be elevated over 14 meters high to have a rail over road crossing over Webbs Road. Remain elevated for 500 meters then a rail over rail crossing over the Dubbo -Cobar rail line plus another 800 meters for a rail over road crossing over the Mitchel Highway. Finally, another 1 km to cross over the Macquarie River. The 2 right angle bends and the requirement for the train to climb 14 meters high to get over the roads and the other rail line, destroys the straight-line theory, and the ability to maintain any sort of speed. The “justification” for this change was that the flood issues on the Western side of Narromine was much greater than on the Eastern side, This is the exact opposite to the documented findings of the extensive survey carried out in the original 2010 study, which dismissed the Eastern option as not viable.
In January 2021 ARTC announced that they were now going to build a loop on the Western side of Narromine to join the Parkes-Narromine-Cobar line. This loop is the same as the original 2010 concept alignment to pass Narromine. One could reasonable expect ARTC to abandon the problem riddled and hugely expensive Eastern option and go back to the original concept and use this Western alignment. However, ARTC has decided to continue to go East and build both alignments, WHY???
The problems with the East option have forced ARTC to bring this line off the Parkes-Narromine line further south than their study area identified. Quite a few kilometres of the now N2N route are outside the study area that the EIS actually covers. The distance and therefore the time of travel on the now proposed route is longer than that stated in the EIS. The scoping data used to justify changing from going West of Narromine to East of Narromine is easily found to be incorrect. The Hydrology report on the flood issues at Narromine, established that all flooding originates from the East and contradicts the EIS report that there are fewer flooding issues East of Narromine than West of Narromine.
ARTC states, “Geotech samples were taken every 100 meters”. That means over 3000 samples would have had to have been taken along the 300 km N2N, route, although no data is provided to support this. The EIS states that the surveys were taken from public roads????
ARTC stated that 4000 meters of bridging will be required. Documents show that that amount of bridging is required for just one bridge, and there are still 3 other major crossing plus numerous other smaller crossing required. A figure of 1 hundred million dollars is cited for a length of new track. Their documents show that a contract has been awarded for 6 hundred million dollars for the same bit of track. (Within 4 days of this, and other inconsistencies being pointed out at our CCC meeting, the budget was quickly increased by 5 billion dollars)
At a CCC meeting ARTC presented us with a Power Point display of a large viaduct structure that they were going to build to cross over the problem area associated with going East of Narromine. When I asked how much this structure would cost, I received no definitive answer and the presentation quickly moved on. At his home visit, a property owner who owns the long narrow property between the Cobar rail line and Mitchel Highway was promised that a viaduct would travers his property. The EIS has disclosed that, except for the Mitchell Highway to the Macquarie River. the elevated rail line will be the enormous 14-meter-high earthen embankment through his property.
The cost of ARTC project has already been increased by 50%. The line will not be “future proofed.” as they said. There are not going to be any vertically separated rail crossings and no viaduct. One would have to be very naive to believe that the costs are not going to escalate a great deal more. This must impact on the financial viability of the project.
It has been announced that NSW Govt. is going to build a large rail maintenance depot at Dubbo.
Why wouldn’t Inland Rail want to access this facility?

This plethora of false and manipulating information goes on and on and are far too numerous to list.
Like most mechanics, as an ARTC Plant mechanic I could be held Legally and Financially responsible for the consequences of any incidence that any of the machinery I was responsible for, caused, or was involved in. Especially if it was established that I failed to “carry out my duty of care” or didn’t maintain the machine in a “safe and proper working condition”.
The ARTC people that are involved in this erroneous document don’t have the same liability. They have included a caveat in their documents, excluding them from all responsibility or liability for any errors or mis information they have included in their reports. It is inconceivable that a Government authority can submit an official report and have absolutely no responsibility whatsoever as to its accuracy or authenticity.
The CCC was in my opinion a complete waste of time. It was just a medium for ARTC to promote their own agenda. There was no “consultation”. There was no medium for the CCC members to communicate with the community. The community was originally barred from attending the meetings. There was no provision for the community to ask any questions unless they posted the question days before the meeting. Absolutely nothing the CCC members suggested or proposed, was ever considered or implemented. Questions concerning the route selection were shut down after the 1st few meetings as ARTC considered then to be historical and they had now moved on to the next phase. A better system would be for the meetings to be advertised and held in a large suitable premise with ample time allotted for ARTC members to answer question from the effected community, and if appropriate, justify their decisions.
Logical thinking would suggest that ARTC N2N Project should be suspended until the results of both the NSW and Federal Government inquiries are tabled.
Attachments
Tim Logan
Object
NARRABRI , New South Wales
Message
I object to the planned route through the township of Narrabri. I have suggested an alternate route not far out of town.
Attachments

Pagination

Project Details

Application Number
SSI-9487
Assessment Type
State Significant Infrastructure
Development Type
Rail transport facilities
Local Government Areas
Coonamble Shire
Decision
Approved
Determination Date
Decider
Minister

Contact Planner

Name
Mick Fallon