M6 Stage 1 (previously F6 extension)

Re Application # SSI 8931 F6 Extension Stage 1
Further to my previous written submission to the RMS (Jan 2018) Having read the current Preferred Infrastructure Report I object to the project in its current form as (1) There are no plans to minimise the anticipated traffic congestion and gridlock expected on O'Connell Street & Chuter Avenue which are already being used as feeder roads to President Avenue and will only worsen and become "Rat Runs" once the project is completed. There are no proposals for additional traffic calming measures along O'Connell Street & Chuter Avenue to reduce the attractiveness of this route to non-local traffic. (2) There is no commitment to the F6 being extended to Taren Point, this would negate my concerns in item one. (3) There is no freight connection planned to Port Botany.
Kind regards,
Anthony Poplett

Hi,
It is critically important that there must be a major all-directions continous on and off-ramp interchange free of traffic lights where the F6 extension adjoins the M5 / New M5 and West Connex. Lets call this interchange the Arncliffe Interchange. This is so that, for example, travellers can use the Arncliffe Interchange to come and go and from all of the surrounding local suburbs such as Arncliffe, Turrella, Earlwood, Bardwell Park, Banksia etc, and who under the current plan are prevented from locally accessing or leaving the F6 / West Connex, thus causing bottlenecks at the few places where such access can be gained, and only after having to drive though overcrowded local streets full of traffic lights. People travelling north on the F6 extension will be able to either exit at the Arncliffe Interchange, or head west along the M5 / New M5. People heading east along the M5 / New M5 will want a continuous traffic-light-free connecting ramp onto the F6 Extension so as to then head south. People in the aforementioned suburbs will want on and off ramps to head north along the West Connex without having to drive along the Princes Highway which is full of traffic lights. People heading south along the North Connex will want to readily exit the West Connex at the interchange so as to access their homes in the surrounding suburbs. It is a major shortcoming not to include such an interchange.

Instead of spending billions on dollars on building more roads, which will only carry more cars, those funds should be allocated on extending and improving public transport infrastructure. Just returned from a trip to Tokyo, with a population the size of total Australia, where not many people choose to drive, instead they catch the extensive public transport network, which we found easy to navigate after the first day.
The benefits of keeping cars off the road are numerous, the least of which is that the public transport system would probably start to make some money!

Whilst I am in favour of this project, the proposed junction with Presisident Avenue will cause delays particularly to vehicles wanting to continue on the A1. This is due to yet more delay-causing traffic lights being added, not just with the F6 junction but with Civic Avenue as well. If the junction with the F6 was a sunken roundabout with slip roads to and from the A1 these delays would be avoided. See attached file. Although this arrangement would be considerably more expensive and cause more problems during construction there would be several advantages.
1) There would be no delays to any traffic on the A1.
2) As the entrance to the F6 tunnels would already be below ground level the cut-and cover section would start earlier so more of Rockdale Millenium park would be restored.
3) The roundabout would provide access to any southward extention of the F6 without any further work on the A1.
I am free to discuss this at any time if this brief description is not clear.
Graeme Harris.

Refer attached document

I object to the project in it's current form.
Per previous comments provided, the current design does not consider the impact on local residential streets and the safety of residents.
I would request that the design be altered to prevent access from O'Connel street into, and from, the F6 extension.
This road is already used as a peak hour Rat Run for cars trying to bypass General Holmes Drive. The addition of traffic, including trucks, to and from the F6 extension would make the roadway unsafe for local children crossing to go to the local schools, parks and sporting fields that are along this street.

The road is also a cycle way used by many cyclists and is not suited to large volumes of traffic especially heavy vehicles that would use the road as a short cut.

I support the new Active Transport inclusion in the project (an extended southern link to the shared path in Monterey), but the overall plans must be rectified to correct a major omission...

The F6 Extension should include a safe, off-road, Active Transport link for walkers and riders from Kogarah all the way to the Cooks River. The lack of end-to-end connectivity ruins a potentially great shared path. Many parents would not let their children ride the on-road section (busy parts of Bruce St, Francis Ave and England St in Brighton Le Sands), and it's a real shame that RMS hasn’t made the entire path off-road. RMS already own the majority of properties required to make this 700 metre section safe and separated from the road. RMS are concerned about the safety of walkers and riders in an area where the shared path may be constrained between two nearby fences for about 130 metres in length. But they think it’s okay to force riders onto several roads to navigate a confusing zig-zag of streets!!

The advantages of the new Active Transport inclusion in the project (an extended southern link to the shared path in Monterey) are that:
-- It provides extended Active Transport links to the Shared Path which runs over President Ave and then to the north.
-- It provides greater Active Transport “permeability” from the east side of Scarborough Park North to the west side. Walkers and riders will no longer have to go via busy President Ave or Barton St.
-- It will help preserve the park area by directing AT users to the path, and not on the present network of informal tracks.
-- As the path will be raised in critical areas, it will help preserve vegetation. And wildlife will be protected from dogs as they will be constrained to the path.
-- It presents educational opportunities on the wetland if viewing platforms and informative signs are provided (such as at Baludarri Wetlands on the Parramatta Valley Cycleway).

Not including full end-to-end, off-road shared path is a major lost opportunity which must be rectified...

I support Bicycle NSW's submission.
1. It is great to see the extension southern link to the shared path in Monterey for the many benefits:
It provides extended Active Transport links to the Shared Path which runs over President Ave and then to the north.
It provides greater Active Transport “permeability” from the east side of Scarborough Park North to the west side. Walkers and riders will no longer have to go via busy President Ave or Barton St.
It will help preserve the park area by directing AT users to the path, and not on the present network of informal tracks.
As the path will be raised in critical areas, it will help preserve vegetation. And wildlife will be protected from dogs as they will be constrained to the path.
It presents educational opportunities on the wetland if viewing platforms and informative signs are provided (eg Baludarri Wetlands on the Parramatta Valley Cycleway).
2. However, the full end to end, off-road shared path has not been included! This is a major lost opportunity which must be rectified. The present plans include a 700 metre on-road portion on the busy Bay St, Francis Ave and Bruce St (Brighton Le Sands). This connection must be made into a safe, off-road facility.

I am writing this submission to advise you of the preferred active transport corridor and cycle infrastructure along the route.

I have reviewed the the PIR and the submissions report regarding the active transport corridor between Rockdale Bicentennial Park and Bruce Street. I think that the current proposed route is neither pleasant, nor safe enough for all types of cyclists, as the current proposed route has many interactions with motor traffic and much unnecessary stopping.
I have determined a better route that requires no additional property acquisition.

Detailed route & infrastructure recommendations:
Starting from near England St (where the current proposed route starts), this route passes England St and turns left from Kurnell St into McCoy Ln (the intersection of Kurnell St and McCoy Ln will be converted into a modified T-intersection to provide priority for the route).
It will then continue past the dead-end of McCoy Ln onto Bay St (minor works will be required to connect the dead-end of McCoy St and Bay St, the permeability will then allow bicycles only).
A new signalised crossing will then be built to allow cyclists to cross Bay Street (the current crossing on the Western side of the intersection with Crawford Rd can be removed as, the new crossing will be in close proximity with the current crossing and may present traffic issues), it will also be necessary to designate the northern footpath of Bay Street as a shared path whilst, the southern footpath between the new crossing and McCoy Ln will have to be widened, part of the existing median on Bay Street will need to to removed to allow passage for cyclists and pedestrians.
Shared path connecting the signalised crossing will be constructed (existing southern footpath of Bay Street is of adequate width) leading to a new kerb ramp on the western side of Francis Ave, taking cyclists onto a 3-metre wide separated two-way cycle track on the existing carriageway on Francis Ave, with physical segregation from motor traffic.

Rest same as current proposed route, infrastructure advice below:
There are currently safety islands adjacent to the existing raised pedestrian crossing near St Thomas More's Catholic School. The islands on the western side of the crossing will have to be demolished to allow for an on-road segregated cycle track. The safety of the crossing will not be compromised as the physical segregation between the cycle track and the carriageway will provide the same, if not better effect of narrowing the street and slowing motor traffic down.
The new segregated cycle track will continue past Boeing Pl, with signage and road markings warning drivers of the presence of the 2-way cycle track. The physically segregated two-way cycle track will turn left into Bruce St from Francis Ave, without any interactions with motor traffic. A segregated two-way cycle traffic of the same standard will be constructed on the southern side of Bruce St, ending where the route finally crosses Bruce St onto the proposed northern off-road cycleway in the current PIR via a chicane crossing that provides priority for cyclists (highly recommended).

In conclusion, this route provides a more pleasant journey for cyclists. It would be suitable for all types of cyclists (particularly racing & unconfident new cyclists, this can be observed from other good examples such as the M7 cycleway.) as the interaction with motor traffic would be minimised and stopping & slowing down would be reduced. The new/relocation of a pedestrian & cyclist crossing is highly necessary whilst on-road segregated cycle tracks are highly desirable.

Please refer attached

Please see 9 page submission

In brief summary, In the longer term, the F6 extension will do little to ease road congestion in Sydney and it will bring more cars closer to the CBD of Sydney, which is NOT wanted by the City of Sydney, for good reasons (see Appendix A of this submission) . Wollongong would be much better served by an upgrading of the rail line linking Sydney and Wollongong than the F6 extension (or yet another motorway for Sydney).
Failure to address transport pricing and to improve rail do so will leave New South Wales with increasing road congestion, and dependence on oil. Oil vulnerability needs reducing, and not increasing.

Lessons may be learnt from the former Victorian governments proposal to construct a large and expensive East West Link motorway, the Western Australian change of direction, and overseas experience.

A more balanced approach is needed between new road construction and developing a fit for purpose rail system for New South Wales. Regional NSW deserves a much more attention than it is presently getting from the NSW Government.

Please find attached my submission

Please see attached submission

Please see attached

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on what will be an amazing piece of transport infrastructure that will deliver some dearly needed community benefits in the form of recreation facilities, new connections and a major regional cycle way. I acknowledge that motorways will not solve Sydney's urban transport and local mobility issues, however by diverting heavy volumes of traffic underground they offer a benefit to provide relief and an opportunity to return open space and local streets back to our communities.

The presence of a (bicycle and pedestrian) corridor, is undoubtedly one of the most functionally significant projects to be designed within the scope of the F6 extension project. It would provide a high quality active transport facility away from roads, utilising key open-space corridors to bypass congested roads and intersections. However the design of this path is shown to divert to a street-side cycle/pedestrian path along Crawford and Francis Street as it progresses past Bay Street - that is 7 right-angled turns from within a street environment, amongst schools zones, within dense mixed-used precincts and across hazardous intersections. This is a clearly a poorly thought-through retro-active step and will render the functionality of the path to a shadow of its potential capacity, void of any community benefit it would otherwise offer.

It has become apparent that RMS own several properties that line Bay and Bruce Street in what has for decades been reserved as a transport corridor - intended for use for a future motorway. This once-in-a-generation project for the area should undeniably utilise this open space corridor for its intended transport purposes, and for the design of the cycle way to enable connection of the green corridor at Bay Street. The project local residents have been waiting decades for is now here - and should this opportunity be lost, it will be lost for another generation, if not for good.

I regularly chat to a number of bicycle commuters and recreation cyclists who, like myself use the the Chuter/Crawford/Francis Streets on-road cycle a number of times a week, we all feel any opportunity to bypass those streets would be a win for safety and and efficiency the future movement of the community. The road network in the precinct is undoubtedly dangerous, congested and will only become more-so into the future. There is no space for any form of safe,family friendly path along those streets and diverting an otherwise high-quality off-road facility to that area would be nothing but a huge fail on the Department of Planning's part.

I strongly urge the F6 project team prioritise Bay Street as the entrance point to both the north (Muddy Creek) and south (Scarborough Park) wetlands, enabling access to what will be the region’s most significant cycle-way and active transport corridor through significant local wetlands.

In addition, I acknowledge the amendment to the southern connection - and such efforts to connect this path to the south is supported, however all efforts should be made to connect the southern terminus of the cycle way to Barton Street at the very least. This would provide access to east-west links as well as the southern network a great deal smoother and safely.

The path across the project should be wide and preferably separated (from pedestrians and vehicles) at every opportunity - as I expect that this corridor to be very popular when it is built.

Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment and feedback on this project. I really look forward to the significant benefits it can provide our community across a number of areas, not just upon completion but I feel importantly, for generations.

Regards

Roberto

The content of this submissions was written by another individual who has also made a submission regarding the changes to the proposed cycleway that was part of the F6.
I fully agree with the content and have nothing further to add.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on what will be an important piece of transport infrastructure that will deliver some clearly needed community benefits in the form of recreation facilities, new connections and a major regional cycle way. I acknowledge that motorways will not solve Sydney's urban transport and local mobility issues, however by diverting heavy volumes of traffic underground they offer a benefit to provide relief and an opportunity to return open space and local streets back to our communities.

The presence of an Active Transport (bicycle and pedestrian) corridor, is undoubtedly one of the most functionally significant side-projects to be designed within the scope of the F6 extension. It would act to provide a high quality local transport facility away from roads, utilising key open-space corridors to bypass congested roads and intersections. However, to much disappointment, it observed that design of this path is shown to divert to a street-side cycle/pedestrian path along Crawford and Francis Street as it progresses past Bay Street - That is - multiple right-angled turns from within a street environment, amongst schools zones, within dense mixed-used precincts and across hazardous intersections. This is a clearly a poorly thought-through, retro-active step and will render the functionality of the path to a shadow of its potential capacity, void of any community benefit it would otherwise offer.

It has become apparent that RMS own several properties that line Bay and Bruce Street in what has for decades been reserved as a transport corridor - intended for use for a future motorway. This once-in-a-generation project for the area must utilise this open space corridor for its intended transport purposes, and to ensure cycle way enables a connection of the green corridor at Bay Street. The project local residents have been waiting decades for is now here - and should this opportunity be lost, it will be lost for another generation, if not for good.

I regularly chat to a number of bicycle commuters and recreation cyclists who, like myself use the the Chuter/Crawford/Francis Streets on-road cycle a number of times a week, we all feel any opportunity to bypass those streets would be a win for safety and and efficiency the future movement of the community. The road network in the precinct is undoubtedly dangerous, congested and will only become more-so into the future. There is no space for any form of safe,family friendly path along those streets and diverting an otherwise high-quality off-road facility to that area would be nothing but a huge fail on the Department of Planning's part.

In addition, I acknowledge the amendment to the southern connection - and such the intent to connect this path to the south is supported, however all efforts should be made to connect the southern terminus of the cycle way to Barton Street at the very least. This would provide access to east-west links as well as the southern network a great deal smoother and safely.

The path dimensions across the project should be considerably wide and preferably separated (from pedestrians and vehicles) at every opportunity - as I expect that this corridor to be very well-used when it is built.

Thank you for this opportunity to provide comment and feedback on this project. I really look forward to the significant benefits it can provide our community across a number of areas, not just upon completion but I feel importantly, for generations.

F6 Extension
I object to the exit and entrance of the expressway by tunnel from Bay St through to President ave Kogarah
I agree with building the F6 as a tunnel but to have tunnels entrances passing through park land destroying wildlife corridors and Parks is stupid and very bad engineering
The skate park is used all the time by young people excercising and a pushbike track where families teach there children how to ride a push bike destroy this for a long time is depriving young people of playground facilities. There isn’t anywhere else where these places exist in the local area The playing fields are green open space and with increase for organised sport to destroy this is criminal.
The Wetland creek is a very important part of the ECO system for Botany Bay which runs from Cooks river to Sans Souci which supplies breeding grounds for fish and other animals. The island in this area is a safe haven for breeding Birds and animals free from interference from Foxes. To destroy and then rebuild is a thirty year plan for very short term gain
Options
This tunnel should continue through to Captain Cook bridge with exit and entrances at President ave but should utilise West Botany St and surface in President Ave with no Traffic lights (this happens at Moore Park )
If the tunnel will be extended from Bay St. in the future why would you spend so much money on a 1.5km exit tunnel and destroy so much important areas that cannot be replaced.
I urge you to reconsider the planning for this important road and although we need these roads open space is important and is even harder to replace then a road utilise and build on what exists

I would like to see better active transport included in the proposal. In particular, to link up the cycle ways without sending cyclists onto the roads.

I support the Bicycle NSW Submission, because:

It provides extended Active Transport links to the Shared Path which runs over President Ave and then to the north.
It provides greater Active Transport “permeability” from the east side of Scarborough Park North to the west side. Walkers and riders will no longer have to go via busy President Ave or Barton St.
It will help preserve the park area by directing AT users to the path, and not on the present network of informal tracks.
As the path will be raised in critical areas, it will help preserve vegetation. And wildlife will be protected from dogs as they will be constrained to the path.
It presents educational opportunities on the wetland if viewing platforms and informative signs are provided (eg Baludarri Wetlands on the Parramatta Valley Cycleway).

Please see attached letter which supports the extension of the Shared Path to the south of President Ave, but call for the path to the north to be fully off-road and NOT include an unsafe 700 metre on-road section.