MOD 2 - The Crescent overpass and active transport links

Although the modification is a slight improvement on the previous design it is still not satisfactory. The Government promised this project was to be all underground and this should be the case. It will only detract from the area. It looks like a Californian freeway in the middle of the inner west of Sydney. There should be a seamless connection between Rozelle goods yard and the Glebe parkland. The view from Rozelle side will spoil the amenity of the new park, which already looks bizarre with the exhaust stacks. It would be great if we could think outside the square and do something interesting for a change.

I object strongly to the overpass being built based on these important reasons:
Visual impact is detrimental to all especially local residents. There will be no cycling link between Glebe foreshore and Rozelle yards.
It only address vehicle flow and hinders cyclists and pedestrian local access.
The people's mural by Rodney Monk which is important to the local community will be obscured.

I object strongly, an underpass would be far the better option for the future of our community.

I feel particularly strongly about this submission due to the lost opportunity to create more and better walking and cycling options during this COVID 19 crisis.

This is an opportunity for this intersection to be of world standard showing how to integrate community amenity, pedestrian and cycle access with the project. The overpass is not needed; either an underpass or traffic light intersection will create the same traffic outcome. An underpass or traffic light intersection provides the best visual and urban outcome and should allow the retention of the green link in a location to best connect different areas of greenspace together. The essential need is community access by foot, cycle or local traffic to and from suburb to suburb and to and from the recreational parks. The horseshoe pedestrian bridge should be reinstated to provide the seamless park to park connection that was originally promised. This means that cyclists and pedestrians are not forced to cross the Crescent via traffic lights. The Rodney Monk’s heritage mural which decorates the northern side of the light rail viaduct along The Crescent and has significant local heritage value should not be compromised. The government should showcase this project as an example of how to prioritise the needs of local residents, pedestrian and cyclist access and the retention of vegetation and greenspace ensuring that community needs and all modes of transport (foot, cycle, local, toll) are accommodated.

11 May 2020



Director, Transport Assessments Planning Services
Department of Planning, Industry and Environment
GPO Box 39
Sydney, NSW 2001


Application: SSI 7485

Dear Director Transport Assessments Planning Services,

I write regarding the proposed modification to M4-M5 Link, Mod 2 The Crescent overpass and changes to pedestrian infrastructure in North Annandale, Rozelle and Rozelle Bay Foreshore area.

I am a Leichhardt resident who lives on the border of Annandale and uses all of the wonderful Annandale amenities especially the open space and parks.

I had used Buruwan Park and footpaths along The Cresent to access Bicentennial Park every day with my children and our dog when walking to the park and waterfront from our home.
I have just seen the new design for the elevated motorway overpass in Annandale at the Crescent and City West Link as part of WestConnex and whilst I appreciate the improvements you have made, I still don’t think Annandale needs an overpass.
I, along with the other 1,000 residents who entered an objection to the original overpass design object to the new overpass design. As residents we want the safety of pedestrians and access to green space NOT extra traffic and motor vehicles.
The massive overpass being proposed is a totally unnecessary imposition on our local area that clearly prioritises cars and traffic over cyclists, pedestrians and resident amenity.
I have the following objections:
• The evidence demonstrates this modification won’t solve congestion in Annandale
• This overpass is only designed to address the additional traffic that you have created by WestConnex.
• It will not reduce the amount of traffic in Annandale but will increase it and negatively impact local residents, cyclists and pedestrians.
• An underpass would be less overbearing on the local area and
the plan for an overpass should be replaced by a short tunnel under the City West Link with slot trench approaches. This would provide the best visual and urban outcomes and would allow the retention of the green link in a location to best connect different areas of greenspace together.
• There is now no direct pedestrian and cycling link between the Glebe foreshore and Rozelle Goods Yard. The new proposal has abandoned the horseshoe pedestrian bridge but hasn’t reinstated the park to park connection that was originally promised. This means that cyclists and pedestrians are forced to cross the Crescent via traffic lights.
• The people’s mural will be obscured by the overpass. The proposed overpass will obstruct Rodney Monk’s much loved heritage mural which decorates the northern side of the light rail viaduct along The Crescent and has significant local heritage value.
• The needs of motorists are prioritised over pedestrians, cyclists and residents. All these negative impacts are being driven by the exclusive focus by Transport for NSW on improved vehicle movements and the government should prioritise the needs of local residents, pedestrian and cyclist access and the retention of vegetation and greenspace over the movement of cars and traffic into WestConnex.
I am absolutely committed to doing what I can as a resident to protect the liveability of our of our local area and retention and access to open green space. This park is our primary green space. The park is used by the residents of six surrounding suburbs - Annandale, Rozelle, Leichhardt, Lilyfield, Forest Lodge and Glebe and our entire community will be hugely impacted by the changes to the overpass design.
Yours Sincerely


Justine Simcoe
1/38-40 John Street
Leichhardt NSW 2040

I would like to express my extreme disappointment that cycling and active transport are to be sacrificed for the sake of private vehicles; that the RMS are happy to seek amendments to the active transport requirements (that they be "direct") but not to the intersection performance requirements (achieve a grade greater than "F") of the EIS, with no justification.

It appears the goals for the active transport links (and the criteria they're assessed against) is to connect two points on the maps with a shared path. I would heavily suggest that stronger guidelines be followed. The original requirements of the Green Bridge, were
* To connect the Rozelle Rail yards to the Glebe Foreshore
* To be direct

I feel these requirements can be amended to
* To connect the Rozelle Rail yards to the Glebe Foreshore
* To connect entrance and exit points of active transport bridges as straight and direct as possible to provide easy navigation and good visibility, which will improve uptake and safety
* Sweeping curves should be avoided without adequate vision, as they enable cyclists to travel at speed around blind corners, presenting a safety concern
* Active transport bridges should be wide - 4.5m (the proposed width) should be considered a minimum, with 6-8m sought where possible.

This second requirement is automatically satisfied for the amended Green Bridge. The new shared user bridge could be altered to provide additional ramps eastbound either side of the eastern end of The Crescent. The purpose of these ramps would be to provide an eastbound crossing of the crescent that doesn't require traveling west, and vice versa a westbound crossing that doesn't require traveling east, which make the bridge much more intuitive to use and navigate.

Some concerns with the current cycling infrastructure that must be addressed are
* Ground level paths should be separated from traffic by at least 1m
* Ground level paths should provide adequate waiting space/cycle turn bays so that cyclists using the crossings do not have to wait in a cycle lane
* Where cyclists must wait at a median to continue crossing, sufficient space must be provided
* Light sequencing for cyclists/pedestrians should be improved (both the Crescent and James Craig Rd intersections require cyclists/pedestrians wait for two (2) cycles of lights)
* Cyclist/Pedestrian beg-buttons should be positioned on the left

Until these objections are met for the benefit of the local community, the project should be suspended.

Thank you. It's my understanding that this proposed alteration to the original plan will have a terribly detrimental effect on the connection between the new parkland in the Rozelle Railyards (which looks terrific) and the foreshore of Rozelle Bay (such a fabulous asset). The promise of the seamless passage between the new parkland and the Glebe bay was one of the mitigating graces of this massive road development. A massive Los Angeles style flyover will be an eyesore and means pedestrians and cyclists have to cross at traffic lights. Please retain the original plan. We are putting enough roads out of sight here - I can't understand why this section cannot also be the original underpass. If it's money, goodness, we've paid billions for this project anyway. Let's not build a Cahill Expressway and keep a green connection between Lilyfield and Annandale/Glebe. Please!

We would like to acknowledge the significant improvements that have been introduced into the overpass project, including: the upgrading of the pedestrian crossing between Johnston Street and the Crescent, widening of the pedestrian bridge to ensure separation of the pedestrians and cyclists, and to a lesser extend the lowering of the overpass. These changes have signficantly improved a poor proposal.

However, these improvements do not change the overall objection that the overpass illustrates an irrational favouring of car based travel over other healther, more efficient and safer modes. The overpass will fundamentally changing the character of this area, and if it works it will result in increased traffic, more pollution and decrease pedestrian and cycling safety. If it doesn't it is a waste of money that could be more effectively spend on other transport priorities.

The overpass is fundamentally proplematic and we wish to continue our objection, while acknowledging the recent improvements and the commitment to community engagement.

It is unconscionable to prevent direct access from Johnston and surrounding streets for the many hundreds of residents who live there to the foreshore when the current crisis has demonstrated the importance of easy access to open space and the creation of 'walkable ' cities. This kind of car-oriented development and traffic prioritisation in the middle of a city dates from 50 years ago and should be unthinkable in the present day. At the very least, a tunnel should be built under the Crescent.

All the evidence suggests that the overpass is unnecessary. Priority should be given to the green space, cyclists & pedestrians. This is the future. I would support an underpass if anything required. Thanks Scott

Hello,
I am an Annandale resident and object to the overpass proposed for The Crescent on the following grounds:

- The evidence demonstrates this modification won’t solve congestion in Annandale
- This overpass is only designed to address the additional traffic that will be created by WestConnex. It will not reduce the amount of traffic in Annandale but will negatively impact local residents, cyclists and pedestrians.
- An underpass would be less overbearing on the local area
- The plan for an overpass should be replaced by a short tunnel under the City West Link with slot trench approaches. An underpass provides the best visual and urban outcomes and should allow the retention of the green link in a location to best connect different areas of greenspace together.
- There is now no direct pedestrian and cycling link between the Glebe foreshore and Rozelle Goods Yard
- This proposal has abandoned the horseshoe pedestrian bridge but hasn’t reinstated the seamless park to park connection that was originally promised. This means that cyclists and pedestrians are forced to cross the Crescent via traffic lights.
- The people’s mural will be obscured
- The proposed overpass will obstruct Rodney Monk’s heritage mural which decorates the northern side of the light rail viaduct along The Crescent and has significant local heritage value.
- Needs of motorists are prioritised over pedestrians, cyclists and residents
- All these negative impacts are being driven by the exclusive focus by Transport for NSW on improved vehicle movements.

Thank you,
Anne

An underpass would be less intrusive than what’s proposed. We need to improve public transport rather than build more roads. We should be constructing dedicated cycle ways not roads. I disagree with this proposal and it should not be approved.

An underpass would be much more appropriate.

The overpass should be an underpass so that it is not prioritising cars over pedestrians. It is also going to obsure the peoples mural.

There needs to be a direct pedestrian and cycling link between the Glebe foreshore and Rozelle Goods Yard.

The impacts to the outflow and inflow of traffic are not going to be manageable around the crescent / ross street which already stuggle at busy times. This is a highly residential area with schools along Johnson street and childcare centre on the crescent. It is going to have a huge negative impact on our comunity.

I strongly object to this proposal.
❌ The evidence demonstrates this modification won’t solve congestion in Annandale.
❌ An underpass would be less overbearing on the local area and provide the best visual and urban outcomes.
❌ The community needs a direct pedestrian and cycling link between the Glebe foreshore and Rozelle Goods Yard. Seamless park to park connection is key!
❌ We also want to preserve the people’s mural which will be significantly obscured by this overpass.
❌ This project prioritises the needs of motorists are prioritised over pedestrians, cyclists and residents.

Our community opposes it!

Hi,
I'm a resident in the Lilyfield area and object to the overpass and changes being made. An underpass would be less overbearing on the local area
The plan for an overpass should be replaced by a short tunnel under the City West Link with slot trench approaches. An underpass provides the best visual and urban outcomes and should allow the retention of the green link in a location to best connect different areas of greenspace together. There is now no direct pedestrian and cycling link between the Glebe foreshore and Rozelle Goods Yard
This proposal has abandoned the horseshoe pedestrian bridge but hasn’t reinstated the seamless park to park connection that was originally promised. This means that cyclists and pedestrians are forced to cross the Crescent via traffic lights. Ideally as a cyclist and pedestrian with very young kids, it would be easier to have a pedestrian bridge to get over and around.



Thank you for your consideration,

To Whom it may concern,
Please find attached a letter outlining my objection to the project.
Many thanks,
Belinda Musumeci

To Whom It May Concern,
Please find attached a letter outlining my objection.
Kind regards,
Philippa Specker

The road overpass is unnecessary and was not what was proposed in the EIS. The road overpass will be detrimental to the local environment. This is just a cop out from the government on the basis of costs. All engineering problems can be solved. It only requires money. Let the engineers solve this issue.

The proposed Crescent overpass has no objective benefits with significant costs and impacts on the local community. THE LOCAL COMMUNITY DOES NOT WANT THIS TO GO AHEAD. PEOPLE FROM WESTERN SYDNEY WANTS PUBLIC TRANSPORT NOT MORE EXPENSIVE TOLL ROADS. As it stands this project reflects the incompetence of the state govs infrastructure planning. Lets build a city that will be inhabitable for future generations.