North West Rail Link - Stations, Rail Infrastructure & Systems

See attached.

See attached.

Lodged on behalf of The Owners Corporation Northpoint Apartments 9 Garthowen Crescent, Castle Hill.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

See attached.

I object to the tunnel diameter and station clearances being reduced so that double deck trains cannot use the NWRL in the longer term, based on inadequate justification being provided in the EIS for this change.

There is no objection to the three tier concept, or the use of tier 1 trains initially before a second harbour crossing is built.

My response is attached, as well as a second document responding to the draft NSW transport master plan.

See attached.

See attached.

Please see attached submission on behalf of The Hills Shire Council.

NWRL EIS 2 submission 1 dated 27th November 2012 , in 4 volumes.

In addition to my submission dated 27th November 2012 related to EIS2; herewith I am providing additional submission related to traffic study undertaken.

See attached.

Dear Sir/Madam,
Kayla Way NWRL Action Group is group that has been formed to jointly represent the concerns and opinions of Kayla Way residents. This submission has been prepared with the consent of the residents of Kayla Way.
Kayla Way is a small subdivision immediately adjacent and to the North of the Cherrybrook Station Precinct. It has been identified to be impacted the most during the tunnelling operations as identified in EIS1 and station construction and ultimate operation of NWRL in EIS2.
Kayla Way NWRL Action Group support the overall principals of increasing infrastructure to improve travel declared by the premier, Barry O'Farrell, for the North West Rail Link project but object to various elements of the execution in the proposal for the Cherrybrook Station Precinct and access roads in particular Franklin Road.
We are also object to the large portions of land within the Cherrybrook Station Precinct and adjacent to the Northern Boundary that have been marked as "Future Use to be determined by Master Plan" in Figure 6.1. We cannot fathom that this complies with the objective of making the station fit into the natural habitat by potentially adding large building structures in an area that is exactly the opposite of this with most residents choosing to live here because of the space and natural flora and fauna that surrounds them. We are of the opinion that the Proponent has deliberately chosen to conceal their plans for these areas in the hope that they can be developed without further involvement of the adjacent residents, by marking these "Future use to be determined". We understand that parking facilities and small retail in the station building itself are necessary and convenient for travellers but believe the impact on residents for anything else is unacceptable and does not comply to the objectives of the Cherrybrook station precinct as declared. We also believe that there are more than adequate access to retailers in the area with Thompson's corner, Coonara shops, Cherrybrook shops and Castle towers all within a few kilometres radius.
There is also a car park proposed near the Northern Boundary of the station which has been identified to cause sleep disturbances to nearby "receivers".
Outside the Cherrybrook Station Precinct, we object to the proposed use of Franklin Road as the main access to the station site during construction and operation. Currently Franklin Road is a quiet residential road with very low traffic volumes. Once Cherrybrook station is operational, peak traffic movements of 500 vehicles (cars and buses) per hour have been estimated. Franklin Road is currently home to two schools and two establishments designed to take care of the needs of the disabled. It concerns us as residents that if a nesting place for an endangered species had been found in the area, we would have been given more consideration than what has been shown so far in the proposal for the residents children, the children of the schools and the disabled that frequently walk these streets.
This will have detrimental impacts to the quality of life of Kayla Way residents in terms of noise, air pollution, vibration, safety of our children. We propose that both Franklin Road and Robert road be closed off to vehicular traffic and that all entry exit to the station be via Castle Hill Road. One lane can be added to Castle Hill in the peak direction following precedents from other roads in Sydney like Military Road, to allow for the increased traffic.
During construction location of the office and ablution block adjacent to Kayla Way is another example where the amenities of nearby residences have not been considered in the design of the Station precinct.
Finally we would like to reinforce our view that the planning for the Cherrybrook Station Precinct and traffic flows are not consistent with the overall objective of the design of the station as outlined in Section 6.9 of Chapter 6 which state: The station has been designed as a suburban park and ride station that integrates with the surrounding natural and built environment. The station precinct has been designed to respond to the area's character. Further in Table 6.2 of Chapter 6, Cherrybrook Station has been identified as Station Type: Suburban Village
We would request you to challenge the proponent, TfNSW to demonstrate how they have achieved the design goal for the station and we would offer an alternative to what has been proposed.
We are also concerned that there was inadequate consultation with the residents of Kayla Way in preparing the design of the station precinct or the access to the station. This is outlined in Chapter 5 Table 5.2.SoC 7.
Mitigation measures to address the impacts of the project including construction works and project operation on land use and community facilities have been developed with Councils and landowners and are included in EIS1 Major Civil Construction Works and EIS 2.
Kayla Way residents have not been party to any such consultations.
Our detailed submission referencing the relevant sections of EIS2 and proposing alternatives is attached.

See attached.

See attached

See attachments (2).

Attention: Director of Infrastructure

Planning NSW

Dear Sir/Madam

Attached are comments from ComfortDelgro Cabcharge (CDC) on the EIS 2 for the North West Rail Line (NWRL).

At present, CDC is contracted by the NSW Government to operate Region 4 services from the NW Sector and the Hills district to Sydney City, North Sydney and Macquarie via the M2 which will be affected by the NWRL. It is approximately 50 percent of the buses in Region 4 delivering the service on the M2.

CDC services carry over 22,000 passengers per day on approximately 866 services using 223 buses per day. Over the last four years we have been growing 12 and 18 percent per annum.

CDC welcomes the NWRL because it will provide a superior mode of service to the public transport travelers in the North West and Hills area. The majority of Region 4 staff reside in the area and they will welcome the provision of such a service.

It is important to provide an integrated service with bus and rail services as well as those using alternate modes to the rail such as walk, bicycle, taxi, kiss and ride and park and ride.

All comments by CDC are made with the intention of getting the best public transport system for our area.

Please find my EIS2 submission attached together with the EIS1 submission resubmitted as it contained information that NWRL said would be addressed in the EIS2 release. Also an invoice that I will be claiming reimbursement on from NWRL in light of the fact they did not have the accurate statistics.