20 December 2012

Residents' Meeting Update

The following is the feedback to DPTI of  concerns from the recently formed Resident Action Group. If you would like to add to this please leave a comment or communicate by email with Luke Faulkner at

Six Areas of Primary Concern

Residents would like to see further information of the level of land contamination of the site to be
excavated and the rail corridor down which the soil will be removed. They want to see a detailed
management plan for this work and know that it complies with EPA and Safe Work SA guidelines.
They want to know who to contact to stop the job if there are perceived failures or lapses of safety in
the work. The current experience residents have with major works down Devon St is that dust
suppression is lax and there have been reports of uncovered trucks leaving the site.
The DPTI consistently claims that they have a Noise Model that determines there will be a net
improvement in Noise Levels. They seem to be using this to deny Residents who may now come into
direct contact with the rail corridor specifically and other residents in general any compensation for
soundproofing of homes. Residents want to see details of this modelling before coming to agreement
that soundproofing is not necessary.
DPTI uses vague terms of Corridor Width that have not been defined to residents when they talk of
vegetation removal. This is creating a heightened level of concern and the perception that tree
removal is arbitrary.
Residents would like more definition of what is to be removed, when. They would also like input into
the rejuvenation of the area.
Where areas are substantially affected by vegetation removal, there is an assumption by residents
that they will have imposed on them a substantial value loss on their properties. Residents would like
to address this and seek compensation via increased public amenities such as improved roads and
Works impact
Residents close to the works are worried about the impact of vibration on their homes. Again, the
DPTI claims it has modelling to suggest the work will be inviolate, but has failed to show residents this
modelling. A further concern from residents is the legacy of bigger, more frequent and faster Freight
Trains and the level of increased vibration they may bring.
Again Residents want to see this modelling.
Traffic Management
Covered somewhat in the Communications Attachment, the community would like to see an
advanced communication of traffic restrictions while the works are progressing.
Specifically, people who have to enter the flow of traffic on Leah St. and East Av. already have trouble
during peak periods. With the addition of Trucks, the lack of train signals at Clarence Park and the
rerouting of traffic due to the works this has the potential to be both very inconvenient and dangerous.
A detailed plan for this is desired.
Furthermore, it is noticed that improvements of Leader St Crossing have been dropped from the
original plan. This will leave the Leader St Crossing with
more train traffic (with increased domestic
trains and planned increase in freight trains). This can only have the effect of making Leader St less
desirable to traverse and increasing the traffic load on Victoria St. A plan to manage this is desired.
The residents of Forestville and Goodwood value their amenities highly. We live in a close knit inner
city area. As a consequence, we as a community value highly the amenities that exist in our suburbs.
Places like the Forestville Reserve act as gathering areas for community events and provide valuable
open space for residents.
We believe large funded projects offer an opportunity to improve amenity for the neighbourhoods in
which they are located. Beyond the development of a bicycle pathway for two short sections (from
Chelmsford St to the Goodwood station and between Clarence Park and Emerson St stations), there
is little in the way of improved amenity for local residents in the current plans. The DPI submission to
DAC (page 19) stated that there should be established 'a process to ensure stakeholder issues are
incorporated into the successful tender's designs and construction management plan'. However there
has been no such process in respect to improving amenity along the rail corridor in the
Goodwood/Millswood area. Instead much will be lost with the ecological damage occurring with the
removal of significant trees, loss of shade and loss of habitat for native animals and birds. Residents
want to see a greatly increased focus on improving the amenity for local residents in addition to
increased public amenities in lieu of the loss of value of property (see above). Improving
neighbourhood amenity would include improving native habitat, a more attractive landscape
overlooking the rail corridor and the establishment of a continuous dedicated bicycle pathway along
the whole of the corridor in this area.

Communications feedback
Residents are seeking communications about these works that
are timely, accurate, and appropriately distributed.
Perceptions of what is
timely clearly vary. Information is
often provided after works have happened. For example, the
bulletin which arrived on 17 December contained notification
of site establishment in Forestville Reserve which commenced
on 13 December. A significant tree to be removed in Devon
St Sth was notified i in the same bulletin and will happen on 19
December—2 days away. The date of the public meeting
about Forestville Reserve was notified to residents 5 days
before it was to take place, and after the removal of a large
number of trees and shrubs. Many residents wanted to know
about these things and have the chance to have a say about
them prior to their taking place.

  • Establish a guaranteed response time for the 1300 line.The faster answer times on the line are appreciated. People are still being told to call back in a few days and ask again if what they asked for has not been acted upon.
  • Offer more detailed information on the www. Organise iso that it can be accessed by locality.
  • Distribute bulletins to the local library, post on local notice boards. Set up notice boards at key points like the Victoria St/Railway junction where passersby arecurious.
  • Optimise existing bulletins to residents so that they are easier to follow. For example, organise them by locality or street rather than the type of work being carried out (using the categories residents use not the ones DPTI uses). Instead of listing them in a dot point list of undifferentiated importance, offer more clues about how undifferentiated importance, offer more clues about how much impact the works are likely to have. Offer an executive summary on the bulletins so people who want a one paragraph summary can find it and those who arecurious or worried can access more.
The level of information has been increasing from what many
residents perceive as an initial low base. Residents have
found street gossip more accurate than contacting the 1300
number or speaking to DPTI employees. The provision of
conflicting and incorrect information which has not been
corrected has led to residents having a low level of confidence
in the information provided. For example, this week three
residents of Devon St Sth discovered that between us we had
been given 4 different dates for the demolition of number 48,
which will have significant impact on the street, exposing
houses to the railway l line, noise and dust. DPTI and residents
have quite different senses of what residents should be
informed about. For example, Devon St Sth was closed at one
end with no prior warning.

  • Offer one-stop issue management at the 1300 number instead of referring residents to other sources.
  • Ensure that collaboration between all parties involved in the works is sufficient to allow accurate information to be provided to residents.
  • Correct information if it emerges that it was incorrect or that it has changed.
  • Where final information is not available, indicate when it  is likely that dependable information will be available.
  • Assess whether information provided is meeting resident needs.
Appropriate distribution
It appears that residents of the local area who are not living in
the streets immediately affected sometimes feel they have not
been adequately informed. It also appears that community
facilities such as Forestville Reserve are seen by DPTI to call
for communication with the surrounding streets, while many
for communication with the surrounding streets, while many
residents walk through the park and use it regularly, seeing it
as a community facility in which they have a stake.
It also appears that street signage is directed primarily toward
car drivers and offers little accurate information to pedestrians
and cyclists (for example, it is hard to tell on approach along
Victoria St from Goodwood Rd that pedestrians and cyclists
can cross the railway at Victoria St on foot).
Residents are aware of what the traffic does when no one is
directing it manually, as well as what our friends, visitors and
families tell us; some of us have had experiences such as
couriers taking urgent parcels back to the depot without a card
being left because our addresses are seen as ‘undeliverable’.
Frustrated drivers are making unsafe and complex
manoeuvres to get out of blocked off streets. Yet, we have
had real difficulty in getting responses to suggestions for
improvement acted on via the 1300 number.
Communication with people who are renting is not working as
well as it might, w with renters being asked to approve work that
only their landlords can approve, while renters are not being
given warning of works which affect their residence in very
significant ways.
  • Wider use of local media.
  • Publicising key works through local facilities like libraries, shopping centres, community centres and schools: people who use these services travel through the local area and are affected by what occurs here.
  • Street signage to be responsive to the full range of travellers (pedestrians, cyclists, drivers).
  • Street signage to be responsive to residents’ feedback when it isn’t working as anticipated.
Suggestions for improvement to the DPTI www site
There is a clearly visible link to Goodwood Junction from the
front page. This is a great start! So is the overall information
presented about the project, the rationale for it and the video.

From that point:
  • Contact Us’ tab has no point of contact for Goodwood Junction and does not even list the 1300 number. Noemail contact is listed.
  • ‘Community Interact’ tab has no survey for GoodwoodJunction.
  • The project is called ‘Goodwood Junction’ in som places but is not linked up to ‘Railway Revitalisation’ of which it seems to be a part. Can links be made? Can references to Goodwood Junction be inserted with appropriate links?
  • The feedback form on the ‘Community Interact’ tab does not list ‘Goodwood Junction’ in the drop down list of projects, and ‘Rail Revitalisation’ may not be selfevidently the same project from the perspective of residents using the site.
  • The localised works notices are just pdfs of the material being letterboxed in the area. This is better than nothing,but could be made more accessible. For example, by organising materials in the way most relevant to residents, by affected area: a map of the local area with links to the works in each street/locality, perhaps.

1 comment:

  1. Millswood Crescent22 December, 2012 10:27

    Hi Luke,

    Very pleased to see you emerging as apparent leader, or at least coordinator for the community, in this debacle. Your list of issues regarding Goodwood Junction is quite comprehensive but there is one point I'd like to contribute:

    Some 2 months ago I was visited by 2 young women on behalf of the Goodwood Junction project (Lauren & Belinda) they listened to my concerns and when we discussed house structure damage due to forthcoming heavy-duty drilling along Cromer Parade, they asked if I would like to go on a register with the purpose of being visited by technical persons who would document (photographically) the state of properties so that any damage to said properties caused by forthcoming heavy drilling works could be appropriately rectified and compensated for. I agreed, and filled in the form.

    Some days ago. Lauren came to visit again, asking about my concerns regarding the pedestrian crossing from the lane located between Sasmee Park and my property (26 Millswood Cr.) towards Fairfax st. I explained my concerns and Lauren promised to contact the appropriate person/s; I have had no feedback about this issue yet. I took the opportunity to remind her about the promised technical staff who were to document state of properties before the heavy drilling along Cromer started. She told me "it will happen" but I have had no further news. A fellow traveller at Goodwood Station last week told me her property had already been photographed. I now ask: What are the criteria for which properties will be documented, and potentially compensated, and which not?

    I would also like to remark that those of us whose properties are close to the freight line have already suffered damage to house structure in the form of cracks due to constantly heavier trains at higher frequency rates over the last few years, which fact anecdotally confirms that the amount of freight being moved through our leafy green suburbs has already caused damage over time. Too easy to ascribe damage to weather change..