Angy Kangy ‘railroaded’

KANGY Angy residents say they’ve been railroaded.
Nanjing Night Net

Although Transport for NSW insists it is still going through the approval process for its Intercity rail maintenance facility in the tiny Central Coast rural area, residents believe it was a done deal from the minute WyongCouncil threatened “political level” opposition to the facility on a council-owned site, and directed the NSW Government to Kangy Angy.

Residentsbelieve their fate was sealed when the council, Transport for NSW and Department of Premier and Cabinet met in February 2015 to discuss the proposal, seven months before Kangy Angy residents knew whenthe first resident was handed a compulsory acquisition notice.

Their view was confirmed last Thursday when criticism of theNSW Government decision to have the 500-train Intercity fleet built in South Korea was countered by newsAustralian firm UGL had won acontract to maintain the fleet at Kangy Angy.

“They keep saying it’s‘subject to approval’ in the fine print, but this whole processhas been a farce. The NSW Government seems to have selected this site on the basis of expediency,” Kangy Angy Residents Action Group speaker Neil Bolte said.

The first of the Intercity fleet of trains between Sydney and Newcastle is expected to be operating by 2019.

Protest: Kangy Angy residents say Transport for NSW should not be applicant and determining authority for a controversial train maintenance facility in an area that is an identified floodplain.

Kangy Angy residents staged a protest on Sunday against the project and the approval process which has Transport for NSW as both applicant and determining authority. It relies onpart 5 of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Act allowingpublic authorities to“assess and self-determine infrastructure that is not likely to significantly effect the environment”.

Neil Bolte and his group say the development on a floodplain will require at least 100,000 cubic metres of fill, and probably much more, and the government must now build a major bridge because the originally proposed access floodsregularly. They say itwill remove 10 per cent of the Central Coast’s swamp mahogany population, and Transport for NSW’s own assessmentfound a previouslyunidentified frog.

“If it’s not been found before that would tend to indicate it’s rare,” said Mr Bolte.

A noise report commissioned by Kangy Angy residents criticised Transport for NSW’s noise assessment as“vague in some areas” and with unquantified noise impacts“which may significantly increase” final mitigation costs.

Residents saya full environmental impact statement is needed and the project should be assessed under standard NSW planning regulations and processes.

“They’re rushing it to meet a deadline and throwing public money at it,” Mr Bolte said.

Protest: Kangy Angy residents say Transport for NSW should not be applicant and determining authority for a controversial train maintenance facility in an area that is an identified floodplain.

IMAGE

Comments are closed.