North East Rail Alliance and the ARTC Project Contents 1 Introduction to the North East Rail Alliance ...... 1 Euroa Connect Issues and Reccomendations ...... 3 Better Rail Issues and Recommendations ...... 10 Glenrowan Improvers considerations...... 18 North East Rail Alliance media release February 2021 ...... 22 North East Rail Alliance media release March 2021 ...... 23

The purpose and aims of the NE Rail Alliance. The North East Rail Alliance (NERA) was formed in late 2020 and represents the local rail action groups, Euroa Connect, Better Benalla Rail, Glenrowan Improvers and the Rail Action Group.

The Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) plan to run 1.8 km long, double-stacked freight trains from to . The trains will utilize the XPT standard gauge line in North East . This will require major changes to several station precincts, including Euroa, Benalla and Glenrowan where these trains will not fit under the existing overpass bridges.

The Alliance was formed in response to seemingly impenetrable difficulties with the ARTC that have existed since 2018 and the lack of action by the local Councils to ensure community views were represented in the Inland Rail Project planning process.

1

NERA was established with the following aims:

• To have a stronger and unified voice about the impact of the Inland Rail project on our local communities and station precincts. • To garner the support of each Council to achieve better local solutions for each town and station precinct. • For local Councils and State and Federal Governments to embrace the opportunity and synergy the inland rail project can provide for our towns. • To provide our State and Federal MPs with a stronger case in representing community concern and involvement. • To petition the State Government to take action about our station precinct design, amenity and functionality. • For State Government to provide the services of the Office of the Victorian Government Architect in the design work. • To provide support to each community in dealing with the ARTC. • For each town to continue independently with their own local community engagement, planning and activities

The North East Rail Alliance responds to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport reference in respect of the management of the Inland Rail project by the Australian Rail Track Corporation and the Commonwealth Government.

We note the Terms of Reference include:

a. financial arrangements of the project;

b. route planning and selection processes;

c. connections with other freight infrastructure, including ports and intermodal hubs;

d. engagement on route alignment, procurement and employment;

e. urban and regional economic development opportunities;

f. collaboration between governments;

g. interaction with National Freight and Supply Chain Strategy; and

h. any other related matters.

2

Euroa Connect – the ARTC and the Euroa railway precinct

Contents 1 Executive Summary ...... 4 Introduction ...... Error! Bookmark not defined. Recommendations to the Senate Standing Committee from Euroa Connect ...... 5 Euroa Connect: general issues ...... 5 The ARTC’s infrastructure proposal – a bigger, longer bridge ...... 5 The opportunity postCovid – infrastructure which connects and revitalises ...... 6 ARTC’s failure to consult ...... 6 ARTC’s failure to provide information ...... 7 Responding specifically to terms of reference ...... 7 Terms of Reference a: financial considerations ...... 7 Terms of Reference d: proper engagement ...... 7 Terms of Reference e: obtaining the best economic development opportunities...... 9 Terms of Reference h: ARTC’s failure to properly consider options other than the preferred ARTC option...... 9

3

Executive Summary

Euroa Connect supports the building of an underpass which, • Reunites the town with the removal of the overpass and creation of a green precinct (Euroa Township Strategy theme 2), • Establishes a town centre and the potential of an environment for arts, culture and events in the existing heritage railway buildings (Euroa Township Strategy Theme 3), • Emphasises the historical importance of the town and its buildings (Euroa Township Strategy Theme 4), • Offers the opportunity for investment and job creation (Euroa Township Strategy Theme 1), • Creates a vibrant gateway across the town and beyond, • Repurposes unused and vacant public land for leisure and recreation purposes and • Creates a solution which is more readily repurposed in the future.

Introduction Euroa Connect1 responds to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport reference in respect of the management of the Inland Rail project by the Australian Rail Track Corporation and the Commonwealth Government.

Euroa Connect is an informal community group. We provide this submission as one component of the North East Rail Alliance’s (NERA) submission. We are joining with Glenrowan, Benalla and Wangaratta in expressing our opposition to the ARTC’s proposals for our towns.

We note the Terms of Reference include:

i. financial arrangements of the project;

j. route planning and selection processes;

k. connections with other freight infrastructure, including ports and intermodal hubs;

l. engagement on route alignment, procurement and employment;

m. urban and regional economic development opportunities;

n. collaboration between governments;

o. interaction with National Freight and Supply Chain Strategy; and

p. any other related matters.

1 Euroa Connect is made up of people who have lived in Euroa for generations; those who have moved to the town in the last 40 years; tree changers; and young families looking for the benefits enjoyed in rural settings. Its members have architecture and design, logistics, and legal and other skills.

4

Recommendations to the Senate Standing Committee from Euroa Connect We recommend -

1. That the Senate Standing Committee notes the view expressed by Euroa Connect that inadequate community consultation and information processes have taken place with regard to the replacement of the existing Anderson Street Overpass in Euroa 2. That the ARTC be called to account for steamrolling public opinion and that the Senate Standing Committee notes that strategies undertaken by the ARTC have not taken account of the views of the majority of members of the Euroa Working Group (EWG) or the community as a whole 3. That further investigation be undertaken in respect of the • breach of the EWG code of ethics, • the lack of an ARTC compensation policy, • the lack of business cases to examine and support the options which were then disregarded by the ARTC, • the failure to adequately consult and address quality and procedural matters, and • the misrepresentation by the ARTC of their engagement activities. Euroa Connect: general issues We reject the ARTC’s commitment to construct a higher and longer railway bridge on Anderson Street in the middle of our town.

We say the ARTC infrastructure proposal

• has not been demonstrated to be value for money; • is the outcome of unaccountable and untransparent processes; • is not reflective of best practice community engagement; • is not best post COVID urban design practice, that it does not ‘build back better’, and it fails to respond to the need to connect communities. The ARTC’s infrastructure proposal – a bigger, longer bridge The ARTC’s proposed Anderson Street bridge would replace a structure built in the 1960s. The photo below shows the current railway bridge. The bridge imposes a clear division between residences on the north and south sides of the line and since it was built, without community consultation and agreement, it has diminished house prices and caused businesses to close. All services, shops, churches, schools, sportsgrounds, medical practices, the hospital, the police and fires stations, and most heritage buildings are on the south side of the bridge. The current bridge represents a disconnect. It is clearly good policy post COVID to seek to remedy that issue. The ARTC is unconcerned with that leadership opportunity, or with the impact its decision will have on our town. Its remit focusses solely on the demands driven by the double stacked intermodal freight trains which we understand will be 1800 metres in length and a capacity to travel at 115KM per hour through our town.

The ARTC’s proposal is a bridge will be a ramped concrete walled construction and will be at least three (3) metres higher than the current structure. It would be topped with a 2.4metre suicide barrier and will be required to have street lighting to meet government specifications. The ARTC’s bridge will continue the looming presence of the 1960s structure and the current inequity of access to services from the north to the south side of town. Being higher and longer the ARTC’s bridge will further impede visual and social amenity across the town, specifically in respect of the heritage precinct which stretches from Railway to Elliott Street.

5

The opportunity postCovid – infrastructure which connects and revitalises Addressing the isolation which has flowed from the health and societal challenge of COVID 19, the reimagining of the railway crossing and railway precinct in Euroa presents us all with opportunities to build back better and to elevate connectivity and green space as the central planks of the revitalisation of our communities and towns. The ARTC’s proposal fails comprehensively to take advantage of that opportunity. ARTC’s failure to consult The ARTC asserts it has consulted with the community about adopting the expanded overpass option. Euroa Connect does not accept that assertion. The ARTC talks about this process as ‘educating’ the community. The ARTC’s lack of commitment to genuine consultation is borne out in the ARTC 2019-20 annual report (page 19):

“A Euroa Working Group was also established to socialise local bridge design options and build community awareness.”

The Euroa community indicated its opposition to the ARTC bridge in 2019. It is only in the week of 8 March that the ARTC has convened a limited number of small community forums to seek community views and provide information on the urban design principles which will underpin its design proposal. No detailed plans have been produced over a three year period since the Euroa Working Group, established at the insistence of the , was established.

A Euroa Working Group of ten local people first met in June 2019. It is chaired by a person appointed by the ARTC. In early March 2021 five members of the EWG resigned stating that the ARTC

• had been engaged in a ‘marketing’ exercise; • its processes were defective; • its meeting minutes were inaccurate; and • it had never embarked on the process of consultation with any serious commitment to listening to the people who live and work in the town.

6

ARTC’s failure to provide information Euroa Connect has had to undertake its own due diligence to examine the option of road-under-rail at Anderson Street. The ARTC was expected to explore this option but instead it has been arbitrarily dismissed.

With the aid of skilled design and architecture volunteers Euroa Connect has developed a road- under-rail concept plan. Engineering advice supports this option.

See this attachment: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hbexrgkegzb8zt6/030321_V5_FINAL%20DRAFT%20EUROA%20TRAI N%20STATION%20PRECINT%20.pdf?dl=0

Responding specifically to terms of reference Terms of Reference a: financial considerations The ARTC has never provided any indication of the real cost of either its preferred option of a bigger bridge or as to alternative structures.

In a document provided to the Euroa Working Group at its third meeting the ARTC (19 August 2019) contrasted the road-under-rail option with the bridge option using $ signs. No figures as to actual expenditure were provided before options other than a bridge were dismissed.

The ARTC’s failure to produce accountable financial assessments of the expenditure required to undertake railway crossing works would not pass the most rudimentary audit. Neither the community nor the Parliament could be confident that the proposed bridge option represents ‘value for money’. The information provided to the Euroa Working Group could not be said to constitute a ‘business case’.

The ARTC method of presenting the ‘costs’ associated with building any structure above or below ground is not just inaccurate, but it also suggests the ARTC regards itself as unaccountable for the spending of public monies. An ANAO inquiry in 2016 made a number of recommendations about procurement and other matters. It is not clear whether the ARTC could be said to have complied with those recommendations.

The inquiries made by Euroa Connect demonstrate the flaws in the ARTC process. It is clear to engineers that a road-under-rail option would be less costly than the bridge option preferred by the ARTC.

The ARTC should be directed to properly cost the development in Euroa and conduct due diligence and adopt standard business practice which would see ‘value for money’ as the driving consideration. Terms of Reference d: proper engagement Euroa Working Group establishment The establishment of the ARTC-Euroa Working Group in 2019 has failed to produce ‘proper engagement’.

Failures illustrated This failure is illustrated in a number of ways.

7

• Four very senior, talented and highly skilled women of Euroa have resigned from the EWG. One of these women was recognised in 2016 for her outstanding community contribution to the people of Euroa. Another holds a degree in architecture and design. The other two women who have resigned are highly successful local businesswomen. • One senior male farmer in the region has also resigned remarking ‘the pop up shop of ARTC is a smoke screen as they have made their decisions well in advance’. Breach of Code of Conduct A male member of Euroa Connect has made a complaint about the failure of the ARTC and the EWG chairwoman to properly support one woman on the EWG who was maliciously and publicly attacked by another member of the EWG (Letters - Euroa Gazette).

The Code of Conduct requires members of the EWG to “act with honesty, integrity and professionalism” and “respect the views and beliefs of other members and provide an atmosphere where all members feel comfortable to contribute”. Neither of those requirements have been met in this specific matter. The EWG Code of Conduct appears not to have been enforced. This is unacceptable.

Addressing quality and procedural matters regarding community engagement The community has no confidence that project specific Quality Plan and Related Procedures have been developed for this project.

The community has no confidence that a project specific ‘internal Audit’ has been undertaken or is being considered. If such Audits have been undertaken the community and the general public is entitled to have access to those Internal Audits as it is only through these audits that the public can be assured that the appropriate level of scrutiny is being applied for transparency, accountability, and compliance.

The community has no confidence that external audits have been undertaken.

These internal and external audits are the only means by which the Minister for Finance and Australian National Audit Office when conducting compliance/performance audits could be confident of due process and due diligence having been undertaken in respect of community engagement.

The community and the general public are entitled to know where this type of information is accessible and publicly displayed.

Lack of consultation about compensation A genuine commitment to consultation about compensation for noise and other disturbance is also absent. The ARTC does not have a compensation policy and it has not discussed impacts with residents whose houses closely abut the railway line in Euroa, confining itself to talking to (some) people who reside near the proposed bridge site.

Misrepresentation by the ARTC of their engagement activities ARTC staff routine claim that they have the support of the ‘vast majority’ of the Euroa community for the bridge construction but they continually fail to provide the data and have never provided any analysis of the comments they receive from the community members who visit their weekly shop front.

Any suggestion that the ARTC has canvassed the broader community cannot be correct. It only started a shopfront in November 2020 and the opening hours are working hours of 4 hours per week so people who work cannot attend or have their say.

8

Members of the community who have attended the ARTC shopfront also advise that conflicting information is provided. On more than one occasion partners who attended at different times were given conflicting information.

Community members have also reported that they feel like the ARTC staff are arguing with them and hold them in contempt if they disagree with the ARTC position. Terms of Reference e: obtaining the best economic development opportunities. The ARTC has embarked upon the justification of the bigger bridge option without having any regard to the tourism opportunities its bridge construction project will foreclose.

It acknowledges that one of the disadvantages of its preferred option is the ‘visual impact’ of a higher and longer bridge. Social amenity will also be affected. A Euroa Connect street level pop-up talking to tourists and locals conducted on 7 March 2021 produced 50 comments all in favour of a ground level outcome, often because of the tourism potential associated with adopting road-under- rail.

No business case has been undertaken to explore any of these possibilities. It is apparent that the Strathbogie Shire has not been actively engaged in the assessment of possibilities and it is also clear that the Euroa Business Chamber has not been informed of developments – receiving its first invitation to attend a meeting in early 2021. Terms of Reference f: inadequate collaboration between governments. It is apparent that the ARTC has persistently sought to distance itself from and avoid responsibility for the decision making in respect of this railway crossing by asserting that others have the policy and practical decision-making authority.

For example - the ARTC shifted the policy responsibility to the Victorian government about a level crossing option (not the preferred option of Euroa Connect) by insisting that Victorian government policy was opposed to regional level crossing. When challenged on this assertion in respect of the regions (not the metropolis) the ARTC admitted that it was in fact promoting its own policies.

The ARTC has not provided access to Victorian government officers at the appropriate decision making level or in a manner which would promote the informed discussion of a range of options at the highest appropriate level. Terms of Reference h: ARTC’s failure to properly consider options other than the preferred ARTC option. It is clear from all the work that Euroa Connect volunteers have done, and from many of the questions that the community have been asking, that the ARTC has prematurely and inappropriately sought to limit the options which should be considered in respect of the Anderson Street railway crossing in the centre of Euroa.

This process has resulted in a sub-standard, short-sighted outcome which fails to address the need to develop infrastructure to consider post COVID realities and which the community rejects.

9

Better Benalla Rail – the ARTC and the Benalla railway precinct

Introduction Better Benalla Rail responds to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport reference in respect of the management of the Inland Rail project by the Australian Rail Track Corporation and the Commonwealth Government.

Better Benalla Rail is an informal community group. We provide this submission as one component of the North East Rail Alliance’s (NERA) submission. We are joining with Glenrowan, Benalla and Wangaratta in expressing our opposition to the ARTC’s proposals for our towns.

We note the Terms of Reference include:

a. financial arrangements of the project;

b. route planning and selection processes;

c. connections with other freight infrastructure, including ports and intermodal hubs;

d. engagement on route alignment, procurement and employment;

e. urban and regional economic development opportunities;

f. collaboration between governments;

g. interaction with National Freight and Supply Chain Strategy; and

h. any other related matters.

ARTC proposal The Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) plan to run 1.8 km long, double-stacked freight trains from Brisbane to Melbourne. They will use the XPT standard gauge line in North East Victoria. This will require major changes to several station precincts, including Benalla where these trains will not fit under the existing overpass.

Benalla Station has been fraught with access and safety problems since the installation of the to Melbourne passenger XPT line in 1962. The installation of a 4-metre-high traffic overpass and small, dark, unsafe and flood prone pedestrian underpass were poorly designed. Today this underpass does not meet code standards for any user including the disabled (Equality Act 2010 replacing Disability and Discrimination Act 1995).

For nearly sixty years Benalla Station has endured inadequate public access with minimal carparking, no taxi rank, and an insufficient and unsafe bus turning area, now utilised by up to 40 coaches per day. Emergency service vehicles are not catered for at all.

10

The XPT line and passenger platform are well away from the main station platform which creates additional safety problems when pedestrians, coaches and cars all use the same confined space. The XPT platform is too narrow and three carriages too short for the train necessitating that it stops twice. The step between train and platform is considerable. Many passengers, especially disabled, elderly and families with small children and baggage find this concerning and dangerous.

The ARTC now plan to also use this XPT line for transiting their long, high freight trains through Benalla and this would require a higher overpass.

The ARTC plan is to build a new 10-metre-high overpass, with access ramps running parallel to Mackellar Street. These ramps would be twice the existing configuration and have a 3m high concrete retaining wall. Alternatively, ARTC claim they would build a pedestrian only passenger underpass for access to the station but no details have ever been presented to the community.

Both options would compound the existing problems of access and safety by decreasing already limited parking and not resolving taxi and coach problems. Pedestrian access would be more difficult as car parking would be further away in residential streets. The visual amenity of the surrounding flat streetscape would be greatly impacted.

The Better Benalla Rail Community Solution The Inland Rail project provides an opportunity to fix the long-term problems at Benalla Station benefiting both freight and passenger needs.

The obvious and most simple solution is to relocate 1.3km of the standard gauge XPT line from one side of the Benalla station to the other. This would allow both lines to be on the west side of station requiring one more crossover at each end of the yard and no

11 overpass. The new section would rely on crossing onto the standard gauge VLine track, already leased by ARTC, and using a small section of the Oaklands Line.

This will negate the need for a new overpass, allow demolition of the existing overpass and enable direct vehicle and pedestrian access to the station as originally designed.

It would improve parking, allow taxi facilities and resolve coach parking and turning problems. Reclaiming and landscaping the XPT line area would provide a sound barrier and create an attractive environment.

Importantly, it would enable freight trains to travel on a dedicated freight line straight through Benalla rather than use the existing loop. This would be quicker, safer and quieter.

It would also allow the main platform at Benalla Station to be used by all passenger trains whether traveling north or south because there is no conflict caused by timetabling.

The ARTC claims, without substantiation, that budgetary considerations will not permit this solution due to signal adjustments and their assertion that a new station platform would be required. Better Benalla Rail disputes these claims.

Is it reasonable that Benalla residents be expected to accept an even more inferior station just to accommodate freight progress?

The Benalla community believe their alternative proposal will meet freight needs. It would be a potentially cheaper, more cost-efficient option that also offers improved on-site shunting opportunities. Most importantly it would restore the amenity of Benalla's historic 1883 station precinct.

12

direct entry to could be restored to the town centre… artist impression

Community Consultation The Community Consultation claims by the ARTC (see The Inland Rail Tottenham to Project Consultation summary report 2017-Sep 2019) are overstated and misleading.

Quote from the ARTC report: Over the last 12 to 18 months, ARTC has undertaken consultation with stakeholders and State agencies to understand local needs and design options in Benalla”.

The ARTC claims are substantially false. The claim the ARTC contacted neighbours of the rail precinct proved to be three people. The reported letterbox drop brochure to the wider Benalla community was actually never printed. The meeting with the Benalla CWA was with less than 12 people.

The information people did receive merely promoted the proposal and did not include any detail. It was this ‘sleight of hand’ that prompted Benalla resident group Bobcar to call a public meeting in Sept. 2019.

The September meeting was attended by an ARTC representative, some Councillors and sixty residents. The impact of the proposed new overpass was made clear. Even at that early stage Bobcar presented the alternative plan involving relocation of a small section of track that would negate the need for any overpass in Benalla.

The Benalla Rural City Council was not even briefed by the ARTC until November 2019.

Since then lack of forthcoming information or transparency by ARTC has led to the formation of a dedicated community group Better Benalla Rail (BBR) taking over from Bobcar and the initiation of a local Save Our Station (SOS) campaign with hundreds of signed up supporters.

13

BBR provides the community with accurate information and a platform for being heard through the webpage http://www.betterbenallarail.com, the Better Benalla Rail for Benalla Facebook page and Save Our Station campaign shop at 81 Nunn Street Benalla.

Better Benalla Rail group has constantly sought information from ARTC but has met continual resistance to accommodate requests. BBR has only received two drawings.

Mistrust by the community in ARTC is exacerbated when ARTC fails to even list Better Benalla Rail as an interested party or stake-holder group.

The ARTC Stakeholder Lead formed a Benalla Working Group in late 2020 to find a solution within the scope and budget of the Inland Rail project. However, given that contractors are already measuring up for the new overpass there is community concern this will be but a token consultation.

Flood Impact The environmental issues listed in the ARTC Report (The Inland Rail Tottenham to Albury Project Consultation summary report 2017- Sept 2019) do not even address the major issue of flooding.

In the disastrous 1993 Benalla flood, the existing overpass acted as a 'dam wall' which impeded the flow of water. Waters entering Benalla from the north were unable to disperse and banked up behind the wall. This increased both the height and duration of the flood and caused inundation of many homes. The XPT eastern line was flooded but none of the western lines.

Subsequent reviews of this flood event recommended major drainage tunnels be built under the railway lines to correct this man-made problem. Only minimal action on these recommendations was ever undertaken.

The ARTC plan will double the length and height of the overpass and its supporting wall. The plan does not provide for emergency services vehicles in the event of a future flood, fire or rail accident.

Economic Future The current revival of interest in rail globally can provide an increased economic benefit for Benalla. As a major station on the Sydney/Melbourne route, Benalla has an impressive history and a strong claim to being the gateway to North East Victoria.

Benalla's renowned Art Gallery, Street Art, Silo Art, Ceramic Mural, Winton Racetrack, Winery and Food Touring, Winton Wetlands, cycling and ecotourism plus the trail are all economic keys.

14

Benalla's proximity to Melbourne allows for promotion of tourist day trips and increased desirability as a retirement hub as well as being within commuting distance for flexible work from home arrangements.

To realise this potential, an attractive, accessible and functional passenger railway station in the township of Benalla is essential.

Planning concerns The Australian Rail Track Corporation plans for Benalla Station are seriously flawed and incomplete. Omissions and incorrect analysis of information render the document misleading and unsuitable as a basis to make a properly informed determination on the acceptability of their proposals.

The Better Benalla Rail group has constantly sought information from the ARTC. There has been continual resistance to our requests for information. As of this date we have been provided with just two drawings, both plans of their proposed overpass. On these drawings are references to additional drawings, part of the series of drawings. We have requested two additional drawings in the series, namely:

Drawings under Item 3 – 78,79, 80, provide detail of elevations. Drawings under Item 4 – Drainage 0212 and 0213, provide drainage and catchment info.

BBR has been denied access to these drawings, to quote the ARTC, “we will not be providing further information, including drawings and costing’s, on earlier designs as it is likely to cause confusion.”

The series of drawings produced for the ARTC for Benalla Station was created in March 2018 by Kellogg Brown and Root in South . The ARTC submission claims community consultation occurred in Benalla which as outlined above has been substantially false until late 2020 when the local Working Group was established and more recently the ARTC opened a ‘shop front’ in Benalla.

The fact is the design drawings for Benalla were produced before any consultation occurred, as shown by the dates. It is possible the drawings were produced without any actual visit to Benalla for assessment. It certainly challenges ARTC claims of “community consultation and feedback”. Better Benalla Rail has been responsible for making the Benalla community aware of the scale and implications of the ARTC plans. The ARTC has actively sought to play down any negative impacts. The ARTC report (The Inland Rail Tottenham to Albury Project Consultation summary report 2017-Sep 2019) approaches farcical with the claim that “distrust of the ARTC was an issue raised by a few”.

15

The Benalla community makes these requests

• Recognition of commuter and local needs to be as important as freight. • Design input from the Office of the Victorian Government Architect due to lack of confidence in ARTC/AEOC ability to design a station precinct to meet our needs. • For State Government and State Authorities involvement and broadening of ARTC “Working Group” to include these participants. • Provision to the community of data and drawings already prepared by the ARTC. • Transparency from the ARTC regarding proposed budgets for our towns. • Details of ARTC considerations of future freight hub considerations for Benalla.

Better Benalla Rail community group www.betterbenallarail.com

Title Block on ARTC Drawing showing dates and additional drawings

16

Benalla heritage lost due to the installation of the XPT line. The community will not allow further decimation.

17

Glenrowan Improvers – the ARTC and the Glenrowan railway precinct

We have come to a very important time in the life of Glenrowan. The decision made will affect the township and the Rural City of Wangaratta for at least the next 100 years. It is paramount the decision made is the correct one with forward thinking on development and the tourist prospects way into the future and after we are gone. This will be the only chance for many decades to come to protect the heritage, tourism for the township, liveability, and safety for all. The ARTC are a law unto their own. They don’t care what damage it done so long as they get the job done as cheap and quickly as possible. They change the staff constantly as a ploy. Questions are never answered as the changing staff are never told the actual facts of the set up. The staff sent are just PR people with no engineering background etc. They are simply there to divide and conquer to achieve the narrative that has already been decided on. The process is just that. Ticking boxes to justify the outcome that they desire. Consultation meetings are at a time that the working person cannot attend. The ARTC originally wanted to lower the tracks to allow the double decker trains to pass safely under the existing overpass. This could not be done. A new bridge is to be built. Reasons for not lowering the tracks were:- 1. The lowering level was 6 feet. They could only go down 4 feet. 2. Heritage Victoria would not allow this to happen.

The Glenrowan Improvers had previously requested that all locations be considered for the new overpass. In February 2018, the ARTC came to the Glenrowan Primary School. They had a drawing of a plan with the location of a new bridge on the Beaconsfield site. An open Span Bridge.

18

They had not considered all locations as previously asked. They admitted at that meeting that the requested Thomas Street location be included. This was not done. Glenrowan Improvers was fortunate to obtain a drawing at that meeting. They were how they came up with this drawing as no site levels or inspections had been done by the time of the meeting. The answer was a google map of Glenrowan was sent to an firm and asked to draw an open span bridge along Beaconsfield Parade. As you see in this drawing the bridge will go way past Siege Street and it will raise Gladstone Street considerably. Even though the right side of the picture is cut off you can easily see this will happen. Gladstone street will now be turned into a crossroads. To draw a bridge and make it fit certainly will not be acceptable. When the ARTC finally got in touch with Glenrowan Improvers in August 2019 at the Vintage Hall Café, the engineer at that time revealed to us that the main street – Gladstone Street, would have to be raised. So that means a hump in the middle of an intersection, the loss of bus and caravan parking to the side, the loss of carparks in Gladstone Street and possibly beside the Bakery. The one-way street at the back of the shops would also be blocked off. So, no rear access to Tourist Centre, Billy Tea Rooms, Smoke House, and Cate’s Cottage. The public bus on a Wednesday will not be able to drive around to the pickup and drop-off zone. At the other side of the Bridge, it will finish almost at Church Street. This will then cause a problem for the residences to enter and leave their properties. The funding we were told was $8,000,000.00. The open span bridge will cost 3 times more. The alleged location bridge will be built over the Station Masters residence site which was part of the story in the siege. Plans for a reconstruction will never be able to take place in the future. Development of the Police paddocks will not be a success in the future either. Whether we like it or not GLENROWAN IS A TOURIST TOWN because of its past history. This history cannot be erased or altered but must be enhanced as we plan into the future for further development. Glenrowan Improvers were told by Bevan that no matter what we said or did our views wouldn’t be considered. The school is very busy now, and the safety of the students is concerning. School buses, caravans, cars, and trucks use Beaconsfield Parade extensively. If we can reduce the schools’ traffic would be a huge bonus. RRV John Stafford, Benalla Office, came to Glenrowan and he along with Richard Hughes – an engineer that has worked on many projects on railways in America and the Ettamogga Hub – walked the streets and did site levels before they concluded that Thomas Street was the ideal location for the new bridge for many reasons. 1. The height is hallway there due to the cutting. 2. Will give direct access to Glenrowan – Moyhu road. 3. Will be able to create a very important diamond access on and off the freeway. This in turn will have the quarry trucks direct access too the freeway without having to go through the town unnecessarily. 4. Caravans will have a better access to the caravan park. 5. Hamilton Park residents will have better direct access to the freeway. 6. Reduce the traffic flow around the school. 7. Leave what is left of the Siege area intact to allow tourism. 8. Better clearer view entering on the Old . 9. Allow for future growth into the town. 10. Allow safer streets for tourists and residence.

19

11. Less road works the rate payers have to fund giving more revenue to spend on other important issues around the town. 12. No loss of car parking or access to the one-way street. This also allows for access to properties front and rear that are in jeopardy with the Beaconsfield site. Glenrowan Improvers then arranged a meeting with the Mayor Dean Rees, CEO Brendan McGrath, Manager Alan Clark and Engineer Marcus Goonan. We had a great meeting as we able to put forward an alternative plan that would bring Glenrowan into the future. Our once in a lifetime chance to get the traffic, bridge compliant and roads sorted correctly. We were given the task to go away and see if our plans could be achieved by securing the extra funding required. Glenrowan Improvers never heard form ARTC again until we were coming out of the first lockdown 2020. That meeting was terrible as we tried to state our case but met with animosity. We had it hinted to us that the ARTC will only take notice of Council, State, and federal Governments. That was the second time that was saidGlenrowan Improvers . Later to hear back that we were telling a bunch of lies. That wasn’t a good feeling. Then to find out that the ARTC wanted the council to sign a non-disclosure document really was the worst. Thank you, council, for not doing so. A notice went into the Chronicle that the ARTC had met regularly with Glenrowan residents and that a survey had been done. On a couple of occasions, Glenrowan Improvers had requested the results of this survey and are still waiting for the results. Delaying tactics at its best. Richard then went away and drew up plans for the alternative location. As you can see there will be a pedestrian and Bike Bridge over the railway line in Beaconsfield Parade. Glenrowan Improvers have joined forced with Benalla and Euroa to fight the ARTC on their destructiveness. We are called the North East Rail Alliance. NERA. The ARTC started to conduct fortnightly sections in the Lions park at Glenrowan on a Tuesday. Again, the time in inappropriate for the working person to attend. 10am to 1pm. Glenrowan Improvers met with them on the 17th November with Richard Hughes and asked numerous questions that they could not answer and said they would find out and let us know. We’re still waiting. Again, it was hinted that they really don’t notice of the community. Just a tick boxing exercise is all I can see. Give someone a job to make ARTC look as though they are doing something other that being deceptive. By the ARTC doing what they want is actually planning Glenrowan into the Future. Their sole purpose is ONLY TO BUILD A BRIDGE. The council and community are the ones to plan and shape the town. One of Glenrowan Improvers concerns is how will they build a secure, safe, and stable overpass in Beaconsfield Parade if they couldn’t dig down more than four feet? Surely the pylons would have to be put deeper into the ground to be stable enough to carry the weight of the heavy vehicles that will use it. Richard Hughes started working with the patron Senator for Indi Senator Jane Hume and her office on securing the extra funding required. As the McKoy Street intersection has been given bucket loads of funds to correct – Richard is now redesigning and costing this project. He met with Senator Hume’s office mid-December and was told that the ARTC are going back to the beginning with their plans on the NE Line upgrade. He has designed a safer intersection for that area at a much cheaper cost on the proviso that the left-over funds be transferred to Glenrowan. He has been assured the funds are there to complete the works required.

20

On December 10th, 12th, 13th,14th, and 15th,December 2020 Glenrowan Improvers walked many streets in Glenrowan Door knocking and speaking with the residence. We discovered that the ARTC or no other person had taken the time to speak with them. In conclusion the majority preferred the alternative bridge site to the one the ARTC are pushing for. With the Councils help and support we can achieve a great outcome.

Glenrowan Improvers Inc. A0034407D 11 – 13 Siege Street, Glenrowan, Vic 3675 [email protected] ABN 16110728220 Chairman: Secretary/Treasurer: Helen Senior Pam Stirling PH: 0407 366 813 PH: 0409 780 222

21

Media release Australian Rail Track Corporation facing increased opposition. Feb. 2021

Opposition to ARTC plans for regional Victorian rail stations continues to grow. An online meeting of representatives from Glenrowan, Euroa and Benalla discussed ARTC plans for their respective towns this week.

The fact sharing session provided an opportunity to hear what was proposed for each railway station. The Heritage listed Glenrowan precinct faces a major upheaval. The Beaconsfield Parade bridge will be raised causing significant changes to the National heritage site.

The Euroa experience of working as part of an “ARTC Community Consultative Group” revealed a process designed to provide the appearance of consultation. The outcome for Euroa would appear to be basically what the ARTC originally planned.

Benalla has recently had a similar “Consultative Committee” established by the ARTC. Given the Euroa experience there is considerable scepticism regarding any successful outcome from this development.

The group discussed strategies to focus wider attention on the ARTC plans and the reluctance of the Corporation to engage seriously with effected communities. All three described dealing with a process designed to deflect community concerns away from the decision makers by being forced to deal with an ever-changing array of “community consultants” with little experience, knowledge or power.

All participants supported the aims of the project, to create more efficient rail freight infrastructure. All felt this should not result in a reduction of local amenity or accessibility, it was considered that we deserve “an outcome we can all be proud of”, as previously stated by ARTC Victorian Manager Mr Ed Walker.

Plans for further joint activities are being developed. Deputy PM Michael McCormack is the Minister responsible for the ARTC, so initial actions will focus on local Federal National Party Members. Strategies and opportunities for joint public events to highlight the issues are being developed.

Glenrowan Heritage Precinct : Glenrowan is the place most identifiable with the story of the anti-authoritarian and risk-taking Kelly and with that of bushrangers in general. The eight-hectare Glenrowan Heritage Precinct includes the key sites of the final Kelly conflict, including the original railway platform, the site of Anne Jones's Glenrowan Inn that was burnt to the ground by police and the site of Ned Kelly's fall and capture – the ‘Kelly Log’. The site allows visitors access to the actual location where the pivotal siege events unfolded and an insight into a moment that helped to shape our nation. http://www.environment.gov.au/heritage/places/national/glenrowan

22

Media release

NORTH EAST COMMUNITIES ASK FOR BETTER DESIGN OUTCOMES. March 2021 The scope of the ARTC Inland Rail project must be expanded to include a guarantee that urban design excellence is built into the project framework. This is the message from four North East Victoria communities, who have commenced lobbying Govt reps, in a bid to ensure the public interest is not overlooked when the new Inland Rail project works commence. The North East Rail Alliance (N.E.R.A.) with members from Wangaratta, Glenrowan, Benalla and Euroa, came together initially to discuss shared concerns around the Inland Rail project. After three meetings a common theme has emerged . . . - ARTC has given clear indications that they will be unable to meet the design expectations of the towns through which the new goods trains will pass. - ARTC's priority is simply to provide the infrastructure to ensure double stacked freight trains can move freely between Melbourne and Brisbane. - There is real and broad concern that affected communities will be severely compromised without a more considered approach. - It is patently clear that regional communities are not being afforded the same urban design considerations given to metropolitan communities. Mostly, these communities seek to avoid a repeat of the design nightmares foist upon them over 60 years ago. The brutal architecture imposed back then, a knee-jerk response to alleviate safety concerns, continues to impact towns including Euroa. Dangerous traffic conditions, divided townships, concrete overkill and lack of heritage considerations are lasting legacies in each of the affected communities. While supportive of improved rail freight infrastructure along the corridor, the Alliance members want the federal and state governments to recognise that such improvements impact greatly on the urban design of these regional centres. Rail Infrastructure projects like those proposed within these towns offer opportunity for improved urban design to encourage growth, further development, new green spaces and to create new dynamic civic presence around regional rail stations and rail crossings. None of which are within the current scope and budget of the ARTC inland rail project. N.E.R.A. is asking that further funds be directed towards each local government authority. The aim of the funds being for each local government area to engage the local community as well a broad range of design professionals, from not only Australia but abroad, to develop the area surrounding the proposed rail interventions. The effect being to ensure creative, innovative and sustainable urban design for these regional areas. "Rail precincts in rural towns once defined the town, and so often defined civic pride and sense of place for the inhabitants. It's time we invested in those values again" said N.E.R.A spokesperson, Alana Johnson. "The group will be working with local govt, whose role to date, had been quite limited. However N.E.R.A. members understand the only way to get a better deal will be for local Councils to speak up on behalf of their communities."

23