Moorebank Intermodal Precinct West - Concept & Stage 1

Issues -- I object to local congestion 24 / 7 in a village community. I object to 24/7 diesel fumes and associated illnesses with these 1000 movements of trucks per week. Badgers creek is supported with the appropriate inforstucture to support the airport and a feed to the M7 and M5 as the only real solution with federal support to a long term need to support economic growth in the region.

To whom it may concern,

As a new home owner in the Moorebank area, I object to the Intermodal project.

Traffic is currently congested and this project would make matters significantly worse.

Furthermore I feel it would have an adverse impact on the property prices in the area and paint the area as Industrial rather than residential.

I object to the Intermodal project as I feel it would adversely affect traffic congestion in the area and reduce property prices.

From a forward thinking perspective the Intermodal would be better located at Badgery's Creek near the proposed airport.

Moorebank is a poor choice for the Intermodal.
Badgery's Creek has ample room to accommodate all that is required now and into the future and is therefore a much better alternative.

Application number: SSD 5066/EPBC 2011/6086
Project name: Moorebank Intermodal Environmental Impact Statement
Objection to the Moorebank Intermodal Proposal
Name: XXXX XXXX
Address: XXXX XXXX
Phone: Moorebank
Email: XXXX XXXX
Signature: XXXX XXXX
I want my name released online with my submission: NO
I oppose the Moorebank Intermodal proposal for the following reasons:
The site identified for the Moorebank intermodal is the wrong location for such a facility. It is situated on prime, urban, riverfront land. This land should be used to assist the government in solving the housing crisis identified in the draft Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney, by using the development as a premium riverside residential lifestyle precinct. The land has the capacity to house 40,000 people.
The land is situated less than 30 Kilometres from the Sydney CBD. It is in close proximity to public transport, including the T2 Airport and T2 Inner West & South lines (both of which have capacity to accommodate urban growth in this area), the Liverpool to Parramatta T-Way, the M90 Liverpool to Burwood bus route, and many suburban bus routes.
The Auditor-General's report recently released shows a target of 800,000 TEUs to be moved to and from NSW Ports by rail in 2020. In a recent Sydney Morning Herald article, J Wiggins wrote that 'Asciano plan to invest $112 million in their sites to increase capacity and making Chullora more competitive, able to handle an increased capacity from Port Botany, and open for operation before Moorebank'.With the Chullora intermodal capacity increased to 800,000 TEU it will easily be able to support increased in freight through Port Botany while the Badgerys Creek site is planned and constructed.
The NSW Long Term Transport Master plan states there are significant challenges in using infrastructure that is shared between freight and passenger journey such as the current rail lines. This also supports a purpose built facility at Badgerys Creek to suit the future freight needs and targets of NSW.
The T1 Western line was identified in the Auditor-General's report as a poor performer in on-time running, while the T2 Airport and T2 Inner West & South lines performed better in this area. This suggests that the Moorebank location would be better suited to residential development than to heavy industry.
The traffic congestion in the area, particularly on the M5 and Hume Highway, indicates that additional heavy vehicle movements in this area would be detrimental to the road network. The Planning and Assessment Commission have already recognised traffic congestion in the area as a significant factor. Another reason to move the proposal to Badgerys Creek.
In short, the Moorebank location is perfectly positioned and adequately serviced by public transport to assist the government in meeting its housing targets set in the Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney.
The Freight Intermodal should be located at Badgerys Creek, near the proposed 2nd airport.

Strongly object to the proposal for an number of reasons:
1. Major increase of diesel emissions into the air atmosphere due to massive increase of trucks in the area.
2. Will add additional traffic to what is already the worst piece of road in the whole of Australia (M5) significant impacting on the travel times in both directions.
3. Intermodal terminal has no place in high residential area.
4. Huge impact on the health of local residents including a very large population of kids.
5.Other better alternatives avaliable as suge2 by the local council.
6. Significant reduction of residential property values.
7. Loss of water front first class land that could be developed to house thousands of residents.

The Moorebank Intermodal is a terrible idea as it will impact on the community and on traffic congestion.

There is no way that 8000 extra trucks on the roads around Moorebank will have little effect on projected congestion in the area. If you add this number of trucks on top of the vehicles that already use Cambridge Avenue and Anzac Road to avoid the M5 congestion, there will be a serious safety issue on our hands. If an intermodal is approved, Cambridge Avenue and Anzac Road need to be properly widened with a proper bridge over the Georges River. Four lanes for both roads would better accommodate traffic flow and as someone who lives in the area and sees the terrible congestion every day, there is no way that the 'scientific' numbers the MIC gave at their presentation last month were accurate. My experiences of driving in the area at peak hour prove otherwise, even since the widening of the M5.

Either way I do not agree that, with the current housing crisis, that there should be an intermodal. Put in next to the second airport at Badgery's Creek and improve the Northern Road and Elizabeth Drive to accommodate. The population in that area is minimal and since an airport has already been approved, it is the logical choice. Turn the land next to the Georges River into much needed residential housing, as I would certainly want to buy a house there if it became available. It would improve the lifestyle of the current residents and allow for community development to be achieved properly. Do not sentence the residents of south west Sydney to a life of congestion, and do not allow the wildlife and beauty of the Georges River to waste. It will be a huge regret and the NSW Department of Planning will be to blame, for not reflecting the wishes of the elected representatives of Liverpool and Campbelltown.

I oppose the Moorebank Intermodal proposal and Environmental Impact Statement for the following reasons:

The Moorebank intermodal will place more traffic on the already congested road network. 10,000 heavy vehicles per day will need to access and leave the terminal utilising the M5 and local roads, 5,000 cars per day will need to access the site.

The Moorebank intermodal will not be an economically viable investment for the Federal Government and the state of New South Wales. The proposal should be relocated to Badgerys Creek in order to reduce supply-chain costs and cater for future urban growth.

Proper consideration about the cost of this proposal has not been undertaken, especially the cost of maintaining assets such as road infrastructure. There needs to be a greater transparency of costs for the development and ongoing costs relating to the operation of this facility. A cost/benefit analysis must be carried out and made public.

Traffic

* The proposal will move the congestion from Port Botany to Moorebank, which is already congested;

* The Modelling does not cater for the predicted growth of the region;

* The intersections and road network are already congested, the proposal will increase traffic delays;

* Trucks `weaving' onto and off the M5 between the Moorebank and Hume Highway interchanges will cause accidents and present a danger to my family; and

* Trucks parking and taking short‐cuts through the nearby streets will make the area unsafe for my family and friends.
Noise

* There is no noise wall along the rail corridor along the Georges River, so noise will carry particularly at night;

* There will be no way to mitigate noise from the unloading/loading and movement of containers within the terminal, especially for residents living within 400 metres of the site;

* There will be no way to mitigate noise from the breaking and shunting of trains which will need to happen on site;

* There will be wheel squeal due to the tight radius curves needed for trains to enter and exit the site; this will keep me awake at night; and

* Residents up to 3km from Port Botany are kept awake at night, I don't want this for my family.

Air quality

* There will be Increased diesel fumes in the community generated from locomotives, heavy vehicles and other heavy equipment used on site, these fumes are carcinogenic;

* My family and friends will develop cancer or other health problems from the increased diesel fumes;

* The South‐west Sydney is already heavily polluted due to the topography of the area;

* There will be dust and odour generated from this site, particularly during the construction period.

Health

* The intermodal in this area will make my family sick; and

* I believe even one person having to use a puffer on one occasion as a result of this proposal is not acceptable, the government shouldn't plan industrial development in a residential area.


Heritage

* We have a strong military history in this area and we are proud of our heritage;removal of heritage features from the site will break ties for the community.

Location

* The site is surrounded by residential development, this site should have never been selected due to the young families who have settled in this area;

* This area is full of quiet, leafy suburbs with strong community connections, this development will be detrimental to the area and depreciate its value; and

* Other sites are preferable, such as Badgerys Creek, which does not have residential development nearby

Contamination

* The unloading of import container in this area will have the potential of destroying native flora and fauna; and

* The unloading of import container in this area will have the potential of destroying the Georges River.

Container destinations
Moorebank Intermodal Company claim that the majority of containers would be delivered within a radius of 20km from the terminal, a study carried out by a modeling firm on behalf of our community showed that two thirds of all containers from Port Botany are destined for the western suburbs not South Western Sydney which are between 26 to 35 km west of the proposed terminal.

Terminal container capacity (TEU's)
The SIMTA Concept plan was approved by the Planning and Assessment Commission on the basis that they are limited to 250k of TEU's + 250k subject to the ability of the road network to handle the volume of Heavy Vehicle traffic. This being the case the same restriction should be applied to the Moorebank Intermodal proposal. The same should also apply if the operations of SIMTA & Moorebank intermodal site are combined.

There has been a lot of confusion around the fact that two proposals have been proposed for one area (SIMTA and MIC).

The cumulative impacts of the two proposals have not been adequately explained or addressed by the proposals; and

There is confusion as to the total traffic generated from the two proposals, as the modelling for each is different.

I support strategic planning and good land use. The intermodal development should be moved to a non-residential area, like Badgerys Creek, or Eastern Creek.

Please reject this proposal on the grounds that it is not in the public interest with other better suited sites available.

Why dont the politicians who dont live in the area,listen to the people,who do,instead of listening to the big corporate heads, who line there pockets with donations,we have to live here none of them do,beautify the area not with trucks smoke and acres of metal boxes,moving it to badgerys creek,by the new airport makes plenty sense,i pray someone in Parliament has sense to make sense NO TO MOOREBANK

The Executive Committee of Liverpool Action Group have instructed me to protest on the siting of a Container Intermodal at Moorebank.
While we acknowledge the need for infrastructure, this development in the middle of prime residential real estate is plainly wrong.
The Liverpool Action Group protests AGAINST an Intermodal at Moorebank.

I find it reprehensible that the size and scope of this proposal along the George's river and so close to a residential community is even being considered. While the need for transport hubs is a sad reality the impact on the river and the community is ill considered and completely lacking environmental issues and impacts.
Millions of dollars have been spent to restore the river and its recovery has been slow the undeniable damage that will occur is catastrophic.

You will receive numerous submissions relating to the unacceptable impacts on the surrounding suburbs and I hope numerous from those who have lived and worked in Liverpool for half a century and who know and understand the access issues already affecting this city.
I do not believe that this location and its magnitude will serve either the community nor its residents in the long term.

Whilst the inevitable plethora of imported goods persists the health and well being of the community and the environment are a fair and reasonable price to pay.

I strongly request that consideration of the impacts weighs heavily on those who will eventually be able to walk away leaving a sicker, Frailer and unrepairable legacy on future generations.

Application number: SSD 5066/EPBC 2011/6086
Project name: Moorebank Intermodal Environmental Impact Statement
Objection to the Moorebank Intermodal Proposal
Name: Dominic Scutella
Address: 118 Daintree Drive Wattle Grove NSW 2173
Phone: 0408 9731 97
Email: [email protected]

The Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the Moorebank Intermodal Company (MIC) states that the proposed Moorebank intermodal will allow imports and exports to grow through Port Botany. This will mean additional traffic on the already congested road network. 10,000 heavy vehicles per day will need to access and leave the terminal utilising the M5 and local roads.
The MIC state that an additional intermodal is required to reduce supply chain costs; however, it is questioned how the proposal at Moorebank will assist in reducing these costs. The proposed terminal in Moorebank will include transferring freight by rail less than 25 Kilometres from Port Botany, while increasing the handling costs of the supply chain with containers having to be loaded and unloaded multiple times in a very short distance. Infrastructure NSW has also questioned the viability of short haul freight and the funding of additional intermodal facilities until this has been properly investigated. That being the case, the increase in capacity at Chullora should be investigated with proper planning for a true intermodal at Badgerys Creek. Jenny Wiggins, in her Sydney Morning Herald article, states that Asciano is primed to invest $112 million to `compete "vigorously" with its own intermodal terminals', for example Chullora, and challenge the Moorebank intermodal essentially casting doubts over the economic viability of the Moorebank site (Wiggins, J., 2014, `Asciano challenges Moorebank freight hub', Sydney Morning Herald, 2 July 2014).
To truly reduce supply chain costs, the intermodal location should be moved to Badgerys Creek, a facility more than 40 Kilometres from the Port with access to key roads such as the M7 and the proposed M9. This location will also have the capacity to support future growth centres. The M9 motorway will provide `a direct link between the Central Coast and the Illawarra, connecting the growth centres of Camden, Penrith and Windsor' (O'Rourke, J., 2014, `What Sydney needs to transport us to the future', Daily Telegraph, 3 November 2014). An intermodal at Badgerys Creek demonstrates good strategic and growth planning.
Why Badgerys Creek is a better location than Moorebank
The MIC, in their Environmental Impact Statement, attempt to describe why Moorebank has been selected as a location. However, Badgerys Creek is better suited to meet the criteria that the MIC has listed.
Badgerys Creek is an ideal location for an intermodal terminal to handle both interstate and import-export freight. This is because it is:
* long enough for interstate freight trains without the need for trains to be broken up and shunted, creating unnecessary additional noise in the area;
* big enough to handle the number of container movements required - up to 1.1 million twenty foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) per year of import-export freight and another 500,000 TEUs per year of interstate freight. This is a greater capacity than the proposed Moorebank site;
* strategically located in an area where a new rail line is planned for the airport;
* near the M7 Motorway, a link to the West and North West where it has been identified by Deloitte that most of the container freight will be headed, and accessible to the M5;
* near the proposed M9 Motorway, providing the ability of the intermodal to service future growth centres;
* near the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA), future industrial areas and future freight markets in Western Sydney, where two-thirds of container freight received at Port Botany will be transported.
* further from Port Botany than the Moorebank site, making rail a viable alternative to trucks, and reducing supply chain costs;
* in development, meaning that truck access can be configured into the $3.5 billion already allocated to the surrounding road infrastructure network rather than upgrading roads that are already at capacity in the Moorebank precinct; and
* owned by the Australian Government and available for use consistent with the airport.
Problems with the Moorebank proposal
The Moorebank site constrained by a number of issues:
* The area is already suffering from significant traffic congestion, the addition of an estimated 10,000 truck movements and approximately 5,000 passenger car movements per day will exacerbate this congestion.
* The Planning and Assessment Commission (PAC), following their community meeting on the SIMTA proposal, has identified that the Moorebank area is already suffering from significant traffic congestion. `The community has strongly argued that the proposal is only going to move the congestion from Port Botany to the Liverpool/Campbelltown region. The Commission understands the Moorebank site is constrained by the surrounding residential and industrial land uses and the already heavily congested local and regional road network. If the concept plan were to be approved with the levels of throughput proposed by both SIMTA and MIC, then clearly the community's case is strengthened.' (2014, Planning and Assessment Commission, SIMTA assessment).
* The SIMTA Concept plan was approved by the PAC on the basis that they are limited to 250,000 TEU's, plus an additional 250,000 ONLY if the road network is able to handle the volume of heavy vehicle traffic. This being the determination made by the PAC, and in the absence of a master plan that would have enabled the commission to assess the impact of both proposals as part of the one process, this limit should apply to the operation of both SIMTA and Moorebank intermodal sites combined. TEU's should be limited to a total of 250,000 in this precinct.
* The economic viability of the site has been questioned due to the limits placed by the PAC on the number of TEUs SIMTA can move through their terminal. Chief Executive of Asciano has also questioned the economic viability of the site as previously mentioned, stating that Asciano plan to invest $112 million in their sites to increase capacity and making Chullora more competitive, able to handle an increased capacity from Port Botany, and open for operation before Moorebank (Wiggins, J., 2014, `Asciano challenges Moorebank freight hub', Sydney Morning Herald, 2 July 2014). With the Chullora intermodal capacity increased to 800,000 TEU it will easily be able to support increased in freight through Port Botany while the Badgerys Creek site is planned and constructed.
* The Moorebank site is surrounded by water on all sides. This means that the complex road and rail upgrades needed to service an intermodal in this area will be extremely costly. Liverpool Council has estimated these upgrades are likely to cost in excess of $750 million.
* There are significant problems relating to air quality, construction and operational noise impacts created by the intermodals. A proposal of this size and nature should not be earmarked for a residential area.
* The PAC determination of the SIMTA proposal has already revealed that Particulate Matter 2.5 levels in the local area are close to or above the advisory criteria for this pollutant, this applies to the current background levels as well as the predicted impacts. Additional diesel and liquid natural gas powered vehicles in this area will exacerbate this problem.
* Noise impacts, light spill and air pollution will have a detrimental effect on the local community, some of whom live as close as 400 metres from the site. Residents around Port Botany living as far as three kilometres from the port are affected by these factors; many residents in Chifley for example have been very vocal about sleep disturbance in the online domain.
* The Moorebank site will have a detrimental impact on the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre. The presence and accessibility of an art and cultural facility in a low socio-economic area, such as Liverpool, is essential for positive community growth.
Problems with the process
The Freight Infrastructure Advisory Board (FIAB) recommended a master plan for the site, this was not undertaken. Residents agree the SIMTA and MIC proposals should have been considered as a single precinct application. This has created an unfair advantage for the proponents with confusion being created among the community with both proponents presenting different figures. The fact that both proposals were assessed separately also means that media attention highlighting the different stages of the planning and assessment process has also created confusion in the community. Coupled with this, the relocation of the Defence National Storage Distribution Centre (DNSDC) and the current construction works at Holsworthy Barracks have also exacerbated this confusion with many people within the community thinking the proposal is already in its construction phase.
Liverpool Council, in meeting with PAC expressed disappointment that a master plan was not undertaken and confirms that this has created confusion within the community `The ad hoc approach .........leaves gaps and inconsistencies in the information available resulting in a lack of transparency and reduced faith in government decision making.'
A master plan would have reduced this confusion and allowed the community to better understand the impacts these proposals will have on their family, friends and neighbours. It would have allowed the community to better refute claims made by the proponents, and have a much greater grasp of any proposed mitigation strategies for this proposal.
The MIC has also created confusion and doubt within the community, adding to a reduced faith in government process and decision making. They have done this first by splitting their figures. Rather than telling the community that there will be 1.55 million TEUs going through the site, they have split these figures between import-export and interstate. And rather than stating that there will be an estimated 297 train movements expected at the site, they have again split these figures to make them sound lower. The Liverpool Leader, in their article `Intermodal company gives community $1m for compensation package but concerned residents aren't buying it', reports on community concerns around the consultation process. This `compensation package' will be completely inadequate to address the impacts this proposal will have on the area, and made MIC seem like it was trying to `buy community support'. At the same time MIC also made a highly publicised donation to the Liverpool Mayoral Ball, which Liverpool Council subsequently rejected (Hansen, N., 2014, `Liverpool Mayor knocks back $5k ball donation from intermodal group but the cash is still destined for charity', Liverpool Leader, 22 August 2014).
An intermodal at Badgerys Creek would not require this level of compensation, as it can be properly planned for a suitable area; it also has residential and council support.
Second, the Sydney Morning Herald in their article `Waterfront baron and Liberal Party donor scored inside running on freight hub tender' has highlighted a possible issue around transparency and due process in the awarding of tenders for the Moorebank precinct. In light of the recent ICAC investigations and the problems faced by the Newcastle community, transparency and due process are paramount in the government decision making process.
Key issues from the community
There were some issues raised by local representatives and the community at the PAC determination meeting on the SIMTA proposal. These have remained largely unchanged in relation to the MIC proposal.
Traffic and access * The proposal will move the congestion from Port Botany to Moorebank, which is already congested;
* Modelling does not include the predicted growth of the region;
* The intersections and road network are already congested, how is it possible for the proposal to decrease traffic delays?
* Trucks `weaving' onto and off the M5 between the Moorebank and Hume Highway interchanges, this is going to cause accidents; and
* Trucks parking and taking short‐cuts through the nearby streets.
Noise * There is no noise wall along the rail corridor along the Georges River, so noise will carry particularly at night;
* Noise from the unloading/loading and movement of containers within the terminal;
* Noise from the breaking and shunting of trains due to the site sizing constraints; and
* Wheel squeal from the trains exiting the SSFL, tight radius curves lead to wheel squeal.
Air quality * Increased diesel fumes in the community generated from locomotives, heavy vehicles and other heavy equipment used on site;
* Health impacts from the increased diesel fumes;
* South‐west Sydney is already heavily polluted due to the topography; and
* Dust and odour, particularly during construction.
Two intermodal
proposals
(SIMTA and MIC)
* There is an ad hoc approach to the two proposals;
* Cumulative impacts of the two proposals have not been adequately addressed; and
* Confusion as to the total traffic generated from the two proposals, as the modelling for each is different.
Heritage * Removal of heritage features from the site, particularly those of military and indigenous significance.
Location * Site is surrounded by residential development; and
* Other sites are preferable, such as Badgerys Creek, which is not surrounded by an established community.
Moorebank Intermodal Company EIS presentation
There was considerable concern from the community over the presentation that was given for the MIC EIS submission. Figures and statistics presented by MIC seemed to be inconsistent and the facilitator tried, on a number of occasions, to ask the community to voice their concerns directly to MIC representatives rather than in the public forum. At each of the three sessions the facilitator kept stating that she was conscious of time; however, the community feel that their questions about a proposal that will impact their family and community deserved an answer, and are more important than clock watching. The number of questions from the community at the final community information session saw the session run over time.
Traffic and Transport
* The MIC recognised that there are significant transport and traffic congestion problems in the Moorebank precinct; however, they claim that the additional 8,160 heavy vehicles and 5,724 cars they predict to be brought into this precinct every day due to an intermodal will not have any further impact.
* The Chief Executive Officer of MIC stated that there would be approximately 1.6 trucks required per TEU. He also stated that 1,400,000 TEUs would be required to leave the terminal by truck. According to this statement, and given that heavy vehicles will have to both arrive and leave from the precinct, the figure of 8,160 heavy vehicles per day seems low, this actually equates to 12,376 heavy vehicles per day. For the purposes of this document the figure of 10,000 heavy vehicle movements per day has been chosen as a more accurate representation of the figures.
* The Chief Executive Officer of MIC also confirmed that the Moorebank intermodal will not take heavy vehicles off the M5 between Port Botany and Moorebank, and that as Port Botany expands the number of heavy vehicle movements on this stretch of the M5 is expected to grow. It should be noted that Labour Minister Anthony Albanese previously claimed that the Moorebank intermodal would take trucks off the M5; this fallacy gained a lot of momentum especially in the media and it has never been publicly corrected.
* Questions were raised by the community about the problem of Trucks `weaving' onto and off the M5 between the Moorebank and Hume Highway interchanges. MIC recognises this as a significant problem.
This `weaving' has the potential to cause a recognised `black spot', with potentially fatal consequences for the community. It is worth noting that a `black spot' is already located at the Nuwarra Road and Heathcote Road intersection, only 2 Kilometres from the `weave' site.
* The traffic modeller for MIC presented information about the predicted impacts on intersections both with the intermodal and without. Intersection surveys were undertaken on Tuesday 7 December 2010, and Tuesday 18 March 2014, in peak hours only. It is concerning that these surveys seem to only have been conducted on two days, four years apart, with the December date being in a peak holiday period.
* A Seven-day automatic traffic count was also conducted from Tuesday 7 December 2010 at only three locations along Moorebank Avenue. It is concerning that four year old data, gathered prior to a number of new and extensive residential developments in the area, is being used as a base for traffic modelling.
* The data presented by the traffic modeller showed a delay of over 200 seconds at some intersections when the intermodal is in operation. A 200 second delay, coupled with a 150-180 second cycle on a normal set of traffic lights is a significant impact (approximately six minutes at EACH set of lights), one that is likely to have flow on effects.
He has compared data, which is based on a scenario where the intermodal is operating with road and intersection upgrades, with predicted data based on no intermodal without road upgrades. This is not comparing like for like. Given that intersections in this area are currently operating at D or E classification (near or at capacity), it is hard to believe that the roads in the area will not be upgraded by relevant authorities to attempt to reduce congestion before they reach an F classification.
* It has been noticed that traffic figures do not take into account the recently announced WestConnex which will have major traffic implications on the M5 during construction; this coincides with the proposed opening date of the Moorebank intermodal.
The WestConnex project also aims to increase Port Botany by 272% more container ships by catering for a greater number of heavy vehicle traffic movements on the M5.
Labour Minister Anthony Albanese criticises the WestConnex `proposal for not going near Port Botany, where it is expected there will be a large rise in the number of container trucks'. He also questions the government's transparency, citing that `the decision to release new information about the impact of WestConnex on Melbourne Cup Day indicates to me that those who support this route are aware of its shortcomings and are keen to avoid public scrutiny.' (Saulwick, J., 2014, `Albanese pans plans for the WestConnex', Sydney Morning Herald, 10 November 2014).
* Residents are understandably concerned about the impact of intermodal traffic on local and residential roads. The MIC confirmed at the community information session that while they can implement some measures for traffic movements, it will ultimately be up to the design of the precinct, the way the precinct operators choose to use the precinct, and choices made by heavy vehicle drivers as to which route they choose to use. With heavy congestion on Moorebank Avenue and the M5, two of the key roads in the area, it is likely that Anzac Road and Cambridge Avenue will be used as `rat runs' for heavy vehicles.
* The MIC traffic modeller recognised that currently 6% of traffic on Anzac Road in the peak is heavy vehicle traffic; however he failed to include any heavy vehicle movements in his trip distribution figures for this road. In current heavy traffic conditions Anzac Road is a very attractive option, as demonstrated when the M5 is congested. Heavy traffic movements on a congested day are far higher than those measured by MIC. The omission of this traffic flow information from MIC data sets is hard to fathom. For the local residents, especially those with houses that back onto Anzac Road, it creates uncertainty and distrust in the accuracy of the information presented.
* The construction of an intermodal terminal at Moorebank shows a lack of strategic planning, particularly in relation to future traffic movements.
* An intermodal at Badgerys Creek will be a true intermodal with road, rail and air access. This area will serve the purpose of meeting the needs of future growth centres. The government currently has the ability to configure appropriate and safe truck access in the Badgerys Creek area with $3.5 billion in funding dedicated for road infrastructure.
Rail access
* MIC has predicted an additional 297 train movements each week, this figure does not include the interstate trains that may transit through the terminal.
* It was unclear how these train movements would impact residents in the area, due to three different rail entry options currently under consideration.
* Due to the length of trains, they will need to be broken up and shunted.
* MIC communicated that the actual rail entry will be decided once a tender for operation of the facility has been awarded. This makes it difficult for residents to understand the impacts of the rail access.
* It is unclear whether rail access will impact the passenger rail line and impact on travel times for people travelling by rail to the Sydney CBD.
* An intermodal at Badgerys Creek will not have the same rail implications. The size of the site will allow trains to remain whole within the terminal without the need for breaking and shunting.
Noise and vibration
* In order to ascertain acceptable noise levels in the area, the MIC have measured ambient noise levels between 2010 and 2011, and then from July 2012 to establish a base index. Approximately 20 of the 34 noise receptors set up and monitored by the MIC to establish this base index were located along train lines and major roads.
* Given that most residents in the area live in quiet, peaceful streets, it is a concern that the receptors set to ascertain the base index for ambient noise seems to have been placed in predominantly noisy locations.
* The residential suburbs of Casula, Wattle Grove and North Glenfield are the closest communities to the Project site; however, these will not be the only locations impacted by the noise generated from the proposed intermodal.
* In a recent article in the Sydney Morning Herald it was learned that `After more than a year of residents around Port Botany being told the night time noises they were complaining about did not exceed "sleep disturbance criteria", the Environment Protection Authority has admitted they were right.' (O'Brien, N., 2014, `EPA admits it was mistaken about Port Botany noise levels', Sydney Morning Herald, 17 August 2014).
* Residents in the precinct are understandably concerned that noise levels will exceed those acceptable. Above acceptable noise levels can have health impacts including: annoyance, sleep disturbance, performance issues (reduced concentration), cardiovascular health problems, hearing problems, mental health effects, and general health impacts (e.g. on the immune system).
* There is currently no noise wall along the rail corridor along the Georges River, so noise will carry particularly at night.
* There is no doubt there will be excessive noise from the unloading/loading and movement of containers within the terminal, which will operate 24 hours a day, as well the breaking and shunting of trains due to the site sizing constraints, and compression breaking of trucks on the surrounding roads.
* Wheel squeal from the trains exiting the SSFL have also been identified, as tight radius curves lead to wheel squeal. The MIC noise analyst has agreed that wheel squeal is likely to be a factor with some of the three different rail entry options currently under consideration. A factor that will apparently be decided once the tender is awarded, a decision that is likely to be economically based with no consideration for the nearby community.
* An intermodal at Badgerys Creek will not have the same noise implications, due to it being located in a purpose built heavy industrial area. The size of the Badgerys Creek site will also allow trains to remain whole within the terminal, negating the need for breaking and shunting of trains. Rail access will not be restricted by the construction of rail bridges over the Georges River, as is the case at Moorebank, reducing the instance of wheel squeal by negating the need for tight entry and exit points. Compression breaking can be limited through planned road upgrades specifically designed for heavy vehicle movements.
Local air quality
* MIC have recognised that exposure to pollutants and particulate matter (PM) can contribute to, or exacerbate, respiratory and cardiovascular issues, including premature mortality and morbidity, in addition to increasing associated hospitalisations. This supports that point that this proposal should not be planned for a residential area.
* Placing a heavy industrial facility in the middle of a residential area is negligent and will be detrimental to the community. The proposed site is located in a basin which allows pollution to lie, rather than easily move away. The NSW Planning and Assessment Commission have already recognised that the air quality in the Liverpool area is generally well below guidelines, particularly PM2.5 concentrations which are close to or above the advisory criteria. Additional diesel emissions and particulate matter released from this proposal will prove dangerous for residents, especially the most vulnerable: children, the elderly and disabled members of the community.
* Diesel fumes and particulate matter are carcinogenic, and as well as causing other serious illnesses, will be fatal for some members of the community.
* It has been identified that diesel locomotives and switch engines are significant contributors of SO2, NOx, PM10, PM2.5 and PAHs, while onsite mobile equipment (ITVs, side picks and forklifts) are the highest contributor to CO and VOC emissions, they also contribute substantially to PM10, PM2.5.
* It is understood the decision about onsite equipment will be made by the tender winner and based on economics rather than community welfare.
* During operation of the Project, combustion engine emissions (i.e. NOx, CO, SO2, PM2.5, PM10, VOCs and PAHs) from locomotives, mobile LNG equipment and heavy vehicles represent the greatest potential for air quality impacts.
* With 297 train movements each week and approximately 10,000 truck movements each day it is concerning that a proposal of this nature could be considered alongside family homes, and close to pre-schools, primary schools, high schools, as well as aged care facilities.
* Badgerys Creek, an Australian Government owned area, is away from residential properties, and therefore not likely to cause the same risks as the Moorebank site. It is also well placed near the M7 and the proposed M9 Motorways, providing the ability of the intermodal to service future growth centres, near the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA), future industrial areas and future freight markets in Western Sydney, where two-thirds of container freight received at Port Botany will be transported.
Human health risks and impacts
* The NSW Chief Health Officer's Report (2010) identified that health gains achieved over the past few decades have not been equally shared across the entire NSW population and that there is a gap between those with good and poor health. This gap is exacerbated in poorer communities.
* South Western Sydney has some of the poorest communities in NSW as measured by the SIEFA data (Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS 2011).
* South Western Sydney has higher rates of people with disabilities than the NSW average. People with disabilities have health conditions which may or may not be related to their disability.
* In 2004 - 2008, South Western Sydney residents had higher incidence of lung, kidney, head and neck, pancreas, thyroid, stomach, bladder, uterus and liver cancer than NSW.
* Mortality rates in South Western Sydney for cardiovascular disease at 83.9 per 100,000 are 5% higher than the NSW average of 100 and are significantly higher in Liverpool LGA (111.4) (2005/06).
* Very high psychological distress was reported by 13.2% of South Western Sydney residents (2.1% above the NSW average).
* As previously noted, MIC have recognised that exposure to pollutants and particulate matter (PM) can contribute to, or exacerbate, respiratory and cardiovascular issues, including premature mortality and morbidity, in addition to increasing associated hospitalisations. And that that diesel locomotives, switch engines, and onsite mobile equipment (ITVs, side picks and forklifts) are significant contributors of PM10, and PM2.5.
* As also noted, above acceptable noise levels that will result from an intermodal terminal can have health impacts including: annoyance, sleep disturbance, performance issues (reduced concentration), cardiovascular health problems, hearing problems, mental health effects, and general health impacts (e.g. on the immune system).
* Traffic impacts with the identified the problem of Trucks `weaving' onto and off the M5 is a significant problem. This `weaving' has the potential to cause a recognised `black spot', with potentially fatal consequences for the community.
* It is highly negligent of the Government to consider building an intermodal at the currently proposed Moorebank site. The site is located in the middle of a residential area, and the consequences of such a decision will prove dire to the community.
* Badgerys Creek is by far a site better suited to meet the criteria that the MIC has listed in their EIS summary.
Support from elected representatives
The role of three tiers of government is to ensure that community needs can be voiced to the government by their local elected representatives. These representatives are based within the community, they understand the local area, and are acutely aware of the geographic typography of the area and their constituents needs.
The representatives from the Liverpool area are all unequivocally stating that the Moorebank Intermodal proposal is in the wrong location. This includes the federal member for Hughes, Craig Kelly MP; the state member for Menai, Melanie Gibbons MP; and Liverpool City Mayor, Ned Mannoun.
It is worth noting these representatives recognise the need for an intermodal terminal within metropolitan Sydney to support future freight growth in New South Wales; however, Badgerys Creek is the ultimate location for this development. Liverpool Council have recently released a discussion paper titled `Badgerys Creek: the ideal location for an intermodal' (October 2014).
It is time for the government to listen to their party members who are voicing some very valid concerns, and join the discussion about a new location for this project.
Alternative uses for the land at Moorebank
The residents of Liverpool also support the Freight Infrastructure Advisory Board (FIAB) recommendation of the development of new intermodal freight capacity within metropolitan Sydney. However, the residents believe that the location of this development should be strategically placed to meet future growth and freight capacity. Therefore, it is proposed that Badgerys Creek, rather than Moorebank, is recognised as the consummate site for development.
`In 2011, the Australian Government developed the Liveable Cities Program (now called the Liveable Communities Programme) to support state, territory and local governments in meeting the challenges of improving the quality of life in our capitals and major regional cities' (2011, Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development website).
As part of this program, Parramatta City Council (the only Sydney council selected for the program) received $16,150,000 in funding to complete three missing links on the Parramatta Valley Cycle way, and undertake a series of related works on the Parramatta River Foreshore. The money used for this revitalisation has given Parramatta an economic and social boost.
The site identified for the Moorebank intermodal is prime, urban, riverfront land. This land should be used to assist the government in solving the housing crisis identified in the draft Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney, by using the development as a premium riverside residential lifestyle precinct. The land is situated less than 30 Kilometres from the Sydney CBD. It is in close proximity to public transport, including the T2 Airport and T2 Inner West & South lines (both of which have capacity to accommodate urban growth in this area), the Liverpool to Parramatta T-Way, the M90 Liverpool to Burwood bus route, and many suburban bus routes. In short, the Moorebank location is perfectly positioned and adequately serviced by public transport to assist the government in meeting its housing targets set in the Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney.
An independent valuation (Cushman and Wakefield Development Opportunity Liverpool Riverside Lands, September 2014) valued the SIMTA and MIC sites at more than $482 million. Revenue raised from the sale of this land could be used to assist in the funding of the infrastructure needed to support, and fast-track an intermodal at Badgerys Creek.
NSW Chief Health Officer's Report (2010) identified that there is considerable evidence that social factors (e.g. income, employment and education) have a critical role in health outcomes. A plan to revitalise the Liverpool area by embracing natural assets, such as the Georges River, and utilising land to its full potential presents an opportunity to lift the socio-economic status and improve overall health in the area. The Liveable Communities Programme in Parramatta is a testament to this.
Preserving the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre and maintaining its accessibility to the community will boost the social economy of the area and contribute positively to community growth.
Linda Silmalis, in her Sunday Telegraph article (9 November 2014) says that `NEW housing sites for 11,000 homes will be unlocked today as the NSW government seizes on a building boom with one of the biggest land releases in Sydney this year.' On this topic, `State Planning Minister Pru Goward said the areas will help drive the housing construction boom, while placing downward pressure on house prices.' (Silmalis, L., 2014, `Grab your new home out west', Sunday Telegraph, 9 November 2014). Liverpool Council estimates that the land proposed for the Moorebank intermodals has the capacity for approximately 16,500 riverside dwellings, housing more than 40,000 people, and giving the community access to the Georges River. This will assist the government in meeting its targets, identified in the draft Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney, to develop housing for more than 1.6 million people. Affordable housing is a much better use of the land in this area.
Good, well considered, strategic planning is required to maintain New South Wales' status as the Premier State. This includes planning major infrastructure projects, such as an intermodal terminal, in the right location. The right location for this proposal is not Moorebank; Badgerys Creek is far better suited and situated to meet the Government's freight infrastructure needs.

Please reject this proposal on the grounds that it is not in the public interest of the residents of Liverpool or the wider community or to the Economy.

Please don't put this in our area.We, like so many other families in the area, have children and don't want them breathing in even more pollution.I understand the need for an intermodal but plonking it here on our door stop does not make sense . This is a residential area and is already so congested.As I have said, I understand the need for an intermodal but please put it elsewhere.It does seem to make much more sense to put it in Badgery's Creek.Please consider our health when making these decisions.

It is a toxic health hazard and should not be anywhere near populated residential areas.

The proposal is unethical and a violation of the right to a clean non toxic environment, The Liverpool district's air pollution is already high and putrid.

Application number: SSD 5066/EPBC 2011/6086
Project name: Moorebank Intermodal Environmental Impact Statement
Objection to the Moorebank Intermodal Proposal
Name: XXXX XXXX
Address: XXXX XXXX Wattle Grove
Phone: XXXX XXXX
Email: XXXX XXXX
The Environmental Impact Statement prepared by the Moorebank Intermodal Company (MIC) states that the proposed Moorebank intermodal will allow imports and exports to grow through Port Botany. This will mean additional traffic on the already congested road network. 10,000 heavy vehicles per day will need to access and leave the terminal utilising the M5 and local roads.
The MIC state that an additional intermodal is required to reduce supply chain costs; however, it is questioned how the proposal at Moorebank will assist in reducing these costs. The proposed terminal in Moorebank will include transferring freight by rail less than 25 Kilometres from Port Botany, while increasing the handling costs of the supply chain with containers having to be loaded and unloaded multiple times in a very short distance. Infrastructure NSW has also questioned the viability of short haul freight and the funding of additional intermodal facilities until this has been properly investigated. That being the case, the increase in capacity at Chullora should be investigated with proper planning for a true intermodal at Badgerys Creek. Jenny Wiggins, in her Sydney Morning Herald article, states that Asciano is primed to invest $112 million to `compete "vigorously" with its own intermodal terminals', for example Chullora, and challenge the Moorebank intermodal Page 2
essentially casting doubts over the economic viability of the Moorebank site (Wiggins, J., 2014, `Asciano challenges Moorebank freight hub', Sydney Morning Herald, 2 July 2014).
To truly reduce supply chain costs, the intermodal location should be moved to Badgerys Creek, a facility more than 40 Kilometres from the Port with access to key roads such as the M7 and the proposed M9. This location will also have the capacity to support future growth centres. The M9 motorway will provide `a direct link between the Central Coast and the Illawarra, connecting the growth centres of Camden, Penrith and Windsor' (O'Rourke, J., 2014, `What Sydney needs to transport us to the future', Daily Telegraph, 3 November 2014). An intermodal at Badgerys Creek demonstrates good strategic and growth planning.
Why Badgerys Creek is a better location than Moorebank
The MIC, in their Environmental Impact Statement, attempt to describe why Moorebank has been selected as a location. However, Badgerys Creek is better suited to meet the criteria that the MIC has listed.
Badgerys Creek is an ideal location for an intermodal terminal to handle both interstate and import-export freight. This is because it is:
* long enough for interstate freight trains without the need for trains to be broken up and shunted, creating unnecessary additional noise in the area;
* big enough to handle the number of container movements required - up to 1.1 million twenty foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) per year of import-export freight and another 500,000 TEUs per year of interstate freight. This is a greater capacity than the proposed Moorebank site;
* strategically located in an area where a new rail line is planned for the airport;

Page 3


* near the M7 Motorway, a link to the West and North West where it has been identified by Deloitte that most of the container freight will be headed, and accessible to the M5;
* near the proposed M9 Motorway, providing the ability of the intermodal to service future growth centres;
* near the Western Sydney Employment Area (WSEA), future industrial areas and future freight markets in Western Sydney, where two-thirds of container freight received at Port Botany will be transported.
* further from Port Botany than the Moorebank site, making rail a viable alternative to trucks, and reducing supply chain costs;
* in development, meaning that truck access can be configured into the $3.5 billion already allocated to the surrounding road infrastructure network rather than upgrading roads that are already at capacity in the Moorebank precinct; and
* owned by the Australian Government and available for use consistent with the airport.

Problems with the Moorebank proposal
The Moorebank site constrained by a number of issues:
* The area is already suffering from significant traffic congestion, the addition of an estimated 10,000 truck movements and approximately 5,000 passenger car movements per day will exacerbate this congestion.
* The Planning and Assessment Commission (PAC), following their community meeting on the SIMTA proposal, has identified that the Moorebank area is already suffering from significant traffic congestion. `The community has strongly argued that the
Page 4


proposal is only going to move the congestion from Port Botany to the Liverpool/Campbelltown region. The Commission understands the Moorebank site is constrained by the surrounding residential and industrial land uses and the already heavily congested local and regional road network. If the concept plan were to be approved with the levels of throughput proposed by both SIMTA and MIC, then clearly the community's case is strengthened.' (2014, Planning and Assessment Commission, SIMTA assessment).
* The SIMTA Concept plan was approved by the PAC on the basis that they are limited to 250,000 TEU's, plus an additional 250,000 ONLY if the road network is able to handle the volume of heavy vehicle traffic. This being the determination made by the PAC, and in the absence of a master plan that would have enabled the commission to assess the impact of both proposals as part of the one process, this limit should apply to the operation of both SIMTA and Moorebank intermodal sites combined. TEU's should be limited to a total of 250,000 in this precinct.
* The economic viability of the site has been questioned due to the limits placed by the PAC on the number of TEUs SIMTA can move through their terminal. Chief Executive of Asciano has also questioned the economic viability of the site as previously mentioned, stating that Asciano plan to invest $112 million in their sites to increase capacity and making Chullora more competitive, able to handle an increased capacity from Port Botany, and open for operation before Moorebank (Wiggins, J., 2014, `Asciano challenges Moorebank freight hub', Sydney Morning Herald, 2 July 2014). With the Chullora intermodal capacity increased to 800,000 TEU it will easily be able to support increased in freight through Port Botany while the Badgerys Creek site is planned and constructed.
Page 5


* The Moorebank site is surrounded by water on all sides. This means that the complex road and rail upgrades needed to service an intermodal in this area will be extremely costly. Liverpool Council has estimated these upgrades are likely to cost in excess of $750 million.
* There are significant problems relating to air quality, construction and operational noise impacts created by the intermodals. A proposal of this size and nature should not be earmarked for a residential area.
* The PAC determination of the SIMTA proposal has already revealed that Particulate Matter 2.5 levels in the local area are close to or above the advisory criteria for this pollutant, this applies to the current background levels as well as the predicted impacts. Additional diesel and liquid natural gas powered vehicles in this area will exacerbate this problem.
* Noise impacts, light spill and air pollution will have a detrimental effect on the local community, some of whom live as close as 400 metres from the site. Residents around Port Botany living as far as three kilometres from the port are affected by these factors; many residents in Chifley for example have been very vocal about sleep disturbance in the online domain.
* The Moorebank site will have a detrimental impact on the Casula Powerhouse Arts Centre. The presence and accessibility of an art and cultural facility in a low socio-economic area, such as Liverpool, is essential for positive community growth.

Problems with the process
The Freight Infrastructure Advisory Board (FIAB) recommended a master plan for the site, this was not undertaken. Residents agree the SIMTA and MIC proposals should have been Page 6

considered as a single precinct application. This has created an unfair advantage for the proponents with confusion being created among the community with both proponents presenting different figures. The fact that both proposals were assessed separately also means that media attention highlighting the different stages of the planning and assessment process has also created confusion in the community. Coupled with this, the relocation of the Defence National Storage Distribution Centre (DNSDC) and the current construction works at Holsworthy Barracks have also exacerbated this confusion with many people within the community thinking the proposal is already in its construction phase.
Liverpool Council, in meeting with PAC expressed disappointment that a master plan was not undertaken and confirms that this has created confusion within the community `The ad hoc approach .........leaves gaps and inconsistencies in the information available resulting in a lack of transparency and reduced faith in government decision making.'
A master plan would have reduced this confusion and allowed the community to better understand the impacts these proposals will have on their family, friends and neighbours. It would have allowed the community to better refute claims made by the proponents, and have a much greater grasp of any proposed mitigation strategies for this proposal.
The MIC has also created confusion and doubt within the community, adding to a reduced faith in government process and decision making. They have done this first by splitting their figures. Rather than telling the community that there will be 1.55 million TEUs going through the site, they have split these figures between import-export and interstate. And rather than stating that there will be an estimated 297 train movements expected at the site, they have again split these figures to make them sound lower. The Liverpool Leader, in their article `Intermodal company gives community $1m for compensation package but Page 7

concerned residents aren't buying it', reports on community concerns around the consultation process. This `compensation package' will be completely inadequate to address the impacts this proposal will have on the area, and made MIC seem like it was trying to `buy community support'. At the same time MIC also made a highly publicised donation to the Liverpool Mayoral Ball, which Liverpool Council subsequently rejected (Hansen, N., 2014, `Liverpool Mayor knocks back $5k ball donation from intermodal group but the cash is still destined for charity', Liverpool Leader, 22 August 2014).
An intermodal at Badgerys Creek would not require this level of compensation, as it can be properly planned for a suitable area; it also has residential and council support.
Second, the Sydney Morning Herald in their article `Waterfront baron and Liberal Party donor scored inside running on freight hub tender' has highlighted a possible issue around transparency and due process in the awarding of tenders for the Moorebank precinct. In light of the recent ICAC investigations and the problems faced by the Newcastle community, transparency and due process are paramount in the government decision making process.
Key issues from the community
There were some issues raised by local representatives and the community at the PAC determination meeting on the SIMTA proposal. These have remained largely unchanged in relation to the MIC proposal. Traffic and access
* The proposal will move the congestion from Port Botany to Moorebank, which is already congested;
* Modelling does not include the predicted growth of the region;
* The intersections and road network are already congested,

I thank you for your time in reviewing this email and the monstrous effects that this development will have on the area. As you can see there are a number of significant issues that need to be addressed.
XXXX XXXX

Moorebank is not a suitable site for such a development. The site is surrounded on all sides by large residential communities and the George's River.
When the initial proposals were made the location had a completely different demographic and if the State or Federal Governments had this proposal in their sites then they should not have allowed the residential developments to be done and should have put a hold on nearby developments and invested in proper road, rail and other essential infrastructure.
The roads surrounding the site barely cope with the current traffic and are in no condition to support any additional traffic let alone a large increase in heavy freight vehicles.
Now that the decision has been made regarding an airport at Badgerys Creek it makes perfect sense to move any freight intermodal out to where the are better roads and more space to accommodate everything needed to make any intermodal successful.
An intermodal at Moorebank with such limited surrounding space for expansion would be a white elephant by the time it is built just like the M5 was once it was constructed - poorly thought out and insufficient for its purpose before it was completed.
Use some common sense.

It's unconscionable to build an industrial freight terminal so close to residential properties, residents have purchased homes based on the location and relative quietness, safety and lifestyle that they wish for.

For the government to approve a freight terminal so close to these rate paying residents is abhorrent. They should try empathising with local residents and consider how it would affect them if they a freight terminal was built that close to their own residencies.

I am disgusted with this government. Please keep industrial development in an industrial location.

I am a resident of Casula and overlook the old Casula Links Golf Course next to the Georges River. I object wholeheartedly with an Intermodal being built at Moorebank. Not only is it in the wrong place to build this in general, it will impact me directly and so many others. A lot of people around me object to this but they don't think that they will change the governments mind so they don't speak up. As I live up on a hill I hear all noises from that area. I hear when the Army does testing . We will have noise coming across the area all day and night if this intermodal proceeds. Recently they built a new rail goods line next to the commuter line and can you believe that they did not build a noise wall. Residents demanded it but according to consultants they were not necessary because they said that there was already a line there and there was already noise. But I can see the the rail tracks directly from my balcony and I can tell you that the freight trains are many times more noisy as the commuter ones , they last longer in time due to their length and they have an enormous high pitch noise from friction on the track. These run 24 hrs and my kids can no longer live in the back section of my home and have left to live with their Mum. It is obvious consultants and studies get it so wrong. And their decisions poorly affect peoples lives forever.

With the proposed Intermodal, the plans are to build bridges and railway lines over the Georges river for freight trains right in the old golf links that my home overlooks. This is not fair, and will cause me and many people extreme hardship. The people that make these decisions don't care who or how they affect people.
This intermodal will affect tens of thousands of people in one way or another maybe hundreds of thousands. The traffic kaos we have already is going to be unbearable, so too the noise, the pollution , property values, quality of life etc etc. This is not the place to put heavy industry, it is so obvious.

Badgerys Creek is the only place that everyone can have a win win. Please I ask you and beg you to try to stop this plan from going ahead in Moorebank. Let them leave the Georges river and the parks around it for the residents to enjoy and the land at the army can be used for much better purposes.

I oppose the Moorebank Intermodal proposal and Environmental Impact Statement for the following reasons:
* The Moorebank intermodal will place more traffic on the already congested road network. 10,000 heavy vehicles per day will need to access and leave the terminal utilising the M5 and local roads, 5,000 cars per day will need to access the site.
* The Moorebank intermodal will not be an economically viable investment for the Federal Government and the state of New South Wales. The proposal should be relocated to Badgerys Creek in order to reduce supply-chain costs and cater for future urban growth.

Traffic
* The proposal will move the congestion from Port Botany to Moorebank, which is already congested;
* The modelling does not cater for the predicted growth of the region;
* The intersections and road network are already congested. The proposal will increase traffic delays;
* Trucks `weaving' onto and off the M5 between the Moorebank and Hume Highway interchanges will cause accidents and present a danger to me and my family; and
* Trucks parking and taking short cuts through the nearby streets will make the area unsafe for me, my family and friends.

Noise
There is no noise wall along the rail corridor along the Georges River, so noise will carry, particularly at night;
* There will be no way to mitigate noise from the unloading/loading and movement of containers within the terminal, especially for residents living within 400 metres of the site;
* There will be no way to mitigate noise from the breaking and shunting of trains which will need to happen on site;
* There will be wheel squeal due to the tight radius curves needed for trains to enter and exit the site; this will keep local residents awake at night; and
* Residents up to 3km from Port Botany are kept awake at night, I don't want this for my family.

Air quality
* There will be increased diesel fumes in the community generated from locomotives, heavy vehicles and other heavy equipment used on site. These fumes are carcinogenic;
* Me, my family and friends will develop cancer or other health problems from the increased diesel fumes;
* South West Sydney is already heavily polluted due to the topography of the area;
* There will be dust and odour generated from this site, particularly during the construction period.

Health
* The intermodal in this area will make me and my family sick; and
* I believe even one person having to use a puffer on one occasion as a result of this proposal is not acceptable.
* The government shouldn't plan industrial development in a residential area.

Heritage
* We have a strong military history in this area and we are proud of our heritage. Removal of heritage features from the site will break ties for the community.

Location
* The site is surrounded by residential development, this site should never have been selected due to the young families who have settled in this area;
* This area is a quiet, leafy suburb with strong community connections,
* This development will be detrimental to the area and depreciate its value; and
* Other sites are preferable, such as Badgerys Creek, which does not have a residential development nearby.

Contamination
* The unloading of imported containers in this area will have the potential to destroy native flora and fauna; and
* The unloading of imported containers in this area will have the potential to destroy the Georges River.

MICL and SIMTA Proposals
* There has been a lot of confusion around the fact that two proposals have been proposed for one area (SIMTA and MICL).
* The cumulative impacts of the two proposals have not been adequately explained or addressed by the proposals; and
* There is confusion as to the total traffic generated from the two proposals, as the modelling for each is different.

I support strategic planning and good land use. The intermodal development should be moved to a non-residential area, like Badgerys Creek.

Please reject this proposal on the grounds that it is not in the public interest with other better suited sites available.