The 3 main quality of life concerns for me and my family are:
AIR QUALITY
NOISE LEVELS
TRAFFIC IMPACTS

It is hard to believe the PEA issued October 2014 by SIMTA stating there will be minimal deterioration of Noise and Traffic, 2 key quality of life factors. On air, I am not sure it has made any statements about its impact. It is a large development so close to suburbia.

It is not clear to what minimum standard the Air & Noise quality levels will be enforced. Should the project get approval, minimum quality levels must be set to international standards and it must be monitored regularly by an independent party to SIMTA.

On the issue of traffic, I am perplexed that this will be all managed with the various road upgrades. Proponent will use data that gives the most promising results and am concerned this may be the case here. Has the traffic study and assumptions of volume and directions of flow been verified independently.

Frankly,

With the application of state significant development 5066 so proximal to the application of this similar development, the cumulative effects of the two effectively double the impact on the environment and the community with similar concerns regarding air quality, noise, traffic, etc.

Refer to the public submissions for the adjacent development proposal, take a leaf out of the book as far as all impacts are concerned, gather the seething dislike from the public, concern yourself accordingly and then double it. This is why this development is not desirable. One application has caused sufficient controversy and grief to the peace loving community. Two? Give the public a break. Find the right location and the sensible application for this development. Or just steamroll in and ignore economics.

No thanks. Not here. I value my family's and my community's health. I value the waiting times at Liverpool Hospital as they are, thanks. I value optimal ling function and being cancer free.

I have heard that they are in need of containers around the Eastern Creek region. Might be worth a shot...

This Intermodal cannot be allowed to proceed because of the negative impact it will have on
1. The health of residents with diesel emissions from thousands of extra trucks on the road. There are hospitals, schools, nursing homes, childcare within the radius.
2. Traffic congestion, our roads cannot cope now, let alone 1 truck every 20 seconds.
3. It is not needed. Chullora can fill all the needs for years to come.
4. Taxpayers should not be paying one cent to this private enterprise.
5. The negative effect on the Georges River and the Powerhouse Museum.

If an Intermodal must be built, it should be at Badgereys Creek near the new airport and close to the distribution centres. It makes no sense to build it at Moorebank

To whom it may concern,
I wish to show my disapproval of the chance that the intermodal may be built in my local area of Holsworthy.
My reasons behind this are many and they are as follows.
1. Excessive traffic within the area.
To me this creates a number of problems. One of them being pollution in the form of vehicle fumes and also noise pollution.
Noise pollution to all the surrounding areas of this proposed storage yard as well as freight trains running 24hrs per day 7 days per week.
2. Traffic congestion not only on the motorways but also when there are truck break downs in the local areas around Hammondville, Holsworthy, Moorebank and Chipping Norton. I have seen what a single broken down car does to the flow of traffic let alone broken down trucks on a regular basis. Having to put up with this not only around our local schools but also the when traffic is diverted of the M5 motorway and on to Newbridge Road the extra vehicle driving through the night make it almost impossible to sleep.
3. What about the safety side of it? The amount of extra trucks that will be driving past schools and school children populated areas during school hours has the potential for children to be injured or possibly even killed.
4. If this does go ahead and a child is harmed because of this, I would really hate to be the one to say " I told you so"

Please think long and hard about this and move this construction to Badgerys Creek.

Concerned Local Resident,

Perry Wills

Strongly object to the damage this will do to our community and environment.

I am strongly opposed to the size and location of the proposed Moorebank intermodal (s).
I have lived in Liverpool for over 55 years and I have enjoyed the clean air, ample environment and a growing thriving community.
This growth has meant our community has had to deal with a poorly considered road system that has not met the requirements of our growing community, leaving many of our community caught in gridlock on a daily basis just leaving and returning to Liverpool to attend work.

The idea that this intermodal project will contribute in excess of over 10,000 truck movements a day to our already congested roads is just ludicrous and unacceptable to a community already struggling with access on roads already at full capacity.

Add to that this proposed mega modal is set right in the middle of a bustling community, with numerous schools, preschools and residential development in a basin along the Beautiful Georges River. Rivers by nature are in basins where the ability of the air flow is limited by the topography. This area is already known for the poor air movement and at present is known for the high density of asthma experienced by the local community that cannot be solely attributed to the socioeconomic status of this community as was unfortunately presented at the community consultations.

The residents along the west of the proposed major development will also be subjected to heavy train movements 24 hours a day seven days a week year in year out. The southern Sydney Freight line that will feed the intermodal via a steep incline into the facility across the river will mean the screeching of brakes and the rumbling of containers without respite or noise abatement to protect them from the constant din that will infect their days and nights. This is compounded by the noise they already experience from the M5 motorway which too has no noise abatement and where the health impacts are already measurable.
At an absolute minimum it is essential that some measures are taken should this project proceed, that the entire community can be assured that when (not if) the air quality, the noise levels, pollution and run off exceed the expected safe levels that the community are guaranteed of efficient monitoring on site and can result in the immediate shutdown of the entire facility until the impacts have been removed or mitigated. It is essential that air quality monitors, to the level of diesel particulate are ON SITE not Kilometres away in a neighbouring suburb.
It is unbelievable that the Georges River will be subjected to run off from both trucks and rail that the detention basins will be unable to protect in the case of heavy rains or flood episodes. The proposed detention basins according to the maps available are simply insufficient to the task and overflow of waste, diesel fuel and overflow from the constant flow of traffic rail and containers and the propensity for flooding in this area is simply outrageous. Millions of dollars have been spent on returning the river to a healthy environment for flora and fauna and all this will be lost in the event of even one negative event. The proposed plantings along the river in the public access area will no doubt be kept to a minimum as opposed to providing dense planting that can be used to absorb noise and filter minor run off. The heat created from enormous hardstand areas will not be mitigated in anyway, contributing to the higher temperatures experienced in the vicinity and negatively impacting on all living creatures and vegetation.
The Community of Liverpool accepts that intermodals are essential in the provision of goods however placing such a large facility in the middle of a community is not only insensitive but potentially dangerous. The negative health impacts and costs to this community will far outweigh the commercial benefits over the coming years and the cost to the community will escalate over time. Will the proponents be liable for the recompense to society for the costs involved in the long term care of those affected by these unacceptable impacts?

As this project was first flagged in 2004 it is unbelievable that so little has been done to address and prevent the overwhelming consequences to the community, that the voice of the community has gone unheard, simply because the Crown Land is cheap and easily accessed. My community deserves better, we have worked hard to ensure our river is being protected and returned to a pristine state, my fellow residents deserve a clean, viable community in which to live, where the air is clean, the roads safe to traverse and the environment protected. The mere size of this facility is prohibitive on all levels.
This submission hasn't addressed the light spill, the likely rat runs, poor protections on our roads and the very few jobs that this automated facility will inflict on our community, I will leave that for others to address. Liverpool is not the dumping ground for everything no one else wants, other than that the land is `relatively cheap' as it is crown land, putting the country's largest inland port in the middle of suburbia is unacceptable on every level. Our community deserves better and to not address the enormous impacts is irresponsible and I implore the panel to truly reconsider this proposal on this site. That is not in itself license to dump it on another, but a chance to genuinely consider placing smaller, well distributed and accessible container terminals on the periphery of our Cities with access via rail from all our ports not just port Botany would allow the fair and equal distribution of produce to all communities that wouldn't endanger our people, our environment and our wildlife.

I oppose the Intermodal at Moorebank. I do not believe that the it is the right location for this facility. The roads will not cope, the area will have significantly more truck traffic and the pollution will be terrible.

OBJECTION TO: SIMTA MOOREBANK INTERMODAL FACILITY STAGE 1 PROPOSAL
Dear Sir/Madam,
I, Robert Lukunic, resident of 50 Schulten St, Moorebank, 2170 NSW, do hereby strongly object to the above proposal (hereafter referred to as the " MITF").
There is no justification to build the MITF as there is already a completed , operational intermodal located at Enfield NSW, that is not being used at 100% capacity. The proposed MITF is purely a money making exercise by the Federal Government to sell off now surplus Commonwealth land to the corporate sector in the fringes of the outer western suburbs of Sydney.
The MITF site is situated too close to residential areas in the Moorebank area. The impact of the MITF will be detrimental to both local traffic flow& air quality, reducing the quality of life of local residents up to 2 kilometres away. This negative impact is acknowledged on Page 39 of the Moorebank Intermodal Terminal Facility (MITF) - SIMTA Stage 1 Traffic Impact Assessment report which states in part "s The modelling results indicate that some approaches at these eight intersections are operating close to or at capacity level of service between E & F".
It continues: "the existing condition traffic model shared capacity problems on the northern section of Moorebank Ave around Newbridge Rd & Heathcote Rd. The model predicted a level of service D at Moorebank Ave/Newbridge Rd signalised intersection & a level of service E at Moorebank Ave/Heathcote Rd signalised intersection. The approach roads including Moorebank Ave, Newbridge Rd & Heathcote Rd showed level of service between E & F. The 2014 modelling results reaffirmed the existing capacity problems previously identified at Newbridge Rd areas during the Concept Plan Approval".
Note that Level of Service (LoS) was assessed with:
D meaning "Operating near capacity". E meaning "At capacity; at signals, incidents will cause excessive delays. Roundabouts require other control mode. F meaning "Unsatisfactory with excessive queuing".
Furthermore, Section 5.4, Page 57 comments on the impact the MITF will have & I quote: "Capacity improvements are required at the Moorebank Ave/Newbridge Rd signalised intersection due to the existing operational problem, without consideration of development of the proposal"
So, why propose band-aid solutions to a compromised location of the MITF at Moorebank? A far better location for the MITF is BADGERY'S CREEK. Why Badgery's Creek?
* Is strategically located where $3.5 billion of new road & rail lines will be built for the new airport & will save taxpayers money.
* Is big enough to handle the number of containers required for a new intermodal - 1.1million each year & expand further infrastructure.
* Would save money as the road & rail upgrades needed for the Moorebank plan would cost more than $750 million.
* Will reduce truck traffic, protect air quality & the local environment around the Georges River from permanent degradation, leading to better health outcomes.
* Is next to industrial areas & freight markets in Western Sydney.
* Is already owned by the Federal Government.
* Would be a true intermodal with road, rail & air access.
* The sale of land at Moorebank could raise more than $482 million to fund an intermodal at Badgery's Creek & will house 40,000 people.
In summary, no MITF at Moorebank so we can:
save the Georges River,
keep traffic volumes at existing capacity, not overload it even further,
keep the air quality from being further negatively impacted ,
get further value from the Bagery's Creek International Airport infrastructure,
utilise the existing Enfield intermodal white elephant,
protect the residents existing health & amenity.

I oppose this development for the following reasons
the traffic increase in the local area, there will be container movement every 20 seconds 24hours a day 365 days a year through th M5 Moorebank rd intersection. If containers are unloaded at the Intermodel then the traffic will increase even more as 1 container may require 4 or 5 smaller trucks. This area can not support such an increase in traffic.

It would be environmentally criminal to place such a facility so close to a major river.

The noise levels on surrounding residential levels will be harmful to residents

The light spill from this facility will affect surrounding residents.

The parkland and Power House Arts centre on the Casula side of the river will be compromised.

The movement of trains from Port Botany will over load the Southern Freight Line and create air pollution problems in an already high pollution area as will the increase in truck movements.

There should be a new EIS called for now that the two Intermodels have been combined.

The claim that it will reduce tucks on the road is false, it will only transfer and increase the traffic problem to Moorebank.

If this proposal goes ahead then the State government should remove stamp duty on house sales for those residents affected and wishing to move away from such an ill thought out imposition on the people of the South West.

It is not safe for local communities and also noisey. There is a heavy traffic on M5 already, later on it gets worse n more dangerous too.